We are all to familiar with the current global crisis of Ebola. The virus has made a fast appearance in sporadic countries, including the United States. We are often told to avoid contamination as best as possible by frequently washing our hands, avoiding sick people and minimizing international travel. These precautions are standard and necessary however, are we, as a people, beginning to take things too far? In a recent Yahoo! article (attached below), Nigerian students were rejected from universities because they are from an "Ebola country".
After reading the article, I am honestly in disbelief that a college would overtly claim that they rejected the student by claiming, "Navarro College is not accepting international students from countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Much like all situations, there are two sides to this story.
On one hand, one may argue that this is complete discrimination. A student was not accepted into a college because of Ebola. Not that the student has Ebola, but rather came from a country that did. One must consider that there was a case of Ebola in the United States in Texas. Yet that does not mean the college stopped accepting American students. The student was not even rejected off of grades, standardized test scores, extra curricular activities or "pizzaz". A college destroyed the future of a young and aspiring student because they came from a country with an Ebola outbreak.
On the other hand, this act may also be seen as cautious and judicious. The college wants to prevent further outbreak of the virus, enabling a safe environment for the students. Also, by rejecting the students, the college helps to contain the disease, therefore, declining the contagion process.
When questioned about the blunt and Draconian rejection letter issued by Navarro College, the Vice President of Access and Accountability, Dewayne Gragg tried to divert from the topic by claiming that the letter was a misunderstanding. However, there is little to misinterpret about rejecting students from, "... Countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Moreover, as a unit, we must inquire how just it is to reject students from college because of a disease they do not have.
URL to article: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/texas-college-bans-students-ebola-215612192.html
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Unconscious Bias in the Google Workplace
Readers,
In regard to the community post about unconscious bias in the Goggle workplace, the article began with stating, "Google, like many tech companies, is a man's world". Does this mean women are just living in it? As a female, I would not consider myself a feminist, however I am borderline. Nonetheless, I do believe in the social, political, and economical equality of the sexes. Honestly, is there a problem with having a desire for an egalitarian society?
The women who work at Google work there because they are exceptionally intelligent and brilliant at what they do. Their gender is irrelevant. They produce the same quality work that any male can. It seems to me that the workers at Google are just immature and intolerant. I am yet to hear of any scientific theory, let alone fact, about the disparity between male and female brain capacity and intellectual ability. As far as I'm concerned, a brain is a brain regardless of the person it belongs to.
If I were working for Google, I would not consider that a safe environment. I would not be able to conform to being constantly demeaned just because of my physical attributes. Moreover, Google claims that they preform diversity training workshops to help better the workplace. Yet and still, attending a seminar every blue moon cannot teach tolerance. Respect is a value and a virtue that employers at Google do not seem to attain.
Moreover, this leads me to question how the female workers feel. Do they have any sentiment toward their male counterparts? If there were a time to complain, would this be it? Although in all rationality, if the women conveyed their thoughts, the issue would be of a greater magnitude. It is probably smarter to just contain any position on the subject and, like the bright women they are, do the job they were paid to do.
In regard to the community post about unconscious bias in the Goggle workplace, the article began with stating, "Google, like many tech companies, is a man's world". Does this mean women are just living in it? As a female, I would not consider myself a feminist, however I am borderline. Nonetheless, I do believe in the social, political, and economical equality of the sexes. Honestly, is there a problem with having a desire for an egalitarian society?
The women who work at Google work there because they are exceptionally intelligent and brilliant at what they do. Their gender is irrelevant. They produce the same quality work that any male can. It seems to me that the workers at Google are just immature and intolerant. I am yet to hear of any scientific theory, let alone fact, about the disparity between male and female brain capacity and intellectual ability. As far as I'm concerned, a brain is a brain regardless of the person it belongs to.
If I were working for Google, I would not consider that a safe environment. I would not be able to conform to being constantly demeaned just because of my physical attributes. Moreover, Google claims that they preform diversity training workshops to help better the workplace. Yet and still, attending a seminar every blue moon cannot teach tolerance. Respect is a value and a virtue that employers at Google do not seem to attain.
Moreover, this leads me to question how the female workers feel. Do they have any sentiment toward their male counterparts? If there were a time to complain, would this be it? Although in all rationality, if the women conveyed their thoughts, the issue would be of a greater magnitude. It is probably smarter to just contain any position on the subject and, like the bright women they are, do the job they were paid to do.
Warm Regards,
Grace
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)