Jesus, dont leave!

"I know that, and I was talking more about the responses to him than the man himself. People tried so hard to defend him and to dismiss the women accusing him."

"Lol. Look at statistics of rapist convictions. Victim blaming is *vastly* more common than false accusation. The amount of people who came out in support for Jimmy Saville here in the UK recently for example, in the face of literally hundreds of claims by women that he sexually assaulted them as children, was…

Holy crap, you sound just like me!

1. "If its implemented correctly" being the operative statement. Maybe I'm just cynical, but I doubt it will be.

1. Because the moment you start talking about quota filling, you are disrespecting both the position and the gender. People want to know that the people they work with are there because of their own merit, not because there was a spot to be filled.

Sure. I questioned the method of fixing it however, not that the issue exists.

Clarification 1: I am against positive discrimination in all cases. What I was talking about was about gender roles and how they are encouraged. That has nothing to do with hiring practices.

Now I agree with a lot of what you said. Your first, third and fourth paragraph are spot on.

XD. Wow. Really?

Sorry to hear about that man. I'm not even really sure if there is a solution for this, and it sucks thinking that there probably isn't. Not for a long time anyway.

You do realize that people have a life outside of the professional? And that the Pedophile/Kidnapper/Rapist until proven innocent extends to all men outside the work place?

And you are getting dangerously close to dismissing a whole section of society's problems just because it may or may not be as bad as another group's.

"For a number of reasons women often don't have the same skills and interests encouraged and nurtured during education as men do, regardless of the interest they show, and this needs to be balanced.

If you have an argument to make against mine, actually address something I've said instead of telling me to not argue at all.

So never question anything done by people in power? They are generally always more qualified right?

And I'm saying this is the wrong response. Did you read my whole comment?

Polygon wrote about this, and I'm going to copy-paste my comment from there:

Read the eligibility requirements:

Hey, I totally agree. I prefer it when scholarships are based purely on economic backgrounds and scholastic achievement. This one doesn't really strike me as really doing anything.