I thought I responded to you, Barbara - somehow I screwed that up.

Anyway - the upper echelons of management who rub elbows with the board of directors are not part of the "workforce". The denizens of the "corporate world" are pretty much chosen at random. Factors including the wealth to attend the top Ivy League colleges, combined with age, combined with random attractions at college, combined with which network meshes with other networks - in short we have a "good old boys" club at the top.

And, yes, you're perfectly right - they get REWARDED for being total screwups. It's a private party, you and I are not invited. People like us aren't even permitted in to clean up the scraps after they party - they have paid henchmen to clean up after them. (read "henchmen" to mean "lawyers")

Being female, or black, or Asian, or any other demographic has just about nothing to do with becoming a member of this class of people. You're born into it, or you learn to perform bizzare, unnatural sex acts very early in life, or you're just not included.

Uhhhmmmm - maybe you're asking the wrong question, based on the wrong assumptions.

Fact is, advertisers would love to have this kind of tech at their disposal. It's probably a safe bet that a bloc of "forward thinking" corporations are prepared to back this kind of research. Given the right combination of sensors and software, your computer can gain insight into your emotional state and your thinking that not even your spouse can get. You can bet your arse that advertising companies want that insight.

Fake smiles. Sometimes, I'm not sure how genuine a smile is. But, I know a handful of women who can be perfectly natural, going about their work. When you spot them, they have a look of concentration, or maybe disapproval, or even a pissed off look. As soon as they see you, they light up with a big smile - like it's obligatory to smile at you. Moments later, the smile is gone, and they are back to concentrating or whatever. That crap is just scary - to me at least.

Please, people, if the smile isn't genuine, you're not actually happy to see me, don't bother with the damned smile. I can do without the distracting falsehoods.

"the Russian command recognised that women were superior snipers. But the Russian experience is unique so I don't know if that applies to all women."

Obviously, I've not researched it - but a lifetime of observation tells me that it is a general truth in all of Earth's cultures. Women are more likely to be "natural" shooters than men. Males have to "learn" to shoot, but they forget that because they are generally taught at very young ages. Females, who traditionally are discouraged from playing with guns, very often just pick up a gun and hit the target.

What's more, I think that most men know this subconsciously, which is why Youtube has so damned many moronic videos of men being cruel to women. Get the girl to come out to the range, hand her an overpowered weapon with a wildcat load in it, and get her to fire it. THEN act like it's funny that she has a permanent scar on her forehead. Idiocy . . . .

What you say is true, regarding H1B. I've said as much myself - the whole H1B program is fraudulent. But, we aren't discussing that program here, or at best, H1B is peripheral to the discussion.

This whole discussion centers on an imagined hiring preference for white males and asian males, and the exclusion of supposedly qualified females and minority workers. Maybe I should point out that "asian males" includes Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other people of Asian descent - Indians are merely the second largest subset of Asians.

"As you've noted - most men won't qualify for the U.S. Marines. But that's a false standard and it presupposes that because someone can, they would wish to (I note that qualifying as a Marine doesn't mean you automagically qualify as a Ranger, no disrespect to Marines)."

I think you have it backward. Just because you qualify as a Ranger, doesn't mean you can qualify with the Marines.

There are many anecdotal stories of an army company or battalion calling for relief, and waiting for a division to come in. A squad of marines shows up, announcing, "We are your relief, Sir!"

You might read this lady's story - http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

That woman has come much closer to passing the test than either you or me. She should know what she is talking about, right?

The rest of the women are unlikely to be shrinking violets - look for their stories too.

Agree or disagree with them, you have to admit that allowing males to take the test a second time, but not permitting females a retry was odd. Why was that? The policy wasn't changed until the policy was exposed to the public light.

Whatever. It's equally possible that those teachers know more than you do. I know for certain that I see people making asses of themselves by making assumptions.

You seem to ASSume that all women and all minorities are at least as qualified as any white or asian male. I have clearly stated that those women and minorities who possess superior qualifications, should be given the job that meets their qualifications. Those who don't qualify don't get a job.

There seems to be another ASSumption amond US-style liberals. If a white male walks into a company, and puts in an application, he's going to get the job. He's a white male, he gets the job, end of story.

And, naturally, if that were true, then there would be no unemployed white males, right?

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsrace...

The most relevant bit that I get from that PDF is, education, education, education. If you bother to get an education, you can probably find a job. If you don't bother to finish high school, times are going to be tough.

And, the demographic that is held down the most is - black teens. When you get out of the teen years, demographics don't play nearly as great a role in your job, as education does.

Imagine that. Education really does pay off!

It isn't "random". Everyone who has had a real education prior to the late '80's has heard a teacher say, "Never assume, because it makes an ASS out of U and ME. The odd capitalization restates that saying, for those who are "in the know".

I mostly agree with you there. But, there ARE some women who meet qualifications. The US Marine Corps has not yet had a woman who passed the physical for combat officers - but a handful have come pretty damned close. That handful are almost certainly better soldiers than I could be. In all my life, I've not had the upper body strength and stamina to pass that course.

You know, and I know, that it is a rare women who has greater upper body strength and stamina than a healthy man - but why should we hold those rare women back? Let them do whatever they are good at.

You seem to have it ALMOST right. Let me try saying the same thing, my way.

Those women and minorities who got their jobs BECAUSE they helped to meet a quota don't belong in those jobs.

However - I don't think that there is any profession which is unsuitable for women or minorities. And, sometimes, the woman, or the minority really is the best qualified.

If you're not careful with how you state the obvious, then you risk sounding like yet another asshole bigot. I cannot, will not ban women from an occupation because they are women. But, I can and will go along with any ban of women and/or minorities who FAIL TO MEET QUALIFICATIONS. Nor can I consider lowering standards just to make the unqualified happy.

Real life is not a special Olympics event. If/when I need an EMT, a doctor, a cop, an architect, I want the BEST, not some wannabe who was given the job to make liberals feel good about themselves.

So, you hire a cute witch who is licensed, and gets routine medical exams. Got it covered!

Note that we handle prostitution in the United States in the most backward, irrational manner possible. There are no licensed prostitutes, and few if any get routine medical exams.

It's not so much an ASSumption, as it is an observation. Corporations tend to hire the most qualified people. Corporations, as opposed to small businesses, simply cannot afford to show prejudice for one demographic over another. Who are corporations hiring? Let us get this straight now - they are hiring the MOST QUALIFIED PEOPLE, who also happen to mostly be WHITE AND ASIAN MALES.

By necessity, making your labor poll more inclusive means lowering standards.

BTW - it has already been pointed out that the Asian males are significantly over represented in Sillycone Valley, whereas white males are closer to "normal". That's probably a result of "No Retard Left Behind" and the Core curriculum. Our schools are being dumbed down, so fewer white males are able to excel.

Mmmm - I see. And, I suppose that your IQ is well over 130?

Very very few blacks or mestizos with IQ's over 130 - you know, I might agree with you. But, what is the percentage of white people with IQ's over 130? Do you REALLY think there is a difference? Really and honestly, you think that non-white people suffer a 20 point (or more) IQ handicap?

OK - what about women then? If IQ is race dependent, then what about women? Are there a lot of white women with IQ's over 130? Or is it also sex dependent?

I think the term you have in mind is "prostitute". They've been fixing hard drives for thousands of years now.