If you had any doubt that political correctness reigns in the corridors of power, read this article about blind recruitment and digest the implications.
Apparently, employing people based on merit, without knowing their gender or ethnic background, doesn’t bring about the desired result (diversity): “Introducing de-identification of applications in such a context may have the unintended consequence of decreasing the number of female and minority candidates shortlisted for senior APS positions, setting back efforts to promote more diversity at the senior management levels in the public service.” Reported in another article, Professor Hiscox said blind policies should be paused and caution exercised so as to avoid damaging diversity efforts.
Translation: making the recruitment process fair won’t bring about the desired end result of more women in high-ranking jobs.
This policy of ‘positive discrimination’ is far from positive for men or women, and here are a few reasons why:
- It is not desirable to recruit more women if those women aren’t as capable as the men who also applied.
- The end never justifies the means.
- Such policies assume that women can’t do as well as men without special treatment. You don’t have to be a feminist to believe that women are capable of holding high level jobs on their own merit.
- Women will not reach their full potential if they have a lower ‘pass threshold’.
- Discrimination is discrimination. There is no ‘equality’ in being given a job because you’re a woman. Imagine the outcry if we had such a policy for white Christian men.
None of this is new, but the open readiness to jettison a ‘blind’ policy communicates the lengths those in authority are willing to go in order to achieve their goals. In the past, there was always a nod to fairness in advocacy of ‘positive’ discrimination. Indeed, the very idea of blind recruitment was theoretically based on the idea that if we removed bias then women and ‘minorities’ would thrive in this fairer environment… but it’s “making things worse”. So we now see (as we suspected) that it has nothing to do with fairness. The end goal is all that matters. In fact, “the public service has a long way to go on gender equality” we’re told, even though the study showed the APS discriminated in favour of women and minorities (by a whopping 22.2% when it came to indigenous women) and women comprise just under 49% of executives.
Lady Justice has always been represented as blind-folded, and there is good reason for this. When government and society unashamedly advocate stripping her of her impartiality, beware!