Apple Releases New Diversity Numbers, Hired Over 11,000 Women in Past Year

[Renzatic]

It can't be used unless they penetrate his anus or mouth. The CDC also does not put men who are made to penetrate in the rape category, that is why the statistics show that more females are raped then men.

It pretty much covers the whole set of sexual acts that can be performed on anyone.

Also, the CDC doesn't have any real say in what constitutes rape. Their primary concern is likely to be the spread of STDs, which would require some form of penetration. The DOJ, on the other hand, does. And their definitions of rape covers just about every sexual act that can be performed or forced upon someone in one nice, little sentence.

So no, since 2012, women don't have more leeway when it comes to a legal definition of rape. Yeah, it does require some form of penetration, but that's kind of the base standard of rape for either gender.

If a man forcibly penetrates a women, it's rape on his part. If a woman forces a man to penetrate her, it's rape on her part. If there's any forced mouth on genitalia action, it's rape depending on who's doing the forcing.

The only caveat is the social stigma. People rarely ever take male rape seriously. But the legal definition to provide for a solid case is now there.

 

[Renzatic]

You mean besides the obvious discrimination?

If it comes down to two equally qualified individuals who each have an equal chance of getting the job, then how is it discrimination? The final say is pretty much up to the discretion of whoever's doing the hiring in that situation, and it could be for whatever reason they want it to be.

You don't want to slide so far down that slippery slope that being denied a job could be construed as some form of discrimination, nepotism, or overall bias.

 

[cfedu]

It pretty much covers the whole set of sexual acts that can be performed on anyone.

Also, the CDC doesn't have any real say in what constitutes rape. Their primary concern is likely to be the spread of STDs, which would require some form of penetration. The DOJ, on the other hand, does. And their definitions of rape covers just about every sexual act that can be performed or forced upon someone in one nice, little sentence.

So no, since 2012, women don't have more leeway when it comes to a legal definition of rape. Yeah, it does require some form of penetration, but that's kind of the base standard of rape for either gender.

If a man forcibly penetrates a women, it's rape on his part. If a woman forces a man to penetrate her, it's rape on her part. If there's any forced mouth on genitalia action, it's rape depending on who's doing the forcing.

The only caveat is the social stigma. People rarely ever take male rape seriously. But the legal definition to provide for a solid case is now there.

Its does not say that, why are you defending the indefensible.

The definition is by the DOJ

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

You must be the person who is penetrated. It is in english right in front of you.

 

[jkcerda]

If it comes down to two equally qualified individuals who each have an equal chance of getting the job, then how is it discrimination? The final say is pretty much up to the discretion of whoever's doing the hiring in that situation, and it could be for whatever reason they want it to be.

You don't want to slide so far down that slippery slope that being denied a job could be construed as some form of discrimination, nepotism, or overall bias.

11k women hired
How many men in the same period?
Diversity is s nice way of saying we are going to discriminate against someone so we can feel good about ourselves

 

[unobtainium]

Would you be Ok with a company using gender as a tie breaker and choosing men over women to break that tie. I would not, I would call that discrimination.

This right here is the kind of invisible, passive discrimination women have been facing since they first entered America's workforce. Progressive companies like Apple are trying to correct for the bias that has been built into the system for a very long time. Some day, such measures won't be necessary, but for now -- I say good for Apple. Change has to start somewhere.

 

[jkcerda]

This right here is the kind of invisible, passive discrimination women have been facing since they first entered America's workforce. Progressive companies like Apple are trying to correct for the bias that has been built into the system for a very long time. Some day, such measures won't be necessary, but for now -- I say good for Apple. Change has to start somewhere.

2 wrongs don't make a right

 

[cfedu]

This right here is the kind of invisible, passive discrimination women have been facing since they first entered America's workforce. Progressive companies like Apple are trying to correct for the bias that has been built into the system for a very long time. Some day, such measures won't be necessary, but for now -- I say good for Apple. Change has to start somewhere.

I agree 100% that that has been a big issue in the past, but correcting one injustice with another is not right IMO.

 

[Renzatic]

You must be the person who is penetrated. It is in english right in front of you.

No. If you penetrate without consent, it's still rape. Penetration has to be involved, but you don't have to be the, er, penetratee to be raped.

Penetration is the only consideration here, not who's being penetrated.

 

[unobtainium]

Why is it intrinsically better to be more diverse?

It isn't. This is the big liberal lie of the modern age. Merit is all that matters.

Tim Cook is just one more sucker whose mind is blinded by false guilt.

Steve Jobs was a white dude who created and nurtured Apple, and without him, we wouldn't have had the iPhone. Sure, there was a whole team working on it, but he was the crucial ingredient (along with God).

Tim Cook has created a culture which is anathema to such single-minded vision. By encouraging diversity, he is actively attacking the roots of creativity which are essential to provoke a revolutionary leap in technology.

"Merit" is not as objective as I'm sure you think it is.

 

[Renzatic]

11k women hired
How many men in the same period?

The real question is, does it matter?

The first thing that pops into your mind after hearing that 11k women have been hired shouldn't be "how many equally qualified men had to give up a position to allow for that".

 

[jkcerda]

The real question is, does it matter?

The first thing that pops into your mind after hearing that 11k women have been hired shouldn't be "how many equally qualified men had to give up a position to allow for that".

No it does not. I.am hoping an equal or close to equal amount got hired . Hiring using sex as a determination is wrong when the position does not call for it.

 

[cfedu]

No. If you penetrate without consent, it's still rape. Penetration has to be involved, but you don't have to be the, er, penetratee to be raped.

Penetration is the only consideration here, not who's being penetrated.

"The CDC’s Lenard cautioned against equating the two categories, as the “made to penetrate” category is a relatively new category that is still not fully understood. Women, she also noted, are less likely to report experiences of sexual violence than men."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...t-one-in-five-american-women-have-been-raped/

“The difference between ‘rape’ and ‘being made to penetrate’ is that in the definition of rape the victim is penetrated; ‘made to penetrate’ by definition refers to cases where the victim penetrated someone else,” she said. “We do not recommend equating or making direct comparisons of rape to MTP given that we view them as distinct types of sexual violence with potentially different sequelae.”

I guess you know more then the CDC, that is the entire reason they have a separate category for men who are made to penetrate.

 

[Renzatic]

No it does not. I.am hoping an equal or close to equal amount got hired . Hiring using sex as a determination is wrong when the position does not call for it.

The thing is, if everyone is so hung up on discrimination that they question any woman being hired for a position, then we're kinda back at square one.

It's one of those things you can overfret about to the point you're back to being discriminating again. The fact is, if a company wants to hire more women during a hiring cycle, that's entirely their prerogative. It's when it continues unabated for a long period of time, to the point that being a man could be a detriment to landing a job that it becomes an issue of opposing discrimination.

 

[Renzatic]

I guess you know more then the CDC, that is the entire reason they have a separate category for men who are made to penetrate.

No. But I can tell you right now that the Center for Disease Control doesn't have as any standing in legal proceedings, while the Department of Justice does. The DOJ, per my link, makes no distinctions between being penetrated, and being made to penetrate. Merely the fact that penetration has taken place, which is a prerequisite for any form of rape.

Until the CDC is called upon to prosecute rape cases, quoting them is a useless aside in this discussion.

 

[cfedu]

No. But I can tell you right now that the Center for Disease Control doesn't have as any standing in legal proceedings, while the Department of Justice does. The DOJ, per my link, makes no distinctions between being penetrated, and being made to penetrate. Merely the fact that penetration has taken place, which is a prerequisite for any form of rape.

Until the CDC is called upon to prosecute rape cases, quoting them is a useless aside in this discussion.[/B]

This definition does not preclude prosecutions of men that are raped by women, it has nothing to do with rape laws. This definitions is there for guidance to organizations like the CDC. The DOJ does not prosecute rape cases, women who rape men will be convicted rapists. The only thing the DOJ definition does is the classification of the crime.


http://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
"
Because the new definition is more inclusive, reported crimes of rape are likely to increase. This does not mean that rape has increased, but simply that it is more accurately reported. In addition, the UCR program will also collect data based on the historical definition of rape, enabling law enforcement to track consistent trend data until the statistical differences between the old and new definitions are more fully understood.

The new UCR SRS definition of rape does not change Federal or state criminal codes or impact charging and prosecution on the Federal, State or local level, it simply means that rape will be more accurately reported nationwide.


"

The definition is clear,

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

 

[trife]

Why is it intrinsically better to be more diverse?

It isn't. This is the big liberal lie of the modern age. Merit is all that matters.

Tim Cook is just one more sucker whose mind is blinded by false guilt.

Steve Jobs was a white dude who created and nurtured Apple, and without him, we wouldn't have had the iPhone. Sure, there was a whole team working on it, but he was the crucial ingredient (along with God).

Tim Cook has created a culture which is anathema to such single-minded vision. By encouraging diversity, he is actively attacking the roots of creativity which are essential to provoke a revolutionary leap in technology.

Just when I thought I've heard it all. Now God was a crucial part of creating the iPhone. Maybe that's what Steve was referring to in all those keynotes when he described Apple products as "magical".

But back on topic. Don't worry white males--you still have pretty much every advantage over every other race/gender combo out there.

 

[Renzatic]

The definition is clear,

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Exactly!

It makes no distinction between sexes whatsoever, merely that an act of forced penetration has taken place. If a man is being forced to penetrate a woman against his will, then he's being raped. Simple as that.

 

[H2SO4]

I seriously doubt any one has ever been discriminated based on race or sex at companies like Apple, Facebook, Google etc. those companies are what they are because they were progressive and innovative in a first place not because they were politically correct

If you seriously believe that you are living in cloud cuckoo land. It happens all the time in any company of any size and anywhere.
Discrimination is not the preserve of minorities and the term ‘minorities’ does not just mean people of a different race. There are plenty of interviewers that will go one way or the other simply because they might feel more comfortable with a prospective employee. That level of comfort is usually based on a stereo type which depends on how a person looks and sounds and where they have come from. A white guy in a suit for example may be more warmly received for a job at a law firm than say a Mexican guy in casual clothes.
How about a Rastafarian aide to the queen, go down well you think?
Old people for instance get less employable as they get older on the whole, despite their probably increased experience.

 

[zin]

There is a difference between qualified and most qualified.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ngly-that-women-are-favored-for-jobs-in-stem/

"Female candidates are now twice as likely to be chosen as equally qualified men."


Which does to include a woman forcing a man to penetrate a woman. If a man is tied up, and 50 women force him to penetrate them and it's not rape as per the 2012 DOJ definition of rape.

The new definition is:

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

That definition would include that scenario. There is no reference to the gender of the victim and perpetrator in the definition. There is a post on the DoJ website about that exact situation (a woman forcing a man to penetrate her). It is covered by the definition.

Although why it took so long to change it, I have no idea.

 

[cfedu]

Exactly!

It makes no distinction between sexes whatsoever, merely that an act of forced penetration has taken place. If a man is being forced to penetrate a woman against his will, then he's being raped. Simple as that.

From the Bureau of justice and statistics

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317


Rape - Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means penetration by the offender(s). Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.

 

[jkcerda]

The thing is, if everyone is so hung up on discrimination that they question any woman being hired for a position, then we're kinda back at square one.

It's one of those things you can overfret about to the point you're back to being discriminating again. The fact is, if a company wants to hire more women during a hiring cycle, that's entirely their prerogative. It's when it continues unabated for a long period of time, to the point that being a man could be a detriment to landing a job that it becomes an issue of opposing discrimination.

Er, 11k women got hired. Not one or one dozen .Apple is not subway or hooters

 

[cfedu]

That definition would include that scenario. There is no reference to the gender of the victim and perpetrator in the definition. There is a post on the DoJ website about that exact situation (a woman forcing a man to penetrate her). It is covered by the definition.

Although why it took so long to change it, I have no idea.

Wrong it's black and white.

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317

Rape - Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means penetration by the offender(s). Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...t-one-in-five-american-women-have-been-raped/

"The CDC’s Lenard cautioned against equating the two categories, as the “made to penetrate” category is a relatively new category that is still not fully understood. Women, she also noted, are less likely to report experiences of sexual violence than men."


“The difference between ‘rape’ and ‘being made to penetrate’ is that in the definition of rape the victim is penetrated; ‘made to penetrate’ by definition refers to cases where the victim penetrated someone else,” she said. “We do not recommend equating or making direct comparisons of rape to MTP given that we view them as distinct types of sexual violence with potentially different sequelae.”

 

[AlecZ]

Perhaps we should make some efforts to put in more men into hospitals as nurses? Or is feminism really only about benefiting one side only?

Well, there's a reason certain things are called "feminism" and not "gender equality." I've heard the argument a million times that they're the same thing, but it's obviously not true.

There's also something called "masculism" that claims to be the same thing as what feminism claims to be, and of course, it's the opposite. Sadly, "equal rights for men" and "equal rights for women" mean totally different things.

 

[Renzatic]

From the Bureau of justice and statistics

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317


Rape - Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means penetration by the offender(s). Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.

By this point, it's less like you're trying to prove a point, and more like you're trying to be right.

The DOJ has expanded the definition of rape to include men and women both in 2012. The DOJ is the last word on the subject. Plain and simple. Dead stop. Any other definitions don't carry any weight in any legal capacity whatsoever.

Don't be indignant for the sake of being indignant. You have what you claim to want.

 

[Renzatic]

Er, 11k women got hired. Not one or one dozen .Apple is not subway or hooters

So?