4 ms·
What you cite isn't a problem with using communication as a value, it's a problem with sexism. Being a good communicator is a pretty uncontroversial positive tr
by tensor 8y ago
What you cite isn't a problem with using communication as a value, it's a problem with sexism. Being a good communicator is a pretty uncontroversial positive trait in any employee. Can you use it as invalid justification for sexism? Sure you can, along with many other things.
I guarantee you that whatever special process you use, it can be used as a form of racism or sexism. E.g. do you think that article's "look for musicians to find data scientists" can't be used as an excuse for racism or sexism?
The problem of discrimination is way more nuanced than naively throwing some things you may not personally like into a bucket and putting a label on it like "dog-whistle."
- wgerard 8y agoYou sound a bit defensive about this so I'm going to stop responding, but I'll leave you with a thought that I responded to a sibling comment with: > I think this is actually why this conversation rubs people the wrong way: I'm not assuming bad faith at all, even though I'm calling "culture fit" out as a bad metric used to discriminate against people. > A relatively modern view of gender/racial relations is that it's not exclusively people acting in bad faith - that is, a minority of people are being overtly racist or sexist (though they obviously dominate the headlines). Rather, there's a lot of subtle and unspoken biases that creep into society and result in discrimination even if that wasn't the intended purpose or goal. > To go back to your own example, if our culture "expects women to be quiet", and then discriminates against quiet people for jobs, that kinda sucks doesn't it? What are women supposed to do in that scenario? Are they really forced to choose between gainful employment and acting in a societally-approved way?