4 ms·

Research institutions are bravely fighting with "sexual discrimination" and at the same time: - they implicitly discourage men to apply for job by adding "We e

Research institutions are bravely fighting with "sexual discrimination" and at the same time: - they implicitly discourage men to apply for job by adding "We especially encourage women to apply." to job ads, - they understand "equality" as equal number men and women working at some institute/position/area instead of equal rights and opportunities and promoting best minds, - they have plenty of grants and awards considered only for women. And all above is coming from so called "smart people" that should give education for the next generations.

Balgair 7y ago
> they implicitly discourage men to apply for job by adding "We especially encourage women to apply." to job ads, Wait, how does that implicitly discourage men to apply? Sure, it is a direct encouragement to women to apply, but that is not therefore an implicit discouragement to men. An implicit discouragement to men would say something like: "We encourage women to apply above others" or "We encourage men to also look for other opportunities".
- hexadecimalMind 7y ago
  So according to your logic adding to job ad such a sentence: "We especially encourage white, heterosexual men" would be completely OK? Because nothing here is "therefore an implicit discouragement to" other ethnicity/sexuality/gender.
  - Balgair 7y ago
    Yeah, if you also encouraged other types of people too. But, like, listing out all the types would be a little much. Like, women are obviously under represented in tech, despite many efforts by the Big 4 to increase representation [0]. The Big 4 are doing better at getting women into tech, but they still have a ways to go. The survey details some of those struggles. So, logically, you'd like to continue to encourage women to apply. WASPy men don't seem to need this encouragement thus far, but times may change. [0] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/07/diversity-report/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/07/diversity-report/
- Khaine 7y ago
  Then why do we need to change terminology to encourage African American's into tech? Why is master and slave unacceptable? Why is fireman unacceptable? The claim is that using this terminology makes people feel unwelcome. The same logic applies above.
phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
This has nothing to do with TFA.
dang 7y ago
Would you please not take HN threads into yet another generic gender flamewar? That breaks the site guidelines, like this one: "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." The reason we have guidelines like this is that these discussions are totally predictable, and therefore devoid of curiosity. They generate a lot of het-up agitation though, which is destructive to the community. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- hexadecimalMind 7y ago
  "(...)Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." One of the topics mentioned in linked article is "sexual discrimination". How is it suddenly not related? "The reason we have guidelines like this is that these discussions are totally predictable, and therefore devoid of curiosity. They generate a lot of het-up agitation though, which is destructive to the community." Saying the truth is destructive to the community? Is this some kind of censorship?
  - dang 7y ago
    The topic is a survey about bullying. Turning that into a yet another internet gender flamewar is certainly an example of what that guideline asks you not to do. There's always some tangential point in an article that leads to one of the major tire fires via a hop or two. The guideline asks you to have the self-control not to be triggered by that, and avoid triggering others in turn. HN is moderated. You can call that censorship if you like; that word is used in so many different ways that at this point it just expresses a feeling.
    - hexadecimalMind 7y ago
      "You can call that censorship if you like; that word is used in so many different ways that at this point it just expresses a feeling." Censorship is not a feeling. You are not even correcting me. It's seems that you are marking my comment because you are told so, not because you can show any failure in my logic. Shame on you.

Balgair 7y ago

> they implicitly discourage men to apply for job by adding "We especially encourage women to apply." to job ads, Wait, how does that implicitly discourage men to apply? Sure, it is a direct encouragement to women to apply, but that is not therefore an implicit discouragement to men. An implicit discouragement to men would say something like: "We encourage women to apply above others" or "We encourage men to also look for other opportunities".

hexadecimalMind 7y ago
So according to your logic adding to job ad such a sentence: "We especially encourage white, heterosexual men" would be completely OK? Because nothing here is "therefore an implicit discouragement to" other ethnicity/sexuality/gender.
- Balgair 7y ago
  Yeah, if you also encouraged other types of people too. But, like, listing out all the types would be a little much. Like, women are obviously under represented in tech, despite many efforts by the Big 4 to increase representation [0]. The Big 4 are doing better at getting women into tech, but they still have a ways to go. The survey details some of those struggles. So, logically, you'd like to continue to encourage women to apply. WASPy men don't seem to need this encouragement thus far, but times may change. [0] https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/07/diversity-report/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/07/diversity-report/
Khaine 7y ago
Then why do we need to change terminology to encourage African American's into tech? Why is master and slave unacceptable? Why is fireman unacceptable? The claim is that using this terminology makes people feel unwelcome. The same logic applies above.

phjesusthatguy3 7y ago

This has nothing to do with TFA.

dang 7y ago

Would you please not take HN threads into yet another generic gender flamewar? That breaks the site guidelines, like this one: "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." The reason we have guidelines like this is that these discussions are totally predictable, and therefore devoid of curiosity. They generate a lot of het-up agitation though, which is destructive to the community. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

hexadecimalMind 7y ago
"(...)Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." One of the topics mentioned in linked article is "sexual discrimination". How is it suddenly not related? "The reason we have guidelines like this is that these discussions are totally predictable, and therefore devoid of curiosity. They generate a lot of het-up agitation though, which is destructive to the community." Saying the truth is destructive to the community? Is this some kind of censorship?
- dang 7y ago
  The topic is a survey about bullying. Turning that into a yet another internet gender flamewar is certainly an example of what that guideline asks you not to do. There's always some tangential point in an article that leads to one of the major tire fires via a hop or two. The guideline asks you to have the self-control not to be triggered by that, and avoid triggering others in turn. HN is moderated. You can call that censorship if you like; that word is used in so many different ways that at this point it just expresses a feeling.
  - hexadecimalMind 7y ago
    "You can call that censorship if you like; that word is used in so many different ways that at this point it just expresses a feeling." Censorship is not a feeling. You are not even correcting me. It's seems that you are marking my comment because you are told so, not because you can show any failure in my logic. Shame on you.