Business Coaching
- Thread starter Lat00
- Start date
Interesting. You've picked just two items out of the extensive body of evidence. And you're dismissive of both.
If there was a higher proportion of women in prison, would you shrug it off as "women commit most of the crime"? I bet you'd be complaining about how society fails women!
That there are more men in prison is not because men are inherently bad people (relative to women). But it appears that this is exactly what you believe.
What I really love though is your glib "same pay for the same work" assertion.
Experienced workers in a factory get paid more. Why? All employees put in the same amount of work.
Do a night shift on a construction site and you get paid more than on the day shift. Why? It's the same work.
If I offer to strip for a nude photo shoot, I doubt I'd earn as much as the average 20 year old woman would earn. Why not? It's the same amount of work.
"Same pay for the same work" looks nice on a placard you're carrying through a protest. In real life it's a load of bullsh*t. We pay what we feel someone is worth. You do, too!
If you need some root canal work done and you have the choice of a woman straight out of uni or an experienced male dentist who charges £1 more for the job, I bet you'd pay the £1 more. Why? It's the same work.
If the productivity / work outputs are the same for two individuals then, yes, they should be paid the same. In theory. But there are always other influences. A model may get paid more because the advertiser feels her face on the ad may sell more face creams. A fitness coach may get paid more simply because they're better at selling themselves!
There are tons of intangible factors, but the average small business owners in this forum are just decent people trying to earn an honest living. They are not racist, homophobic, transphobic or whatever. They are fundamentally good people. They want to provide fair pay and keep their employees happy.
Yet the atmosphere for them is one of fear, because on the other side of their honest economic activity is a lobby that makes money by painting them as monsters ...even just for talking in English! Enjoying your Christmas holidays (it's winter holidays), breast feeding a baby (it's chest feeding) or calling someone a genius (it "carries assumptions of gender inequality and also of class and ethnicity") are all horrific sins, micro-aggressions or hostility against minorities.
There is a language competition out there to find more and more offence in normal everyday communication. The enemy? Everyday folk just going about their business.
D&I has gone mental (if one can even say "mental" nowadays without getting arrested). It's become obsessive, demanding, suffocating; it's holding our country back.
"Same pay for same work" sounds neat, sound reasonable, sounds like a demand for a fairer society, so everybody has to support it or they are morally bankrupt! You hypocritical lot (who discriminate on pay like everybody else) get your pitchforks out if anyone so much as dares question your world views.
"Same work for same pay" is, in reality, a dog whistle to the perpetually offended desperate virtue signallers out there, inviting them to jump on the bandwagon so they can exhibit their caring credentials.
Well done to you for your "community initiatives" if you are indeed helping people and not getting them together just to spread some brand of D&I poison.
Upvote
0
I will answer this one last time, because honestly Clinton, you are boring me to death and we've wandered far from the subject matter.
Firstly, you (assuming you are classing yourself as an "average small business owner" and "decent people trying to earn an honest living", you are not being decent towards the original poster.
You also seem to have me confused with him. I don't do work specifically on D&I, my focus is on neurodiversity and helping people affected by it.
You again muddy the waters on comments, which appears to be "oh look a squirrel" tactics.
Men do commit the most crime, it's why there are more of them in prison. If it were the opposite, no I wouldn't say anything. I didn't say men are inherently bad, but it's simply a fact they commit the most crime.
You use examples of models, inexperienced dentists and the like. All of this is just waffle. Hot air to distract.
In the case of the factory worker you've given, it's not necessarily the same job. There will be other factors of course. The person at the factory might have been there a long, long time and seen their salary increase throughout the years.
Night shift is not the same as day shift, due to the factors on the body. We are built to sleep at night, not work it.
You're not a stupid man, you know there are plenty of examples out there of females being paid less than men for the exact same roles, most factors being equal. It's simply a fact.
I actually agree with you on some points. Some of the stuff coming out recently is going too far. The Tom Jones song last week for example, others again I agree with you on.
Finally, I will re-iterate with the point I started with. I'm not a D&I worker. I help people with neurodiverse conditions (although I do other things too). So yes I do community work for this, and other mental health conditions. I charge where it is appropriate and can be afforded (I have a few large corporates I deal with) but currently have a handful of clients that I don't charge a penny for. They have made it clear talking to me has helped them considerably.
This is the last I will answer on this as you seem to be very angry at the world, so much so that you can't actually recognise that I'm not a D&I person. It's honestly just tiresome to read, even though you do make a handful of good points amongst the nonsense.
Upvote
0
As a country, we’d be better off if we learned how to make things and sell them again, instead of this workshy piffle.
Upvote
0
Came across some diversity stuff today and thought this would be a good thread in which to post it.
In business it's important to use the right data. And this relates to business data and transgender issues.
It's a hilarious example of how you may THINK you're using the right data but you're not!
The screwup comes from the UK's Office of National Statistics, no less.
The ONS data claims 262,000 trans people in England and Wales (according to the 2021 census published in Jan)
Within that data, the London boroughs of Newham (East London) and Brent (West London) have the highest number of trans people.
These seem the most unlikely of places to have the UK's largest trans communities especially give these areas' high Muslim / Asian populations.
I've lived in Brent, it's almost 100% my lot from India!
A deeper look into the data shows that areas with many non-English speakers seemed to have the largest number of trans people.
That's a strange correlation.
1 in 67 Muslims said they were transgender. Most of them were older people. Also strange.
It turns out that the anomaly is because of how the census questionnaire asked the question!
Instead of asking, "Are you trans?" the census people consulted with pro transgender lobby groups and come up with the monumentally stupid "Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?"
That's a complicated question for people not very fluent in English. "Did you have sex from birth?" Everyone from Punjabi grandmothers to Polish builders seemed to have answered "No".
Even some native English speakers struggle with a question like this. It presupposes everyone understands the whole gender / sex issue!
The #transgender capital of the UK, Brighton and Hove, expected to come in at #1, came in at #20.
So the number of trans people in the UK is highly exaggerated in the national stats.
But that doesn't stop government departments, councils, NHS trusts and others formulating policies based on this data that says 0.5% of the adult population is trans.
So it's not 1 in 200 people who are trans. It may be 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000. Nobody knows!
Even businesses are planning their services, their PR, their ESG policies, their recruitment, based on this flawed data.
And there are Diversity and Inclusivity champions all over the UK pressuring / lobbying / influencing businesses using this completely messed up data.
Moral of the story: Even what should be rock solid data from the ONS could be crap.
The more heavily you rely on any data the more carefully you need to check that it's quality and reliable data.
One more lesson: probably much to the annoyance of gay and trans lobby groups, it turns out there are far, far fewer trans people in the UK than all the virtue signallers, inclusivity champions and baying mobs will have you believe.
In business it's important to use the right data. And this relates to business data and transgender issues.
It's a hilarious example of how you may THINK you're using the right data but you're not!
The screwup comes from the UK's Office of National Statistics, no less.
The ONS data claims 262,000 trans people in England and Wales (according to the 2021 census published in Jan)
Within that data, the London boroughs of Newham (East London) and Brent (West London) have the highest number of trans people.
These seem the most unlikely of places to have the UK's largest trans communities especially give these areas' high Muslim / Asian populations.
I've lived in Brent, it's almost 100% my lot from India!
A deeper look into the data shows that areas with many non-English speakers seemed to have the largest number of trans people.
That's a strange correlation.
1 in 67 Muslims said they were transgender. Most of them were older people. Also strange.
It turns out that the anomaly is because of how the census questionnaire asked the question!
Instead of asking, "Are you trans?" the census people consulted with pro transgender lobby groups and come up with the monumentally stupid "Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?"
That's a complicated question for people not very fluent in English. "Did you have sex from birth?" Everyone from Punjabi grandmothers to Polish builders seemed to have answered "No".
Even some native English speakers struggle with a question like this. It presupposes everyone understands the whole gender / sex issue!
The #transgender capital of the UK, Brighton and Hove, expected to come in at #1, came in at #20.
So the number of trans people in the UK is highly exaggerated in the national stats.
But that doesn't stop government departments, councils, NHS trusts and others formulating policies based on this data that says 0.5% of the adult population is trans.
So it's not 1 in 200 people who are trans. It may be 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000. Nobody knows!
Even businesses are planning their services, their PR, their ESG policies, their recruitment, based on this flawed data.
And there are Diversity and Inclusivity champions all over the UK pressuring / lobbying / influencing businesses using this completely messed up data.
Moral of the story: Even what should be rock solid data from the ONS could be crap.
The more heavily you rely on any data the more carefully you need to check that it's quality and reliable data.
One more lesson: probably much to the annoyance of gay and trans lobby groups, it turns out there are far, far fewer trans people in the UK than all the virtue signallers, inclusivity champions and baying mobs will have you believe.
Upvote
0
T
The Byre
The primary task of the ONS is to support and push any and every pro-government argument, no matter how blatantly absurd or misguided that agenda might be.
To do this, the ONS has to conflate issues, obfuscate the facts and studiously ignore the blindingly obvious! The CPI and RPI data sets are bogus. Government spending figures are bogus. The Civil Service figures are bogus. The facts are laid out in as opaque a manner as possible, so as to make direct criticism of government and the way the country is governed as difficult as possible.
If you are in doubt, try getting a handle on the cost of insuring a person for health care under the NHS! It has taken me weeks to drill down to the fact that of the c.a. £3,280 each and every person costs under the NHS, only £2,020 is spent on health care (2022 figures). The only way I could drill down to the real figures was to ignore the ONS and start again from scratch.
(The ONS slipped up badly on Universal Credit, as it was possible for me to back-calculate the figures and realise that 40% of the £75bn spent on UC gets lost in administration. I bet someone got into hot water on that one!)
The 2021 census was a master-class in misleading obfuscation and the author of this exercise in confirmation bias (the phenomenon of people believing in a theory so hard that they stretch the facts or even make them up just so that they fit the theory) is one Jonathan Wroth-Smith, Head of Census Statistical Design at (you've guessed it!) the Office for National Statistics!
For our brave Jonathan to come up with the brilliantly confusing question "Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?" and to do so without appearing to want to deliberately confuse must have involved a focus group that discussed the problem for days.
"How can we ask the 'Trans' question so as to create the greatest degree of epistemological inexactitude without actually appearing to do so?" was no doubt on the agenda!
And with one stroke of the pen and a happy murmur of agreement from the Statistical Design Committee, every second Punjabi grandmother was born Albert Snodgrass!
Upvote
0
I've been dipping into reading this, because it has some very good well-considered-and written posts from which I've learned - from people who clearly know and care about what they're doing. Thankyou. Genuinely.
It also has some thoroughly ignorant and bigoted views, too.
Oh well, such is life. 'Ignore 'em' is my note-to-self.
Yes, the thread relatively quickly became completely derailed from the original question... which may be a good thing, because anyone tagging themselves as 'thought leader' (which I think is genuinely worse than 'influencer') is immediately opening themselves to having the p*** taken, and quite mercilessly. (And I've personally done similar and worse when younger, in the desire to seem better than I really am and impress others.) He/she 'got off lightly'.
I'm struggling to find an appropriate close to this comment - so I'll just post as-is.
It also has some thoroughly ignorant and bigoted views, too.
Oh well, such is life. 'Ignore 'em' is my note-to-self.
Yes, the thread relatively quickly became completely derailed from the original question... which may be a good thing, because anyone tagging themselves as 'thought leader' (which I think is genuinely worse than 'influencer') is immediately opening themselves to having the p*** taken, and quite mercilessly. (And I've personally done similar and worse when younger, in the desire to seem better than I really am and impress others.) He/she 'got off lightly'.
I'm struggling to find an appropriate close to this comment - so I'll just post as-is.
Upvote
0
For anyone struggling with their gender identity (or sexuality), life can be pretty difficult / stressful. We need to extend them our sympathy and understanding.
However, some of the blatant in-yer-face exhibitionism and militant activism by a few individuals does a lot of damage to those who are genuinely struggling. Organisations (and individuals) who jump on the bandwagon in order to brandish their "caring" credentials actually end up causing further damage to the public's perception and understanding of genuine gender / sexuality problems. Their self-congratulatory and santimonious positioning and preaching end up hurting the very people whose cause they claim to champion.
But these organisations don't care. They got their social media likes, they got more subscribers, they ticked their ESG box.
There is a battle for dominance in what's become a hierarchy of virtue! The original belief was that dominance in this hierarchy was the route to achieving success. That got replaced with the virtue competition becoming embedded as part of organisations' core philisophies and mission goals. This is particularly acute in organisations not geared towards commercial goals (think schools, NHS trusts, councils etc)
The National Education Union has called for more drag queens in schools to challenge the “heteronormative culture and curriculum”. In some primaries there are zero male teachers. Kids see more drag queens than they see men.
Teachers, and teaching unions generally don't see a problem with this. The debate is all around whether having drag queens coming in harms children or not, whether children will benefit from being exposed to alternatives to the "heteronormative culture".
I think we're asking the wrong questions. That some men want to dress as women and do so publicly is entirely upto them. If they want to strut about in high heels and enter drag queen competitions, again it's upto them. The question we should be asking is why some men want to dress up as women and spend time with children while posing as women. Is that normal? Is there something odd about it? Are these people, to use your term, weirdos?
Schools today talk a lot about safeguarding. As a volunteer at schools I've had to undergo safeguarding training - and repeat training every year! - but the greatest safeguarding risks to children are the teachers themselves.
The Asleep At The Wheel publication by the Policy Exchange last month made waves and it makes for chilling reading. All parents of children in school need to read that report to be aware of what's actually happening in the schools their children are attending.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I disagree that they don't care (I'm in one) but they clearly have limited budgets. Just because people are in a SME doesn't mean they don't care about other people and how to be fair within a business context (and not only fair - internal diversity is good for business). Those SMEs may be members of small business organisations so those orgs may be a conduit to their members.
Upvote
0
Good point. I contacted my alma mater, a relatively small university, the other day because a researcher had told me about some impending changes that he wasn't comfortable with. That researcher is autistic, I now know, but I had no idea of this when I was working on my MSc. (His masking is very impressive.) The reply came with some standard and slightly out of date terminology, along the lines of "people should just stop by and tell us what they need".
Not only is this akin to someone who doesn't use a wheelchair constantly having to ask for a regular chair, it doesn't take into account either that many autistic people don't know that they are autistic. So the solution is to offer a wider range of options without this requiring lengthy discussions and a lot of paperwork. Like a pick and mix.
I know someone else who is autistic. She has a law degree and was working at a pretty high-up health-related govt organisation (not in UK) when she didn't know yet that she's autistic. I think it's fair to say that her autism cost her her job because it wasn't recognised. Autistic people are less burdened by various social conventions and judgments, so she was overheard saying things on the phone that were perceived as undesirable. The situation could have been handled so much better than it was.
(PS moderator, yes, I am currently posting from outside the UK.)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Hi, point taken but it seems to me that you could be the waffle ?. You, collectively may have a problem. I searched on "neurodiversity" and this came up. It may literally have been the only thread that contained the topic. So, some of you have work to do. No, not you, Mr Waffles.
Did you know that 20% of Brits have a disability, btw? Just came up in dragons' den. Also, there once was a woman in Amsterdam whose brother couldn't get a job because of his impairment. So, she set up a courier business that hired people with impairments. Was later acquired by one of the big firms, keeping company's special mission intact.
Oh. Aren't you running a courier company too, Mr Waffles? There you go. ?
Upvote
0
Oh. I thought I already replied to this. (But I had included a link to the dragon's den episode.)
I may have remembered the figure wrong but it was mentioned by a so-called disabled fashion designer whose body suddenly went haywire. (So-called ? I disable an app or a program on my computer and it's partly society that "disables" people by not being inclusive enough.) I think she was turning over over a million within a short time because the fashion industry doesn't know how to address the differences in requirements while she does.
I think that diversity is a huge multidimensional space. The differences stop life from being extremely boring.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Remember this?
people.com
Woman with Down Syndrome Grows Her Baking Hobby Into a Full-Fledged Business: 'Do Not Give Up'
Collette Divitto decided to open her cookie business, Collettey's, after being rejected for many jobs in Boston
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
Should you crowdfund? A framework for UK founders in 2026Three articles into a series on what crowdfunding actually costs, the...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
The polls, the reframing, and the billion dollarsHow three letters from the early years of Star Citizen's development...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
The values trap: what the Punks actually ownedWhy BrewDog's Equity for Punks investors were structurally locked out...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
When belief is the business modelWhat BrewDog's collapse and Star Citizen's billion-dollar climb are...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
AI, Virtual Influencers and the Copyright Minefield: What Entrepreneurs Need to KnowI'll be upfront: this article was written with the assistance of an AI...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
