8 ms·
Buzzfeed Twitter “like to hear from you if you are not white and not male.”
- timrpeterson 11y agoAnd somebody won't be getting fired.
- hitekker 11y agoAs for 10:05a.m. EST, her current pinned tweet is: "you owe these pale devils nothing." https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700703145631023105 https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700703145631023105 Screen grab here: http://imgur.com/m5T09G4 http://imgur.com/m5T09G4
- autoreleasepool 11y agoThat's pure hate.
- hitekker 11y agoSo it is, and predictably, her twitter went private.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- bmelton 11y agoI know I'm not the normal, but this doesn't bother me. I believe that in the marketplace of ideas, the best ideas tend to win out, and if hiring "non-white males" is the best idea, then more power to them. Fighting discrimination with discrimination might or might not prove to be an effective tactic, but it certainly doesn't paint a pretty picture. On the flip side, in America this violates EEOC laws, and is pretty clearly illegal. Someone in a position to hire ought to be aware of this.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoIts not evil to recruit, trying to level your employee demographic. Labelling everything 'discrimination' is lazy. Intent colors the issue.
- ra1n85 11y agoScaachi Koul: "You owe these pale demons nothing". Intent certainly does color the issue.
- bmelton 11y agoRefusal to consider someone's application on matters of race is prima facie discrimination. Calling discrimination what it is might be lazy, but it's also very accurate. Legally speaking, there are a variety of ways to promote diversity that are, for better or worse, legal. Internal memorandums insisting that diversity is a key company value, for example, is in fact anti-discriminatory, though it might sometimes end with a result that sacrifices the best potential candidate for someone who can add a unique perspective. That said, suggesting that white people need not apply is not remotely the same thing as promoting diversity, and co-statements that highlight the ills of white people put too fine a point on it. FWIW, I'm of the opinion that I think a given person should be able to hire whomever they want. If that means that BuzzFeed Canada hires zero white people, then so be it. But that doesn't change that the laws as they are do not generally allow for this (with certain exceptions -- like hiring Chinese people exclusively to staff an authentic Chinese restaurant).
- humanrebar 11y ago> Internal memorandums insisting that diversity is a key company value, for example, is in fact anti-discriminatory... I'll disagree here. What counts as diversity is fairly arbitrary. Choosing what counts as diverse is inherently discriminatory. Are veterans underrepresented? Are transpeople? Are people with irrelevant but chronic health issues? Do the age ranges of employees match the regional (neighborhood, city, province, national, international... yes it's impossible to do all at once) demographics? And because people are diverse and unique, shops can definitely find a diverse group of people that talk, act, and think the same way. Does that still count as diversity?
- chasing 11y agoI'm happy that Buzzfeed is looking to diversify. But this person's just being an asshole.
- cperciva 11y agoI have a feeling that someone may be getting a talking-to by their lawyers. That said, the full tweet was "@BuzzFeedCanada would particularly like to hear from you if you are not white and not male." which has a subtly different meaning than it would without the word "particularly". It's quite common in Canada for job postings to include words like "we encourage applications from under-represented groups, including women, Aboriginals, visible minorities, and persons with disabilities", because encouraging applications from particular groups does not imply bias in the selection process itself.
- jdjcnndmms 11y agoThat's not the only one. You should post her other tweets too.
- parennoob 11y agoHere's one: https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700332786280853504 https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700332786280853504 "@danspeerin White men are still permitted to pitch, I will read it, I will consider it. I’m just less interested because, ugh, men." We judge this person because she's spewing her random thoughts on Twitter, but I wonder what happens when a large number of people with this knee jerk "all men are bad" attitude get into positions of power? And how many of them are there already? I can't see that it will help reduce sexist attitudes in the workplace. [As an aside, as a minority, I find her Tweets extremely racist as well – and hope no one ever makes this sort of racist speech on my behalf or while pretending to be helping me.]
- autoreleasepool 11y ago> As an aside, as a minority, I find her Tweets extremely racist as well – and hope no one ever makes this sort of racist speech on my behalf or while pretending to be helping me. Seriously! I grew up in an actual diverse place. My high school was 98% Hispanic. None of use realized we were systemically oppressed though. Even "darker skinned" Hispanics. For example, it wasn't until I left my state for college that I realized there was actually a significant difference between white and Hispanics to some people.. for some reason. It was bad enough that the same people would ask "ok yeah, but come on what's the difference between Mexican culture and Cuban culture -- the food is the same". These same people were self-proclaimed "liberals". They just grew up in a small liberal all-white town their whole lives. Growing up, I literally thought my friends and I were all white, because nobody told us we were something else. What I mean to say is, my fellow Cuban friends, my Colombian friends, my Veneuelan, and Puerto Rican friends etc... didn't think we were in a different category than say Italian people, Irish people, or Polish people. This shit is just weird. It was actually shitty to find out I'm technically part of some arbitrary category that entitles activists to treat me like a handicapped puppy. I'd rather people not consider it at all. It's patronizing because you're suggesting I'm inherently less capable on my own. I'm not saying there aren't issues that can be solved by affirmative action. I'm saying when you purposefully exclude white males and I can technically still apply for your job, I can't help but feel like you're treating me like an inferior being that needs extra help. You're not letting me compete with a certain class of people because you think they're inherently more capable than I am. The situation in the article isn't affirmative action anyways, it is exclusionary discrimination that is emotionally harmful to the people who apply too. Affirmative action is about considering diversity when you have a diversity problem, it's not supposed to be a very strong factor. Ugh. I wish they would just stop asking me about my "race". It's a totally futile effort to get me to codify some sort of needy status. Besides, if you do require it, I'm going to check off White, Hispanic, and Other: High Elf -- just to fuck with you anyways.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- hobs 11y agoFirst tweet, who cares. Subsequent tweets, trolling/asshole, why would you work for this person no matter what your or their race is? I know they are probably getting a lot of shade on twitter, but the tweets sound like a crank, not someone doing hiring. Completely unprofessional.
- outside1234 11y agoDiscrimination against white males is just as bad as anything other form of discrimination. This is also the wrong way to end up with a more diverse workforce. The "non-diverse" portion of your workforce, who probably highly support your diversity efforts in general, will slowly sour over not being given equal opportunity and float away. It also always leaves the question "Is she really good? Or did she get the General Manager position because she was female?", which again, is not what you want. You want diverse candidates to win the positions fair and square and thereby command the respect of the rest of the team. The right way to end up a more diverse workforce is to setup a better funnel to find qualified candidates. This requires work (a lot of it) and then a lot of outreach to get them come interview for positions. But the actual decision for a positions (and as a corollary, promotions) should be on merit, otherwise you are just as bad as the previous state of affairs.
- seivan 11y agoNot sure why you're getting down voted. This is the right way to handle these matters without alienating a lot of groups and cause polarisation with other issues.
- daleharvey 11y ago> Discrimination against white males is just > as bad as anything other form of discrimination. It isnt in any way comparable, discrimination against white males mostly hurts their(our) feelings, discrimination against other demographics has them paid less, physically and sexually attacked more, put in jail or killed by police more (insert almost infinite list of results of being systematically discriminated against for not being a white male)
- parennoob 11y agoDisclaimer: Not a white male. > It isnt in any way comparable, discrimination against white males mostly hurts their(our) feelings, discrimination against other demographics has them paid less Suppose the highest paying job in my profession pays $65k/year. If you hire someone who is not a white male (me, for instance) for that job over a white male who is objectively better at it, how on earth is this not causing them to be paid less? They just lost the top job (worth $65k) on account of their race, and will have to accept lower paying jobs in the future. They are absolutely being discriminated against and paid less.
- Joeboy 11y agoIs "You owe these pale demons nothing" a quote from something, or a pastiche of some style of speech? Maybe US black nationalism or Mugabe-ism? It's not normal English. Google only finds things about Buzzfeed though. I suspect there may be a lot of whoosh happening here.
- asymmetric 11y agoHow is it not normal English?
- Kapura 11y agoThere's a lot of context for the request for under-represented groups in some of her other tweets. Particularly this chain [1] which begins with: "1. The reason why I was sourcing out work specifically from WOC is because we have filled out freelance roster until June with white dudes." "2. I am trying to readjust that balance, which is not illegal. I am not sure who you are going to sue for affirmative action, but good luck." [1] https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700672318406840320 https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/700672318406840320
- hitekker 11y agoIn this case, the tweets she sends out in seeming righteous fury now seem to be less kneejerk and more intentional: it's raw, and it's coming from her hearts of hearts.
- seivan 11y agoHer texts about "pale devils", that's also part of the process of hiring WoC? There are decent ways to go around this to empower non-white hiring. This isn't helping anyone, and ends up alienating a lot of people.
- Kapura 11y agoIt alienates far more fragile white guys than the groups she's looking to employ. An unfortunate sacrifice, but necessary none the less.
- kelukelugames 11y agoI think she's trying to do more than that. She's standing up to the people telling her to move back to India and calling her various slurs and demeaning terms. The article left that out because it's clickbait inciting rage.
- seivan 11y agoShe threw manure and got manure thrown back. Like a tantrum for a child. What is it you feel is so compelling with siding with one idiot and not the other idiots?
- ryanSrich 11y agoI encourage activity like this. It helps me add to the list of companies that I wouldn't touch with a 10ft pole.
- hitekker 11y agoI wonder about some of the folks at Github and at Buzzfeed now. When a vilified person's employers quietly condone vilification by not speaking out against it: how does that make the subject of the hate feel? More worryingly, the employees who are now given free reign to hate: what will they do with this newfound implicit power?
- generic_user 11y agoEncourage racist monoculture that actively exclude there perceived racial enemies? Seems like a fairly straightforward answer to that question.
- ryanSrich 11y ago> what will they do with this newfound implicit power? Condone and nurture the very activities that less-radical movements of the same nature set out to destroy.
- generic_user 11y agoThe intent here is clearly to exclude based on race and gender not to encourage ethnic diversity. The language is no subtle, 'NO WHITE MEN' is simply racism and sexism. This person should be removed from her position and buzzfeed should issue an apology.
- seivan 11y agoThe irony is today we got to hear former Khmer Rogue communist on trial masquerading their mass murder as "social justice" [0] I wonder how far people are willing to go for "diversity". Branding a group as "pale devils" is a good way to start diminish people into justifiable targets. This isn't going to go away unless someone steps up and stops it. Unfortunately those who want to stop it are being branded as bigots, and others can only gain (votes, power, etc) from situation like this. 0: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2016/02/top-khmer-rogue-says-he-fought-for-social-justice.php http://jurist.org/paperchase/2016/02/top-khmer-rogue-says-he...
- bruceb 11y agoBuzzfeed is built on divisive headlines and half true stories. No surprise this person works there.
- dudul 11y agoAt this point, the title of this submission doesn't reflect what's going on. It's clearly "white men, go die in a ditch! We hate you!". The first tweets weren't that sensational, but it went down hill pretty quickly.
- JamesMcMinn 11y agoPeople such as this are part of the problem. They're not helping, just causing a bigger divide. Diversity is great, it should be encouraged, but diversity through exclusion should not.
- pbadger27 11y agoIt really speaks to the viewership of HN that many of these comments are negative, along the theme of 'Discrimination against white males is just as bad as anything other form of discrimination.' This person definitely went overboard, but given the last 300 years of race in North America, discriminating in one set of hires for one company is potentially a great thing. It's amazing that the Canadian constitution literally calls this out in support of it. When you have certain groups of people that you can look at and say 'Ok that person has a much lower chance of success in life than I, just look at them', something is wrong with your country, and people supporting diversity are taking a step in the right direction. Heres the bit from the Canadian charter of rights "Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."
- dudul 11y agoPeople getting to such extremisms are not interested in justice for the present, they're interested in revenge for the past.
- teamhappy 11y agoPale Demons is a great name for a band. Wait, what were we talking about? // You don't like it? Our album drops in december.
- krisdol 11y agoNot considering white males in a field that's already dominated by women, and excusing it because it "promotes diversity" ironically sounds like a hypocritical monoculture.
- autoreleasepool 11y agoI'm convinced Twitter ought to be avoided like the plague. It seems to be nothing but a place to get publicly humiliated for an accidental slip up in phrasing or line of thought. People make mistakes, and certain Twitter users do not forgive them. I'm not a supporter of any group that uses the sjw acronym. I'm just a realistic person who has made mistakes with phrasing in the past.
- jakobegger 11y agoSo I've been looking through this thread and there isn't a single comment that's supportive of @scaachi Makes me sad. I love reading HN, but I wish it wasn't such an monocultural echo chamber of white males that get all riled up every time a woman says something slightly controversial on twitter.
- wfo 11y agoIf you're sad that HN users don't rush to defend something that's indefensible well then I'm not sure what to tell you. Would you like one of us to pretend this is okay so there's an illusion of a debate that doesn't need to happen? Hiring is kind of a big deal (it determines people's livelihoods, careers, etc) so people take it seriously. Hiring is not the place for an angry hateful racist (and possibly illegal) rant.
- autoreleasepool 11y agoSupportive of what? Her overt racism? This seems like nothing more than a hateful and racist stance. Look, I actually speak differently on this website than I do in real life. In real life, I use a lot of slang and Spanglish. Im aware of the monoculture you're talking about. But to me, it was always a nerd/geek monoculture, not a white one. I guess now that you and others have forced me to think that it's a homogenous white male culture, I subconsciously think that to.
- jakobegger 11y agoI can only imagine what this must feel like for @scaachi. She tries to hire writers that are underrepresented, and lots of people who have nothing to do with it start yelling at her. Yeah, she might not have used the most politically language -- but I think that intent is more important than what exactly upset people tweet when the situation escalates. I think that it is extremely important to hire people from diverse backgrounds, especially when hiring journalists. That's what I believe she was trying to do, and that's something that we should be supportive of.
- autoreleasepool 11y ago
- douche 11y agoIt's always interesting watching stories that threaten certain ideologies get blasted away from the front page
- cha5m 11y agoThere is a difference between affirmative action and bald-faced racism/sexism. Giving bonus points to underrepresented applicants is fine. Behaving negatively towards a group of people because of their race/sex is not.