4 ms·

> while simply assuming that all the other interesting ways that people experience life differently is irrelevant? I don't know of anyone who values diversity

> while simply assuming that all the other interesting ways that people experience life differently is irrelevant? I don't know of anyone who values diversity in gender/religion/sexuality/etc but draws the line there, and I know a lot of very unusual people from all walks of life. That would be a weird line to draw. A gay genderfluid punk rocker probably has lots of experiences a biromantic genderfluid cellist would be fascinated by. Diversity is good. The more intersections, the better. Why do you think anyone would draw this line?

fmitchell0 10y ago
Because some things are a choice, and some things are not. Some things can be turned off and some things cannot. Gender (and gender identity), along with race, are things that cannot be unshed. The language you choose to speak, what music you listen to, and whether you choose to share your sexuality, while they are differences, they cannot be instantly detected. The natural heuristic we use drawing upon our experiences in an American society have a unique relationship with gender and race. It is especially because those things are non-choices and instantaneously recognizable, that they are the most important to address first.
- RileyKyeden 10y ago
  This is a better answer to the question in the post I replied to. I was responding to CWuestefeld's faulty belief that people who want diversity in involuntary attributes don't care about diversity in others.
- CWuestefeld 10y ago
  Because some things are a choice, and some things are not. Some things can be turned off and some things cannot. This heuristic doesn't accurately predict which attributes are protected (legislatively or otherwise) and which are not. There's a pretty much open-ended set of predetermined attributes that can be discriminated on. Start with height and physical attractiveness: these factors are more-or-less immutable, but are well known as drivers of discrimination.
CWuestefeld 10y ago
Why do you think anyone would draw this line? Because the line has been drawn. The government has told me that there's a short list of protected attributes. And my employer (and thus by extension my hiring and compensation decisions) is held accountable based on those and only those. And in the discourse on the topic, we always hear "why aren't there enough blacks in tech" or "why do women get paid less", but not a peep about the achievement gap for punk rockers.
- RileyKyeden 10y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13563855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13563855

fmitchell0 10y ago

Because some things are a choice, and some things are not. Some things can be turned off and some things cannot. Gender (and gender identity), along with race, are things that cannot be unshed. The language you choose to speak, what music you listen to, and whether you choose to share your sexuality, while they are differences, they cannot be instantly detected. The natural heuristic we use drawing upon our experiences in an American society have a unique relationship with gender and race. It is especially because those things are non-choices and instantaneously recognizable, that they are the most important to address first.

RileyKyeden 10y ago
This is a better answer to the question in the post I replied to. I was responding to CWuestefeld's faulty belief that people who want diversity in involuntary attributes don't care about diversity in others.
CWuestefeld 10y ago
Because some things are a choice, and some things are not. Some things can be turned off and some things cannot. This heuristic doesn't accurately predict which attributes are protected (legislatively or otherwise) and which are not. There's a pretty much open-ended set of predetermined attributes that can be discriminated on. Start with height and physical attractiveness: these factors are more-or-less immutable, but are well known as drivers of discrimination.

CWuestefeld 10y ago

Why do you think anyone would draw this line? Because the line has been drawn. The government has told me that there's a short list of protected attributes. And my employer (and thus by extension my hiring and compensation decisions) is held accountable based on those and only those. And in the discourse on the topic, we always hear "why aren't there enough blacks in tech" or "why do women get paid less", but not a peep about the achievement gap for punk rockers.

RileyKyeden 10y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13563855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13563855