4 ms·

The more attention you draw on diversity, the less diversity you receive. Diversity is supposed to be impartial and tolerant, yet it seems the prescribed approa

by tomc1985 10y ago

The more attention you draw on diversity, the less diversity you receive. Diversity is supposed to be impartial and tolerant, yet it seems the prescribed approach is to carve out separate "spaces" for different feelings and situations. How is this building bridges in the so-called "gender divide"? True diversity is complete and utter impartiality. Why are we focusing on all these useless, pretty, inspirational solutions (interviews, diversity name-and-shame, putting females in a zoo) when we really need to be attacking the mental characteristics that lead to sexist thought? It's interesting she mentions voice so much. We men need to check our emotional responses to stupid inputs like "sound of voice" or "shape of body" or whatever. These things DO NOT MATTER. All that matters is ability. Nothing else!

zamalek 10y ago
I think that getting women involved in STEM does exactly this: > attacking the mental characteristics that lead to sexist thought It's a forcing function. I really think that the current plan is the most logical approach given the current situation; though, we do need to eventually move away from it. Exactly when is going to be hard to nail down; too soon and everyone will revert to their sexist ways, too late and it's ceremony - not change. In lieu of what you are saying, everyone needs to come to the table. This type of thing also needs to go away: > Ada: [...] Otherwise I get home at night and realize I haven’t heard another woman’s voice all day. I understand where she's coming from, though. As a trailblazer it might be hard when you realize that you are alone.
- tomc1985 10y ago
  > I think that getting women involved in STEM does exactly this: > attacking the mental characteristics that lead to sexist thought I agree, but only as long as the end result is the best candidate for the job being hired. Granting special consideration to a group is just as bad as shutting them out.
  - zamalek 10y ago
    Exactly: * It becomes impossible for women to measure their growth. "Did I earn this promotion because of my gender?" As a man I face this reality all the time and it sucks. * It becomes impossible for society to measure progress in terms of the overall moral compass. "Are people only hiring women because they are forced to?"
    - mavhc 10y ago
      Doesn't matter in the end, once you get equality, then you can stop the positive bias, and also the problems of existing bias should reduce to near zero
      - ManlyBread 10y ago
        How utopian.
- rndgermandude 10y ago
  The "involved in STEM" can also go too far. For example more than half the bachelor degrees in biology are earned by women these days[1], which is nice. But why do we still need special girls/women events to promote biology to women, when in fact we should promote biology to all? Also, where are the programs to get boys interested in education or psychology, both of which are over three quarters female? This simply does not happen, at least not at scale, because the idea that it is women and women alone who must be "interested" in various things is too prevalent at the moment, for the right reasons but the wrong outcomes, if you ask me. [1] http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/ http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelor...
andreasklinger 10y ago
Being equal doesn't mean being the same. I assume that the intend is to acknowledge differences and educate people about that these arent signals for the actual work. Don't really like to judge/opinonate about this topic b/c i have never been on the negative spectrum of this problem but to reply to your point and why my above comment relates to it. The sexist thoughts imo in the end come from the fact that we aren't exposed to alternatives, build our value systems with this skewed reality and judge with this biased value system. As in: I have never seen a successful female XYZ => I am looking for the patterns i saw in the successful (male) ones => I judge the candidate based on the patterns i saw => I created another skewed reality/example for the next person to build their value system
- tomc1985 10y ago
  > As in: I have never seen a successful female XYZ => I am looking for the patterns i saw in the successful (male) ones => I judge the candidate based on the patterns i saw => I created another skewed reality/example for the next person to build their value system "I have never seen a successful female XYZ" <-- why does 'female' or gender even need to be in that sentence? That's what I can't figure out. People are purposefully inserting gender considerations where they plainly do not belong. That's what needs to stop. Because WTF does being man or woman have anything to do with computers? Assuming one knows how to talk to computers, they don't care.... why should we?
  - andreasklinger 10y ago
    of course we shouldn't but how do we get there with no inbetween steps? we should have a perfectly unbiased point of view and never subconsciously skew ourselves/be skewed in our opinion the only problem is that the same thing (our brain) we use to decide if we are unbiased is the same thing that creates the worldview that decides what bias is for us.
- clifanatic 10y ago
  > i have never been on the negative spectrum of this problem To the extent that underrepresentation of the group that I identify with is a "problem", I think you and I probably both have. Programming as a profession is dominated by Asians, specifically Indians. When I completed my master's degree in computer science at an American university, I was one of only a half-dozen non-Indian citizens in the entire program (and one of only two white men). There were lots of women, but they were all from India. In my professional work as a developer, I've seen the same massive overrepresentation of Indian programmers. Of course, I don't see this as a "problem" that my fellow, downtrodden white men need "diversity initiatives" to "overcome": Indian people, for whatever reason, just appear to have more interest and motivation in pursuing programming education and careers. The only time it grates on me is when I see somebody from $APPROVED_OPPRESSED_MINORITY_GROUP insisting that not only their group's representation, but specifically their group's representation in comparison to that of white men, is somehow a problem that I brought about.
Mz 10y ago
The more attention you draw on diversity, the less diversity you receive. Yeah, they are doing it badly. But no one seems to have an actual good solution. You know the saying: Anything worth doing is worth doing badly. You gotta start somewhere.
gens 10y ago
I usually "explain" that to people by writing something like: There are all kinds of idiots. There are male idiots. There are female idiots. There are chinese idiots. There are black idiots. There are slovenian idiots. There are afganistany idiots. There are tall idiots. There are short idiots. There are american idiots. There are white idiots. There are ginger idiots. And so on till i run out of ideas. All prejudice are the same. In fact the only actual study i found that shows an actual difference between women and men when it comes to technology is by microsoft and it says that women have better spacial awareness with widescreen while it doesn't matter that much for men. What i concluded myself is that all this PC crap is dehumanizing people and thus will probably lead to more misery then actual sexism (on average, that is). That partially comes from the fact that most older women like to be called "girl(s)", while the PC people find that derogatory.
- tomc1985 10y ago
  It makes me wonder if all this nonsense is a conspiracy to continue discriminatory practices ("preserving the boys club") rather than correct them. Lots of people trying way too hard makes me suspicious.
  - gens 10y ago
    I go by "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". I'm sure some are in it for personal gain (maybe even on bout sides), and that some are in it for actual social benefit (India comes to mind). But in general, no. It's just the usual chatter about social themes. edit: Just to note, i find this here thread OK (but wish there were more actual engineering questions).

zamalek 10y ago

I think that getting women involved in STEM does exactly this: > attacking the mental characteristics that lead to sexist thought It's a forcing function. I really think that the current plan is the most logical approach given the current situation; though, we do need to eventually move away from it. Exactly when is going to be hard to nail down; too soon and everyone will revert to their sexist ways, too late and it's ceremony - not change. In lieu of what you are saying, everyone needs to come to the table. This type of thing also needs to go away: > Ada: [...] Otherwise I get home at night and realize I haven’t heard another woman’s voice all day. I understand where she's coming from, though. As a trailblazer it might be hard when you realize that you are alone.

tomc1985 10y ago
> I think that getting women involved in STEM does exactly this: > attacking the mental characteristics that lead to sexist thought I agree, but only as long as the end result is the best candidate for the job being hired. Granting special consideration to a group is just as bad as shutting them out.
- zamalek 10y ago
  Exactly: * It becomes impossible for women to measure their growth. "Did I earn this promotion because of my gender?" As a man I face this reality all the time and it sucks. * It becomes impossible for society to measure progress in terms of the overall moral compass. "Are people only hiring women because they are forced to?"
  - mavhc 10y ago
    Doesn't matter in the end, once you get equality, then you can stop the positive bias, and also the problems of existing bias should reduce to near zero
    - ManlyBread 10y ago
      How utopian.
rndgermandude 10y ago
The "involved in STEM" can also go too far. For example more than half the bachelor degrees in biology are earned by women these days[1], which is nice. But why do we still need special girls/women events to promote biology to women, when in fact we should promote biology to all? Also, where are the programs to get boys interested in education or psychology, both of which are over three quarters female? This simply does not happen, at least not at scale, because the idea that it is women and women alone who must be "interested" in various things is too prevalent at the moment, for the right reasons but the wrong outcomes, if you ask me. [1] http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/ http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelor...

andreasklinger 10y ago

Being equal doesn't mean being the same. I assume that the intend is to acknowledge differences and educate people about that these arent signals for the actual work. Don't really like to judge/opinonate about this topic b/c i have never been on the negative spectrum of this problem but to reply to your point and why my above comment relates to it. The sexist thoughts imo in the end come from the fact that we aren't exposed to alternatives, build our value systems with this skewed reality and judge with this biased value system. As in: I have never seen a successful female XYZ => I am looking for the patterns i saw in the successful (male) ones => I judge the candidate based on the patterns i saw => I created another skewed reality/example for the next person to build their value system

tomc1985 10y ago
> As in: I have never seen a successful female XYZ => I am looking for the patterns i saw in the successful (male) ones => I judge the candidate based on the patterns i saw => I created another skewed reality/example for the next person to build their value system "I have never seen a successful female XYZ" <-- why does 'female' or gender even need to be in that sentence? That's what I can't figure out. People are purposefully inserting gender considerations where they plainly do not belong. That's what needs to stop. Because WTF does being man or woman have anything to do with computers? Assuming one knows how to talk to computers, they don't care.... why should we?
- andreasklinger 10y ago
  of course we shouldn't but how do we get there with no inbetween steps? we should have a perfectly unbiased point of view and never subconsciously skew ourselves/be skewed in our opinion the only problem is that the same thing (our brain) we use to decide if we are unbiased is the same thing that creates the worldview that decides what bias is for us.
clifanatic 10y ago
> i have never been on the negative spectrum of this problem To the extent that underrepresentation of the group that I identify with is a "problem", I think you and I probably both have. Programming as a profession is dominated by Asians, specifically Indians. When I completed my master's degree in computer science at an American university, I was one of only a half-dozen non-Indian citizens in the entire program (and one of only two white men). There were lots of women, but they were all from India. In my professional work as a developer, I've seen the same massive overrepresentation of Indian programmers. Of course, I don't see this as a "problem" that my fellow, downtrodden white men need "diversity initiatives" to "overcome": Indian people, for whatever reason, just appear to have more interest and motivation in pursuing programming education and careers. The only time it grates on me is when I see somebody from $APPROVED_OPPRESSED_MINORITY_GROUP insisting that not only their group's representation, but specifically their group's representation in comparison to that of white men, is somehow a problem that I brought about.

Mz 10y ago

The more attention you draw on diversity, the less diversity you receive. Yeah, they are doing it badly. But no one seems to have an actual good solution. You know the saying: Anything worth doing is worth doing badly. You gotta start somewhere.

gens 10y ago

I usually "explain" that to people by writing something like: There are all kinds of idiots. There are male idiots. There are female idiots. There are chinese idiots. There are black idiots. There are slovenian idiots. There are afganistany idiots. There are tall idiots. There are short idiots. There are american idiots. There are white idiots. There are ginger idiots. And so on till i run out of ideas. All prejudice are the same. In fact the only actual study i found that shows an actual difference between women and men when it comes to technology is by microsoft and it says that women have better spacial awareness with widescreen while it doesn't matter that much for men. What i concluded myself is that all this PC crap is dehumanizing people and thus will probably lead to more misery then actual sexism (on average, that is). That partially comes from the fact that most older women like to be called "girl(s)", while the PC people find that derogatory.

tomc1985 10y ago
It makes me wonder if all this nonsense is a conspiracy to continue discriminatory practices ("preserving the boys club") rather than correct them. Lots of people trying way too hard makes me suspicious.
- gens 10y ago
  I go by "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". I'm sure some are in it for personal gain (maybe even on bout sides), and that some are in it for actual social benefit (India comes to mind). But in general, no. It's just the usual chatter about social themes. edit: Just to note, i find this here thread OK (but wish there were more actual engineering questions).