The Warring States of NPF - Does this seem a little wrong to anyone else?

The Warring States of NPF (http://www.nuklearforums.com/index.php)

- Dead threads (http://www.nuklearforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=91)

- - Does this seem a little wrong to anyone else? (http://www.nuklearforums.com/showthread.php?t=10249)

Does this seem a little wrong to anyone else?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSNBC

ORLANDO, Fla. - The WNBA again is America�s best pro sports league at achieving racial and gender diversity, from front offices down to the court, according to a study released Thursday.

The A grade given by Richard Lapchick of the University of Central Florida�s Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport came after he examined data from the 2004 season. The WNBA matched the grade it received in the 2001 Racial and Gender Report Card.

Among men�s leagues, the NBA ranked the highest in diversity with an overall grade of B-plus. The NBA and WNBA both earned As for race; the WNBA also got an A for gender while its older brother was given a B.

In Lapchick�s studies, an A for race is achieved if 24 percent of the positions were held by racial minorities; to earn the same grade for gender, 40 percent of the employees must be women.

Two-thirds of the WNBA�s players were minorities, while there were five of the league�s 13 head coaches are women and four are black. Trudi Lacey of the Charlotte Sting was the only black woman coaching a team; she also serves as the Sting�s general manager

In the WNBA league offices, 90 percent of the employees were women, while 40 percent were minorities. The league president in 2004 was Val Ackerman, who has been replaced by another woman. Donna Orender is the only female president of a major pro sports league, as Ackerman was.

Now...maybe this is just me...but having 90% of your work-force being women doesn't seem very "gender diverse" to me. Can you imagine the outrage if it was 90% male? Why is it that having an overwhelming majority of one sex makes you "diverse", while you had an overwhelming majority of the other sex would get you labeled "sexist"?

Or is it just the egotisical male part of me being illogical about this?

EDIT: I think it's because we are seen to have dominated for too long. Maybe women still feel repressed.

Semiazas, I see you're new. If you want to stick around until you're not new, I would recommend you don't make idiotic generalizations in a public forum. Suggestion: edit your post before someone intelligent such as Mashirosen the Brave finds you and kills you.

Thanks. Need the heads up.

I'll just quietly linger now.

EDIT: I have a question. Why is it that new people are effectively told to sit down and shut up? Are our views any less valid? If someone could argue against my views and effectively beat me down with them, I'd concede that I was wrong. Why do I have to wait until a certain time or until I've been here for a certain time until I'm allowed to post?

Just an observation.

You know, the instant you said that the WNBA/NBA were the most diverse sports, I had a feeling there was some wierd weighting system. And there is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by American Heritage Dictionary

Diversity, adj - Variety or multiformity

Having more women or minorities than men or white people doesn't make you diverse. Having lots of everything makes you diverse. Maybe according to their ass backwards system they are, but by any statistically valid method the WNBA is one of, if not the, most "bigoted" (in the sense of working against diversity) sports organizations out there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Semiazas

Why is it that new people are effectively told to sit down and shut up? Are our views any less valid? If someone could argue against my views and effectively beat me down with them, I'd concede that I was wrong. Why do I have to wait until a certain time or until I've been here for a certain time until I'm allowed to post?

Disclaimer: I did not see what you originally posted. However, it is my experience that the mods tend to be fair on this kind of thing. More often than not, people new to the forum tend to be used to applying the behavior that is generally considered acceptable at places like Slashdot or Futuremark forums, whereas we're trying not to devolve into one giant frat party. That said, I don't know what you said originally, so I suppose its possible that Shiney is being unfair. If thats the case, private message him. In my experience, he's a reasonable guy...(though why he got married is beyond me ;-) [Congrats, by the way])

I basically posted a huge generalization about the female gender. But I think that I was correct in my beliefs, and I'll continue not to make such observations, it just gets in the way.

Cheers for clearing that up.

Quote:

In Lapchick�s studies, an A for race is achieved if 24 percent of the positions were held by racial minorities; to earn the same grade for gender, 40 percent of the employees must be women.

Quote:

In the WNBA league offices, 90 percent of the employees were women, while 40 percent were minorities. The league president in 2004 was Val Ackerman, who has been replaced by another woman. Donna Orender is the only female president of a major pro sports league, as Ackerman was.

I could agree with the former quote, since that one is more "in line" with the population of the US. To me, the latter quote shows a lack of this "diversity" by not sticking with the bounds of the ratios of the US population.

However, I do have an important question: Why is this even greatly important? Even better, How can one even rate diversity in this way? True diversity, in my opinion, would be the interaction of different cultures and peoples, not different colours of skin.

I must say that the fact that 90% of the employees are women shows that it is not "diverse" in that respect. However, I must also say that this is not unexpected by any means. To us men: How many look forward to a career with the WNBA in our lifetimes? This numbers are this way because of interest, and (as far as I know) not of any discrimination.

But the thing I don't like is the fact that everybody looks up these statistics and chapions them as if they were truly and greatly important. It's great that more minorities and women are working, but unless your "diversity" is truly making a difference on the workforce, there's no point. These statistics are important with respect to aiding various studies and lookin at trends. But the fact that they are "graded" in this way seems to be just so that groups and companies can yell out "HA! I HAVE MORE BLACKS AND WOMEN THAN YOU!" which is wrong in itself. Having three people of different races doesn't mean much if they all grew up in, say, Brooklyn, or Beverly Hills, or London: they will have lived in a similar environment and seen or experienced the same hardships - is that truly diverse?

Statistically, if a race was a minority, then shouldn't the minority of the team be that race O.o? (Statistically speacking)
I'm not trying to be racist, but if it were truly diverse, than wouldn't it be 50/50? And then there's the grading! What do they do? Just go up to a school and go. "Hmm...well that team only has a 50/50 percentage of diversity, so i guess we should gice them a C!"

Wait... why do we have to have so much resentment flying around over these things?

It's important that no matter what the ethnicity or gender, people will get paid equally for the value of their work. It doesn't matter if one company is 99% women, and another 80% Male, it's only vital that these people are in fact, employed, in education or whatever else.

As for the dangers of being underrepresented in the work place? Well, maybe if people shed their unjust resentments for another race or the opposite sex, they could live both a happier life for themselves and the people they come into contact with.

The only place that seems important when considering representation would of course, be political. having mostly middle aged white guys isn't too great. It's not awful though, what really matters is that they can take the problems and issues of a whole community.

To be honest seeing as it is the WNBA I would expect there to be more women. Also, as far a gender goes, women are not a minority. They may be treated like a lower form of human by some pig-headed, caveman, but statistically, there aren't more men then women. As far as sports leagues go, I do think they should knock off the gender division shit. Put men and women on the same team, it actually reminds me of the past where there was the standard leagues and the black leagues. If we are equal, despite our sex and ethnicity, then shouldn't men and women be able to compete against each other?