Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

I feel ill

Hooligan Harry

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
503
Reaction score
45
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24771759-2862,00.html

DISCRIMINATION against dominant white males will soon be encouraged in a bid to boost the status of women, the disabled and cultural and religious minorities.

Such positive discrimination -- treating people differently in order to obtain equality for marginalised groups - is set to be legalised under planned changes to the Equal Opportunity Act foreshadowed last week by state Attorney-General Rob Hulls.

The laws are also expected to protect the rights of people with criminal records to get a job, as long as their past misdeeds are irrelevant to work being sought.

Equal Opportunity Commission CEO Dr Helen Szoke said males had "been the big success story in business and goods and services".

"Clearly, they will have their position changed because they will be competing in a different way with these people who have been traditionally marginalised," she said.

"Let's open it up so everyone can have a fair go."

Victoria's peak business body expressed concern yesterday about the need for the proposed laws, and questioned if they would undermine the right of companies to make legitimate business decisions.

At present, individuals or bodies wanting to single out any race or gender for special treatment must gain an exemption from VCAT.

Companies and public bodies accused of discrimination can only be held to account after a complaint has been made.

But the proposed changes go much further, allowing the commission to inquire into discrimination, seize documents and search and enter premises after attempts to bring about change have failed.

Businesses and individuals would be required to change their ways even if a complaint had not been received.

Action could be taken where an unlawful act was "likely to occur", not just in cases where discrimination has taken place.

The commission would also have real teeth to enforce its rulings via VCAT and, as a last resort, in the courts.

The changes, shown in a Department of Justice report by former public advocate Julian Gardner, would also:

EDUCATE people so they know their rights.

GIVE more protection to people with disabilities, requiring companies and public entities to reasonably accommodate their needs.

GRANT the homeless and people who act as volunteers better protection from discrimination.

Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry workplace general manager David Gregory said business supported the objectives of equal opportunity legislation.

"But I am concerned and curious about whether these changes mean the commission can second-guess the legitimate business decisions of individual businesses," he said.

The first raft of changes to the Equal Opportunity Act were introduced into Parliament last week.
 

Jitterbug

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
143
Are they trying to create a civil war in our society where they pit white males who increasingly feel disadvantaged against minorities (because you're not allowed to fight women)? The feminazis and the real dominant white males - you know, the ones who pass these legislations - will be laughing. You think Rob Hulls or David Gregory and whoever are behind them will practice what they preach and step down to be replaced by someone their Act is supposed to help? Hell no!

As an Asian male, I feel disgusted. I want to know that I get a job because of my own merits, not because of some bullsh!t "Equal Opportunity" Act. Besides, there's loads of evidence showing that Asians are typically disadvantaged by "Affirmative Action" or "Equal Opportunity" anyway. For example, AA in American colleges reduce the number of Asian students getting in. At colleges where it's been removed, the Asian student intake has shot way up.

Having said that, I'll find and read the real act, as I do not trust the quality of reporting from news.com.au. They're a bunch of fvckwits.
 

Warrior74

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
5,134
Reaction score
227
To be honest. I don't think any real man wants to be 'given' a job. He wants to be the best qualified and prove that he's earned his position through his own hard work and merit. Not because of the color of his skin but because of the sweat of his brow. The whole point of anti discrimination laws was to just give everyone a shot to go as far as they can go. As usual, give someone a tool of power and they start to take it too far.

Action could be taken where an unlawful act was "likely to occur", not just in cases where discrimination has taken place.
focking thought police. 1984 much?
 

Ballie

Don Juan
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
137
Reaction score
8
Age
66
Location
Durban SA
They have done the same in SA, discriminated against the White male. AA "give a chance to the disadvantage" hasn't worked though. A MAN does not need hand outs - he creates jobs
 

Warrior74

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
5,134
Reaction score
227
Ballie said:
They have done the same in SA, discriminated against the White male. AA "give a chance to the disadvantage" hasn't worked though. A MAN does not need hand outs - he creates jobs
listen to your terminology. it betrays exactly why it doesn't work. "give a chance to the disadvantage" its a difference between discrimination and disadvantaged. Discrimination means the person is able to do the job, is qualified and meets the requirements and has the drive to succeed, he just can't get the job due to socially constructed bull**** (race), vs the "disadvantaged" which is a person who is not qualified for the position. You understand? The sheep really can't think that deep.
 

speed dawg

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
4,808
Reaction score
1,242
Location
The Dirty South
Warrior74 said:
listen to your terminology. it betrays exactly why it doesn't work. "give a chance to the disadvantage" its a difference between discrimination and disadvantaged. Discrimination means the person is able to do the job, is qualified and meets the requirements and has the drive to succeed, he just can't get the job due to socially constructed bull**** (race), vs the "disadvantaged" which is a person who is not qualified for the position. You understand? The sheep really can't think that deep.
If you had any real life experience with this sort of thing, you'd know that there is hardly a QUALIFIED minority candidate for a position that doesn't get it.

It is usually the disadvantaged that ends up getting the job STRICTLY because they are the minority, when there are no other qualified minority candidates. That CAN and DOES happen, all the time you know. The original intention is not happening. And through this, you create dead weight in the work force. That's why people are pissed off.
 

Warrior74

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
5,134
Reaction score
227
sharkybear said:
What!? Are you saying that these people are dumber and less qualified than you because they are minority? BS! I have seen a better swimmer than Michael Phelps, but he just got lucky enough to get the opportunity to practice all his life and show it off at the Olympic Games. Am I reading this differently? They were just trying to say that everybody should get an equal start, and I wholeheartedly agree on that.

If you are that much of a pvssy that you are afraid of a LITTLE COMPETITION, then maybe you should be asking yourself how qualified you are!
I read it as "if there is a postion, and a minority is totally qualified, he will get the position hands down". Which of course is not true.

When it comes to people complaining about stuff like this, you look at it the same way you look at the Klan or AFCs. Only the weak ones complain, hate and live in fear. The strong ones are to busy winning the game and rewritting the rules to suit themselves to complain.
 

Tazman

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Messages
1,286
Reaction score
30
Age
45
speed dawg said:
If you had any real life experience with this sort of thing, you'd know that there is hardly a QUALIFIED minority candidate for a position that doesn't get it.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to make this claim, I myself don't "know" how often it happens, but I do know it happens. I think it's all relative to the people that are doing the hiring. You'll have some that accept the most qualified based on merit and "need", and you'll have some that don't.

The problem with policies such as this is that they can be easily abused. The only way to change anything is to put forth your own individual effort, some will have to put forth more than others but there isn't an easy solution. Everyone has prejudice, so long as this is true you will always have these problems.
 

mintxx

Senior Don Juan
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
447
Reaction score
9
Take it easy Harry, that article's in the Herald Sun. It's sensationalism - nothing is going to break the stranglehold that the best people have on the best positions. The article's aimed at rednecks who are already unemployed and want someone to blame. The only 'businesses' that will implement it will be government agencies, and they're already as inefficient as fvck. I don't imagine that the firm I work at is going to risk losing business by hiring some unproductive emotional train wreck as a corporate lawyer.
 
Top