6 ms·

Tell that to the white and asian males who get rejected on the basis of their race and gender despite having worked their entire lives to be the most qualified

Tell that to the white and asian males who get rejected on the basis of their race and gender despite having worked their entire lives to be the most qualified and technically adept candidate. I'm pretty sure impostor syndrome is a problem they would love to have. Instead they got the entire course of their careers (and lives) stepped on by bigoted racists and sexists. I know your comment has to be the top one because it turns this whole thing back into more sympathy for women and minorities, but this is literally an article about white and asian males being overtly discriminated against on the basis of race and gender. Can some of the conversation be about that?

pasabagi 9y ago
I think I'd settle for having a proportionate amount of the conversation being about discrimination against white men. So, perhaps, for every thousand comments about discrimination against other groups, we could include a word or two. I am a white man - I have never to my knowledge been meaningfully discriminated against. I think only a fool would suggest that if I was black, or a woman, I could say that - or even say that for a more limited time period.
- oceanghost 9y ago
  In the most ironic statement possible... as a white man, I once was told, "We're only hiring women and niggers."
  - wutbrodo 9y ago
    Did this actually happen to you? Out of curiosity, in what time period and industry? I only ask because I imagine that even the most racist HR person in the world would know to show more discretion.
    - oceanghost 9y ago
      Yes, in the early 90s (I'm old), and it was the local AT&T office. I've also been "discriminated" against for not being Native American (Casino Morongo in So Cal), and not being an Evangelical Christian (Cal Baptist University). As it turns out-- those institutions are legally allowed to discriminate. It absolutely blew my mind being asked to "describe my relationship with jesus" in an interview.
      - danieltillett 9y ago
        I hope you said first name basis :)
        oceanghost 9y ago
        Oh, it was awful. I was perhaps, 26, hardcore atheist. No mention was made of any of what was to come when I accepted the interview. There was a technical interview with a very nice guy, who said I scored the highest of any candidate who had ever interviewed for the university. Then, this sallow cow of a woman with a permanent look of disgust on her face conducted my "religious" interview on subjects like evolution, the Trinity, and my relationship with Jesus. I tried my best to be "reasonable," but I'm sure I looked like a deer in headlights. It's impossible to be reasonable with unreasonable people such as evangelicals. My position on spirituality has softened quite a bit as I've gotten older and had a few "spiritual experiences"... but sometimes I wonder if, in the intervening years, if it has occurred to them that beliving in provably false things like creationism, (remember, evangelicals won't even accept that "evolution is gods mechanism of creation"), doesn't make for a good engineer.
    - friedButter 9y ago
      > I imagine that even the most racist HR person in the world would know to show more discretion Only cause you mentioned "world", its pretty common for only women, or even women who have taken breaks to raise a child to be eligible for many jobs in India, including at companies considered "Big4" like Microsoft. There is also a suspension of the right to equality in favour of certain castes, and 50-70% of govt jobs and govt college seats can only be occupied by people from these castes.
      - wutbrodo 9y ago
        No, I didn't mean more discreet than to say that they were discriminating by gender or race; I've worked at a big 4 company in the Bay and they barely even managed to maintain plausible deniability about racism and sexism in their hiring policies. I was just referring to directly using the word "nigger" in that context.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
spicymaki 9y ago
I am trying to wrap my head around this. The level of black employees at Google is at 2% and actually dropped since 2016. How fair is it to say from a statistical point of view that if you did not get hired, you lost out to a lesser qualified black person and not someone from a white or asian of equal or more qualifications? I pick on the black statistic specifically because at the end of the day the blow back for these perceived diversity programs lands on this group in particular.
- aliston 9y ago
  You’re correct that the difference is in the margins. But, at the end of the day, is any exclusion based on race acceptable? From my perspective, it’s hypocritical to champion equal opportunity while systematically having a different hiring process for different races, not to mention illegal.
  - spicymaki 9y ago
    That is not the argument I am making. I am asking the question if there is a super majority of white and asian males being hired at these firms (that is present in the Google stats), is it fair to say on an individual basis that the reason you did not get the job was because you were passed over for someone unqualified in an underrepresented group, or is it because said person just did not get hired for some other reason?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- sin7 9y ago
  If you were to accept the current estimates on IQ, where blacks have an average IQ of 85, Hispanics an average IQ of 90, whites an average IQ of 100 and Asians an average IQ of 105 with a standard deviation of 15 by design, and that Youtube only hires people two standard deviations from the mean, then about 2% of employees would be black, 5% Hispanic, 30% white and 63% Asian. I am quite sure that whites are over represented at the expense of Asians.
danso 9y ago
The GP was arguing a point that is agreed-upon by many who argue against affirmative action — that the minorities ostensibly helped are harmed in the bigger picture. Yet you rip on the GP for not thinking enough about the whites and Asians who are also the victims of affirmative action? You could be a bit reflexively polarized about this issue.
- candiodari 9y ago
  Perhaps he's against discrimination, and that then automatically leads to the "reflexively polarized" opinion. How about we judge people on their merits ?
  - danso 9y ago
    The GP didn't post their resumé and CV -- nor should that be some kind of pre-requisite for discussion -- so I'm limited to judging and critiquing the content of their comment. Likewise, we shouldn't be interested in each other's character beyond the personal viewpoints we each have relating to the discussion.
    - candiodari 9y ago
      I don't see how their race affects anything. Race and gender affect the outcome, but only in negative ways. Either by preventing a fair outcome, or by casting doubt on the fairness of the outcome.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > How about we judge people on their merits ? That's fine if everyone starts from the same base and has the same opportunities which, currently, they most assuredly do not. Let's knock this privileged bullshit on the head until then.
    - manigandham 9y ago
      That will never happen. Life isn't fair and never will be, just by virtue of the natural world itself. We can and should do our best to clear the way to ensure equal opportunity (not outcome) but it's important to realize what is actually reasonable and achievable vs impossible.
throwaway1584 9y ago
Most of these are also misclassified as white and asian Americans. ⅔ [1] of Silicon Valley tech workers are immigrants that risk discrimination due to being misclassified into US demographic categories from the EEO-1 Instruction Booklet [2] that underpins all diversity and inclusion programs. It is currently impossible for an immigrant to avoid being mis-classified because the EEO-1 booklet states that if a person decline to state their race and/or ethnicity the employer is allowed to classify them on their own. The misclassified immigrants is by far Silicon Valley's largest source of diversity, and the misclassification also makes diversity statistics incorrect for Americans in tech. [1] https://jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2018.pdf https://jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2018.pdf [2] https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/2007instructions.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/2007instructions.c...

pasabagi 9y ago

I think I'd settle for having a proportionate amount of the conversation being about discrimination against white men. So, perhaps, for every thousand comments about discrimination against other groups, we could include a word or two. I am a white man - I have never to my knowledge been meaningfully discriminated against. I think only a fool would suggest that if I was black, or a woman, I could say that - or even say that for a more limited time period.

oceanghost 9y ago
In the most ironic statement possible... as a white man, I once was told, "We're only hiring women and niggers."
- wutbrodo 9y ago
  Did this actually happen to you? Out of curiosity, in what time period and industry? I only ask because I imagine that even the most racist HR person in the world would know to show more discretion.
  - oceanghost 9y ago
    Yes, in the early 90s (I'm old), and it was the local AT&T office. I've also been "discriminated" against for not being Native American (Casino Morongo in So Cal), and not being an Evangelical Christian (Cal Baptist University). As it turns out-- those institutions are legally allowed to discriminate. It absolutely blew my mind being asked to "describe my relationship with jesus" in an interview.
    - danieltillett 9y ago
      I hope you said first name basis :)
      - oceanghost 9y ago
        Oh, it was awful. I was perhaps, 26, hardcore atheist. No mention was made of any of what was to come when I accepted the interview. There was a technical interview with a very nice guy, who said I scored the highest of any candidate who had ever interviewed for the university. Then, this sallow cow of a woman with a permanent look of disgust on her face conducted my "religious" interview on subjects like evolution, the Trinity, and my relationship with Jesus. I tried my best to be "reasonable," but I'm sure I looked like a deer in headlights. It's impossible to be reasonable with unreasonable people such as evangelicals. My position on spirituality has softened quite a bit as I've gotten older and had a few "spiritual experiences"... but sometimes I wonder if, in the intervening years, if it has occurred to them that beliving in provably false things like creationism, (remember, evangelicals won't even accept that "evolution is gods mechanism of creation"), doesn't make for a good engineer.
  - friedButter 9y ago
    > I imagine that even the most racist HR person in the world would know to show more discretion Only cause you mentioned "world", its pretty common for only women, or even women who have taken breaks to raise a child to be eligible for many jobs in India, including at companies considered "Big4" like Microsoft. There is also a suspension of the right to equality in favour of certain castes, and 50-70% of govt jobs and govt college seats can only be occupied by people from these castes.
    - wutbrodo 9y ago
      No, I didn't mean more discreet than to say that they were discriminating by gender or race; I've worked at a big 4 company in the Bay and they barely even managed to maintain plausible deniability about racism and sexism in their hiring policies. I was just referring to directly using the word "nigger" in that context.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

spicymaki 9y ago

I am trying to wrap my head around this. The level of black employees at Google is at 2% and actually dropped since 2016. How fair is it to say from a statistical point of view that if you did not get hired, you lost out to a lesser qualified black person and not someone from a white or asian of equal or more qualifications? I pick on the black statistic specifically because at the end of the day the blow back for these perceived diversity programs lands on this group in particular.

aliston 9y ago
You’re correct that the difference is in the margins. But, at the end of the day, is any exclusion based on race acceptable? From my perspective, it’s hypocritical to champion equal opportunity while systematically having a different hiring process for different races, not to mention illegal.
- spicymaki 9y ago
  That is not the argument I am making. I am asking the question if there is a super majority of white and asian males being hired at these firms (that is present in the Google stats), is it fair to say on an individual basis that the reason you did not get the job was because you were passed over for someone unqualified in an underrepresented group, or is it because said person just did not get hired for some other reason?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
sin7 9y ago
If you were to accept the current estimates on IQ, where blacks have an average IQ of 85, Hispanics an average IQ of 90, whites an average IQ of 100 and Asians an average IQ of 105 with a standard deviation of 15 by design, and that Youtube only hires people two standard deviations from the mean, then about 2% of employees would be black, 5% Hispanic, 30% white and 63% Asian. I am quite sure that whites are over represented at the expense of Asians.

danso 9y ago

The GP was arguing a point that is agreed-upon by many who argue against affirmative action — that the minorities ostensibly helped are harmed in the bigger picture. Yet you rip on the GP for not thinking enough about the whites and Asians who are also the victims of affirmative action? You could be a bit reflexively polarized about this issue.

candiodari 9y ago
Perhaps he's against discrimination, and that then automatically leads to the "reflexively polarized" opinion. How about we judge people on their merits ?
- danso 9y ago
  The GP didn't post their resumé and CV -- nor should that be some kind of pre-requisite for discussion -- so I'm limited to judging and critiquing the content of their comment. Likewise, we shouldn't be interested in each other's character beyond the personal viewpoints we each have relating to the discussion.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    I don't see how their race affects anything. Race and gender affect the outcome, but only in negative ways. Either by preventing a fair outcome, or by casting doubt on the fairness of the outcome.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > How about we judge people on their merits ? That's fine if everyone starts from the same base and has the same opportunities which, currently, they most assuredly do not. Let's knock this privileged bullshit on the head until then.
  - manigandham 9y ago
    That will never happen. Life isn't fair and never will be, just by virtue of the natural world itself. We can and should do our best to clear the way to ensure equal opportunity (not outcome) but it's important to realize what is actually reasonable and achievable vs impossible.

throwaway1584 9y ago

Most of these are also misclassified as white and asian Americans. ⅔ [1] of Silicon Valley tech workers are immigrants that risk discrimination due to being misclassified into US demographic categories from the EEO-1 Instruction Booklet [2] that underpins all diversity and inclusion programs. It is currently impossible for an immigrant to avoid being mis-classified because the EEO-1 booklet states that if a person decline to state their race and/or ethnicity the employer is allowed to classify them on their own. The misclassified immigrants is by far Silicon Valley's largest source of diversity, and the misclassification also makes diversity statistics incorrect for Americans in tech. [1] https://jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2018.pdf https://jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2018.pdf [2] https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/2007instructions.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/2007instructions.c...