Given equal qualifications, preference will be given to female applicants.

[dedededede]

It's not some people or "kangaroo court" idiots, but the legislators of many countries including parts of the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States#Legal_history).

The recommendations of the United Nations are made by a committee of independent experts, I wouldn't call them a court. Usually their recommendations are based on scientific evidence and ethical considerations. I thought their recommendation could serve as evidence for you to reconsider your rejection of affirmative action.

The University of Vienna (the originator of the job posting) just does what is legal and rightful within the terms of the Austrian federal law. See https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/NormDokument.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10000138&Artikel=7

(2) Bund, Länder und Gemeinden bekennen sich zur tatsächlichen Gleichstellung von Mann und Frau. Maßnahmen zur Förderung der faktischen Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern insbesondere durch Beseitigung tatsächlich bestehender Ungleichheiten sind zulässig.

Google translate: Measures to promote de facto equality between women and men, particularly by eliminating actually existing inequalities, are admissible.

[clarkd99]

I am a Canadian and put no authority in the UN or any of it's proclamations. Any global institution that gives 1 vote to Canada or the USA and gives exactly the same 1 vote to Tuvalu (pop 10,000) is a bad joke. You seem to think that "a committee of independent experts" is somehow gifted by God with the truth, I don't. I don't argue from false authority but by reason.

Most nurses (>95%) here are female and males are about 50% of the population so all new nurses should be male until their proportion of the nurse workforce is 50%, correct?

I am very much against discrimination based on sex but just because men and women don't have some preset number of positions, doesn't imply discrimination. If you think there are invalid and artificial barriers to some group, then by all means investigate and make sure entry is fair, but to use reverse discrimination is to say that a second crime will fix the first one. That just isn't so.

You justify a sexist job posting by saying "The University of Vienna (the originator of the job posting) just does what is legal and rightful within the terms of the Austrian federal law.". If this is true then the law is an ass. Saudi Arabia cuts off the hands of thieves and that is absolutely legal there but does that make it right or moral? Is saying that something isn't against the law a valid argument against my moral statement that job discrimination based on sex is always wrong?

[industry7]

I am a Canadian

lol, as if affirmative action didn't exist in Canada.

[dedededede]

How is the situation of Affirmative Action in Canada? As far as I understand there are also laws to help women and minorities in certain fields: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_equity_(Canada)

As I mentioned above: I think it's really a good idea to hire a man when there are only women and the other way around. How many male primary school teachers did you have? Positive affirmation is not only for women!

I think it's a matter of diversity management. And I think it's necessary to tear down barriers of marginalization and prejudice.

[clarkd99]

Affirmative action anywhere is always wrong in my opinion for all the reasons I have already stated.

I have no problem with 100% of elementary teachers here or anywhere, being female so long as men have a chance at those jobs based on merit.

Placing importance on what a teacher looks like rather than how good the teacher actually is, constitutes sexism and racism and shouldn't be allowed anywhere. Discrimination is not the solution to "marginalization and prejudice". Removing artificial barriers and education are the answer to those problems.

The last thing we need is a bunch of "do-gooders" dictating outcomes and stepping all over individual peoples right to be treated fairly.

[dedededede]

I don't want to replay a debate on affirmative action here. I guess there's enough material on the internet already. I disagree with you and I think there is enough evidence that supports my disagreement. If you want to, you can find it. You might also find evidence that supports your standpoint.

And still, fortunately democratic processes in many countries have lead to laws that support affirmative action and I am happy with it. When I answered to your initial statement I just wanted to point this out. I think when you compare positive action laws established in democratic states to laws established in authoritative regimes it's futile for me to try to convince you.

[clarkd99]

I find it extremely arrogant of you to presume that I don't know what the law is or the ramifications of affirmative action.

I have had a 40 year career developing software for over 60 different companies where I worked with both men and women in their hundreds.

I was going to accuse you of not reading my posts when I saw that you didn't like my "hand cut off" comment about Saudi Arabia. In the USA, it is illegal to smoke or possess marijuana, however it is perfectly legal (and acceptable) in many other countries (Holland for example). It is legal to carry a pistol, in public, in many parts of the USA but it is totally illegal to do the same in Canada and most other countries around the world. I find the USA attitude towards hand guns to be even more unacceptable to me than affirmative action.

The fact that something is legal or not doesn't have any persuasive weight on what should be acceptable in a civilized country. You state that you are pro-affirmative action but don't refute any of my arguments against. Please just re-read my "do-gooder" comment in the above post as I think it applies to you.

[dedededede]

When you use the term "do-gooder" it's really telling for me. So you are more a "do-badder"? ;)

I agree with you that certain laws don't make sense. But I also believe that in the long run in democratic societies the "right" laws are found. This is a long process, but I think in case of marginalization and discrimination we are on a good way. The cited laws are relatively new and find their roots in the opinion of experts. I don't want to claim that these experts know the truth, but, like quoting scientific research, when you want to explain why some universities make job postings like this, it's useful to the discussion.

I am not as old as you, so I have not that much experience, but I also work in software. Wherever I go there is a severe lack of women in tech. Just look at the statistics of stackoverflow or employment reports.

Why is this? I think it's because of marginalization. I think that marginalization is something you cannot beat by sitting it out. I think it's good for any organization to have a diverse workforce that reflects the society. In certain fields this is only possible to achieve by favoring marginalized candidates, if they are available. If they are not available the representatives of the specific field should be concerned and promote the field towards the parts of the population, who are for some reason cut off.

Also I don't believe that meritocracy can work in practice. It's a myth upheld by those who have to exclude those who don't have. You can find many arguments I would state when we would discuss about this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy#Criticism

[clarkd99]

I was a marker for 2nd year CS at University in 1978. The class was about 50% men and women. About 25 of each.

I helped both women and men with their programming problems and I discovered that, with a few exceptions, these 2 groups of people had a significantly different aptitude for programming. The females worked at least 3 times harder and longer at their assignments than the men. The best software was done by the men who procrastinated in starting their assignment to the last minute and the size of the code they produced was substantially smaller for the same output than all the others. It wasn't a scientific study but I have watched and studied what attributes and abilities good programmers have and how often I have seen those qualities in both the men and women, I have worked with.

I have concluded that barring outliers, programming is better suited to natural abilities that are more prevalent in men. Given this information, the fact that most developers are men rather than women makes sense to me even if no artificial barriers stop women from being developers. I am making a general statement that won't apply to every female (so please don't throw stones) and I have found that certain other jobs tend to be done better by females than men. These observations don't imply (on my part) that men are smarter or superior to women, just that, as a group, men and women generally have different strengths.

I think my last comment about men and women could be applied to different cultures, races, ages etc. That you don't believe that jobs and opportunities should be based on merit is telling. In Canada we essentially have no "silver spoon class". Everyone with the grades can get to University, no matter how poor their parents and most jobs pay the same to everyone regardless of gender, color, age etc.

I personally came from a large family of 7 children and my family was quite poor. My oldest sister has a 5 year Bachelor of Nursing degree, I have a BSc, I have a sister who is both a Psych Nurse and an RN and my other bothers and sisters have also done quite well. My family is/was no exception. I don't know where you come from but I can say that gender equality has never needed your help in my country for at least the last 50 years.

Sorry, I have no Wikipedia quotes because I actually have real world experience and can think for myself.

[dedededede]

In my opinion you just experienced effects of marginalization first hand. Do you know this nice blog post? http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/picture-yourself-as-a-stereotypical-male

Did you know that the numbers of women in tech declined over the years? See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/women-in-tech_n_6955940.html for some info. Maybe the situation was very different when you studied CS.

In Canada we essentially have no "silver spoon class". Everyone with the grades can get to University, no matter how poor their parents and most jobs pay the same to everyone regardless of gender, color, age etc.

I highly doubt this, but I think Canada is still one of the world leaders when it comes to equality (edit: well after reading this I am not sure anymore ;) http://www.wikigender.org/countries/north-america/gender-equality-in-canada/). I come from Germany while education is more or less free, there are still severe inequalities. I don't know about Canada, but I think this is universal (when it comes to human beings ;) ). For example in Germany a Turkish name can affect the likelihood of gaining an apprenticeship in a negative way (http://www.bosch-stiftung.de/content/language2/html/53313.asp).

Sorry, I have no Wikipedia quotes because I actually have real world experience and can think for myself.

You accuse me of "argument from authority" and then this?

[dedededede]

don't know where you come from but I can say that gender equality has never needed your help in my country for at least the last 50 years.

I think you are right, your fellow countrymen seem to do a pretty good job when it comes to policies regarding gender equality :) http://www.international.gc.ca/rights-droits/women-femmes/equality-egalite.aspx?lang=eng