You could also point out the fact that it has been shown that more inclusive and diverse teams typically make better decisions and yield better results.
Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief
Or a mix of both. It needs to be studied case by case.
I'm gonna give you an example: Most swimmers are whites, while most runners are black. And it's not a racism thing, it's because physically each one is better on each thing.
Another example: the most dangerous and hard works are occupied by men. Are they women excluded from those jobs by their genitals? Or maybe because they require a level of resistance and strenght that most women can sustain (miners, fishermen, etc)
Another one: most high executives are men, because the job requires time that most women don't want to sacrifice because that means they can't form a family and raise their children (men can have children at old age, but women are only fertile until certain age). We can talk about no job should mean to sacrifice your life and if there's too a predilection to pick men first, but as you see there are more factors.
This happens too when the employer suspects that a woman could get pregnant, so she would have to leave to give birth. The solutions isn't to have a 50% quota, but to have both parents take FORCED paternity leave like some countries have.
We shouldn't automatically imply that there's not equality of opportunity each time we don't see equiality of results.
I didn't mean it shouldn't be investigated, of course it needs to be investigated. But we, as regular human beings should place trust into victims and their stories. These are not easy things to come forward with. The shame, confusion and even guilt are such dominant feelings when you're victim of these sorts of things.
They're both healthy.
You doubt everyone involved. You investigate everything and everyone.
Then, after you've ascertained the individual truth of each case, you dole out the sentence. But only then.
The fact that it's one person claiming X or n+1 people claiming X doesn't mean the second isn't investigated just as throughly.
It is not something else. If they bring proof on an individual level. I will believe those ones. If someone says oh yeah I was totally molested during a drunken work party 10 years ago, it was not consensual or anything like it totally happened and all the proof I have is that I am saying this. Now that we've got that out of the way I'd like my thousands of lawsuit dollars on my credit card by tomorrow.
While you can argue the details, corporations and corporativism are a direct consequence of capitalism. Free market and capitalism is at the core of many problems that we have today. E.G.: Insulin and big pharma in the US.
Not here to argue which system is better because it's pointless, but capitalism comes with a lot of baggage and many problems.
I don't want solutions. I want to be mad. - PoorlyDrawnlines
People are innocent until proven guilty.
It's the standard I want for myself and thus I will defend it for anybody else.
I'm not gonna let compassion shroud my judgement. People lie all the time.
I will not mistreat Jussiette Smollette and her story about being a victim of white Maga rape... but neither will I blindly trust this alleged victim by default before an investigation has taken place.
Better risk being heartless than a manipulated tool and fool.
You missed the part where the investigation already happened and there is plenty of proof. Sure they will have their day in court, but if a person is holding the murder weapon atop a bloody corpse and other 100 people said they watched him stab someone, don't be surprised if the court rules that he is a murderer.
Being overly skeptical of everything is not a good thing, and contrary to popular belief, not a sign of intelligence either.
I don't want solutions. I want to be mad. - PoorlyDrawnlines