home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6234 soc.men:22004 soc.women:22024 talk.abortion:53867 alt.feminism:6715
- Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ddsw1!karl
- From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
- Subject: Re: Reproductive Technologies... (was: Re: Father Notification...)
- Message-ID: <C08KKH.I1o@ddsw1.mcs.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:00:17 GMT
- References: <1992Dec22.023310.2069@jetsun.weitek.COM> <C05KMD.34L@ddsw1.mcs.com> <1993Jan1.161916.5572@panix.com>
- Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL
- Lines: 23
-
- In article <1993Jan1.161916.5572@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
- >karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
- >| ...
- >| I propose as the yardstick of equality the total number of minor children
- >| under the custodial care of each sex in single parent homes. When it
- >| reaches the level of the population dispersion (49% men / 51% women I
- >| believe) then we have equality. Until that time men are to be preferred in
- >| both custody and child support awards.
- >
- >In many cases, companies say that they cannot get a sufficient
- >number of applicants from discriminated groups to balance their
- >hiring or promotion numbers. In the case of custody, do we know
- >what the proportion of applicants is? It may be that the draft
- >rather than the job market will turn out to be appropriate
- >analogy.
-
- Of course, when companies say this they have to prove it by presenting the
- resumes of qualified applicants for inspection.
-
- --
- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
- Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
- Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
-