3 ms·
> "The upside to this is that white people no longer make up the majority at Facebook." I am all for diversity, but this sentence upsets me. Decreasing one po
by pwaivers 8y ago
> "The upside to this is that white people no longer make up the majority at Facebook."
I am all for diversity, but this sentence upsets me. Decreasing one population in the place should not be the goal.
- throwawaymath 8y agoBut percentages are zero sum. You can't increase diversity without decreasing homogeneity.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y agoIncreasing a minority will require decreasing the share of the majority. Either you're okay with that or you're not.
- manfredo 8y agoI'm not sure I follow. If a company has 75% from group A and 25% from group B while these groups make up 66% and 33% of the population respectively then it makes sense to address the underrepresentation of group B. But why would we applaud a 50/50 ratio? Isn't that just an underrepresentation if group A? A majority is not necessarily an overrepresentation. This line if thing seems liable to give credence to the notion that "diversity" is a dog whistle for achieving an underrepresentation of undesirable groups (men, Whites, and increasingly Asians).
- java_script 8y agoThen by definition you are not "all for diversity".
- manfredo 8y agoDepends. In my view you can be all for diversity but at the same time not deliberately attempt to achieve an underrepresentation of a particular group.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- swalsh 8y agoIt reminds me of mercantilism.
- guido88 8y agoThe diversity cult is here, have your throwaway accounts ready.