3 ms·

But the flip side of that is that talent not in the coddled identity class of the day will feel that they should find companies with actual important shit to fo

But the flip side of that is that talent not in the coddled identity class of the day will feel that they should find companies with actual important shit to focus on to work for.

resu_nimda 10y ago
I love the "too busy doing important things" argument for why nobody should spend any time thinking about diversity. Of course, deciding what is important in life is an entirely subjective matter. But just to aid in my understanding of this argument, I would be interested to hear some examples of which companies and activities constitute actual important shit.
- reader5000 10y ago
  Important things: producing a good or service that is valuable to some market and that supports the livelihoods of employees/stakeholders in an equitable way. Not important things: disfavoring groups of people that it is currently stylish to consider as "oppressive", "problematic", or "triggering" in favor of other groups of people that are currently deemed to be "diverse", "oppressed", "modern". Real life isn't handing out stickers to preschoolers.
  - resu_nimda 10y ago
    So obviously there is quite a lot of overlap between companies doing important things (by that incredibly broad definition) and companies that devote some of their resources to diversity. It's almost as if working on important things and caring about diversity are not mutually exclusive, that people/companies can care about multiple things... I don't get why it is so irksome to you that a company would make a diversity effort. It should be irrelevant to the question of whether they are working on important things. I would guess that you're straight, white, and male, and just don't care how achieving one's goals might be significantly more difficult for other people in the US, because you "don't have time" to consider things that don't affect your own life. Which is all well and good, really, I'm pretty much in the same boat, but I just don't understand what's so bothersome about people that do care about those things. The words you've chosen to put in quotes are telling...the diversity effort is not a personal crusade against you. It's not about "problematic" groups of people. It's about elevating groups of people who may actually have been systemically disadvantaged through no fault of their own. Do you assert that that doesn't happen? Or just that nobody should care about it? "Real life isn't handing out stickers to preschoolers." I don't even know what that means. Where is the Code of Real Life written? If people want to hand out stickers, why does that upset you?
    - reader5000 10y ago
      "Do you assert that that doesn't happen?" Yes. Many (most?) ethnic minorities are significantly more successful than whites in the US. Whites represent the largest group of people in the US living in poverty. Whites must face the entire ideology of diversity which is that they must be replaced by non-whites due to inherent moral inferiority. Wait you're right I think systematic disadvantage does happen..
      - xenadu02 10y ago
        Citation needed. I've been directly involved in hiring/interviewing under these circumstances and the idea of lowering technical standards just to meet a quota was never entertained. We simply recruited through diverse avenues. Mostly the diversity statement itself was sufficient to let potential candidates know they could apply without fear of rejection for not being "like us". I've never actually seen evidence of active discrimination against a more qualified white candidate. Maybe it happens but it certainly isn't a result of diversity policies.
        reader5000 10y ago
        Citation: law/med school admissions in US. So active discrimination against an equally qualified white candidate is ok?
      - tkxxx7 10y ago
        Whites represent the largest body of every class. That's kind of how numbers work.
        reader5000 10y ago
        Not as undergraduates at Harvard. Or children under 5 in the US. Or residents of London, England.

But the flip side of that is that talent not in the coddled identity class of the day will feel that they should find companies with actual important shit to focus on to work for.

resu_nimda 10y ago

I love the "too busy doing important things" argument for why nobody should spend any time thinking about diversity. Of course, deciding what is important in life is an entirely subjective matter. But just to aid in my understanding of this argument, I would be interested to hear some examples of which companies and activities constitute actual important shit.

reader5000 10y ago
Important things: producing a good or service that is valuable to some market and that supports the livelihoods of employees/stakeholders in an equitable way. Not important things: disfavoring groups of people that it is currently stylish to consider as "oppressive", "problematic", or "triggering" in favor of other groups of people that are currently deemed to be "diverse", "oppressed", "modern". Real life isn't handing out stickers to preschoolers.
- resu_nimda 10y ago
  So obviously there is quite a lot of overlap between companies doing important things (by that incredibly broad definition) and companies that devote some of their resources to diversity. It's almost as if working on important things and caring about diversity are not mutually exclusive, that people/companies can care about multiple things... I don't get why it is so irksome to you that a company would make a diversity effort. It should be irrelevant to the question of whether they are working on important things. I would guess that you're straight, white, and male, and just don't care how achieving one's goals might be significantly more difficult for other people in the US, because you "don't have time" to consider things that don't affect your own life. Which is all well and good, really, I'm pretty much in the same boat, but I just don't understand what's so bothersome about people that do care about those things. The words you've chosen to put in quotes are telling...the diversity effort is not a personal crusade against you. It's not about "problematic" groups of people. It's about elevating groups of people who may actually have been systemically disadvantaged through no fault of their own. Do you assert that that doesn't happen? Or just that nobody should care about it? "Real life isn't handing out stickers to preschoolers." I don't even know what that means. Where is the Code of Real Life written? If people want to hand out stickers, why does that upset you?
  - reader5000 10y ago
    "Do you assert that that doesn't happen?" Yes. Many (most?) ethnic minorities are significantly more successful than whites in the US. Whites represent the largest group of people in the US living in poverty. Whites must face the entire ideology of diversity which is that they must be replaced by non-whites due to inherent moral inferiority. Wait you're right I think systematic disadvantage does happen..
    - xenadu02 10y ago
      Citation needed. I've been directly involved in hiring/interviewing under these circumstances and the idea of lowering technical standards just to meet a quota was never entertained. We simply recruited through diverse avenues. Mostly the diversity statement itself was sufficient to let potential candidates know they could apply without fear of rejection for not being "like us". I've never actually seen evidence of active discrimination against a more qualified white candidate. Maybe it happens but it certainly isn't a result of diversity policies.
      - reader5000 10y ago
        Citation: law/med school admissions in US. So active discrimination against an equally qualified white candidate is ok?
    - tkxxx7 10y ago
      Whites represent the largest body of every class. That's kind of how numbers work.
      - reader5000 10y ago
        Not as undergraduates at Harvard. Or children under 5 in the US. Or residents of London, England.