A pair of bills sponsored by Massachusetts state Senator Jason Lewis and House Speaker Pro Tempore Patricia Haddad, to ensure “gender parity” on boards and commissions, provide a case in point.
马萨诸塞州参议员贾森·刘易斯和众议院临时议长帕特里夏·哈达德发起的两项法案，旨在确保董事会和委员会的“性别平等”，就是一个很好的例子。
Progressives often support diversity mandates as a path to equality and a way to level the playing field. But all too often such policies are an insincere form of virtue-signaling that benefits only the most privileged and does little to help average people.
进步人士通常支持多样性授权，作为实现平等和公平竞争环境的途径。这种特权政策往往只对最有特权的人有利，对普通人帮助不大。
The bills are similar to a measure recently adopted in California, which last year became the first state to require gender quotas for private companies. In signing the measure, California Governor Jerry Brown admitted that the law, which expressly classifies people on the basis of sex, is probably unconstitutional.
这些法案与加州最近通过的一项措施类似，去年加州成为第一个要求私营企业性别配额的州。在签署这项措施时，加州州长杰瑞·布朗承认，这项法律，其中明确地把人们的性别分类，可能是违宪的。
Haddad and Lewis are concerned that more than half the state-government boards are less than 40 percent female. In order to ensure that elite women have more such opportunities, they have proposed imposing government quotas. If the bills become law, state boards and commissions will be required to set aside 50 percent of board seats for women by 2022.
哈达德和刘易斯担心超过一半的州政府议会中女性比例不足40%。为了确保精英女性有更多这样的机会，他们提议实行政府配额制。如果这些法案成为法律，州议会和委员会将被要求在2022年前为女性留出50%的议会席位。
The number of women on corporate boards has been steadily increasing without government interference. According to a study by Catalyst, between 2010 and 2015 the share of women on the boards of global corporations increased by 54 percent.
在没有政府干预的情况下，公司董事会的女性人数一直在稳步增加。根据Catalyst的一项研究，2010年至2015年间，全球公司董事会中女性的比例增加了54%。
But are such government mandates even necessary? Female participation on corporate boards may not currently mirror the percentage of women in the general population, but so what?
但是，这样的政府命令是必要的吗？女性在公司董事会中的参与程度目前可能无法反映出女性在总人口中所占的比例，但那又如何呢？
Next time somebody pushes corporate quotas as a way to promote gender equity, remember that such policies are largely self-serving measures that make their sponsors feel good but do little to help average women.
下一次，当有人把公司配额作为促进性别平等的一种方式时，请记住，这些政策基本上都是自私自利的措施，让他们的赞助者感觉良好，但对普通女性帮助不大。
Writing in The New Republic, Alice Lee notes that increasing the number of opportunities for board membership without increasing the pool of qualified women to serve on such boards has led to a “golden skirt “phenomenon, where the same elite women scoop up multiple seats on a variety of boards.
爱丽丝•李在《新共和国》撰文指出，在增加董事会成员机会的同时，却没有增加合格女性在此类董事会任职的人才库，导致了一种“金裙子”现象，即同一批精英女性在各种董事会上抢走多个席位。
Requiring companies to make gender the primary qualification for board membership will inevitably lead to less experienced private sector boards. That is exactly what happened when Norway adopted a nationwide corporate gender quota.
要求公司将性别作为董事会成员资格的首要条件，将不可避免地导致私营部门董事会经验不足。这正是挪威通过全国性的企业性别配额时发生的事情。
The US Supreme Court frowns on sex-based classifications unless they are designed to address an “important” policy interest, Because the California law applies to all boards, even where there is no history of prior discrimination, courts are likely to rule that the law violates the constitutional guarantee of “equal protection”.
美国最高法院不赞成基于性别的分类，除非这些分类旨在解决“重要”的政策利益，因为加州法律适用于所有议会，即使在过去没有歧视历史的地方，法院也可能裁定该法律违反了宪法对“平等保护”的保障。
0 条评论