4 ms·

Collective madness is largely reached at this point: the writer is complaining about a totally self-made issue. If I was trying to recruit men for nurse jobs, o

Collective madness is largely reached at this point: the writer is complaining about a totally self-made issue. If I was trying to recruit men for nurse jobs, or people of color in Korea I would ran in a similar pipeline problem. The real issue is that "diversity" had became a metrics to reach for its own sake by companies instead of simply recruiting people that fit the job. Moreover, you can’t complain about so-called systemic sexism or racism when your policy is to not recruit white, asian or men that could fulfill the job precisely because of their race/sex.

rofo1 7y ago
> The real issue is that "diversity" had became a metrics to reach for its own sake by companies instead of simply recruiting people that fit the job. Completely insane. I can't understand who came up with and spread it around with a straight face. "hey we better hire predetermined % of <insert any group that is non-white-christian-men> otherwise we are bigots" Truly remarkable how insane it is. I haven't seen a single case where the people that ought to be employed are white Christian men. Why is that so? Does nobody ask this question? Can it be coincidence that nobody, ever, ever raised an issue that not enough white Christian men were employed? A lot of illogical and improbable things, and IMHO it's just not a coincidence. But I don't have good understanding on why it happens, though.
- tasogare 7y ago
  > Can it be coincidence that nobody, ever, ever raised an issue that not enough white Christian men were employed? Multiple reasons: - in European countries (USA is particular because of imported slaves) the white unemployment used to be the general unemployment rate until 40 years ago. Tons of white men are seeking jobs, at this moment. So yes, the issue exists. - some minorities are in the business of complaining, other aren’t. In my country, which has a significant East-Asian population, none of them plays the victim cards. It seems going to school make wonders, who would have guess? - then there is the natural difference between sexes that drive different interests, and the average IQ difference between races. Of course someone with a 80 IQ will have hard time competing on the education and job market against people with 100+. That’s why Jews and East-Asian are over represented in Ivy league. So, there are few reasons that explain the state of things very well. But of course, I guess it’s more interesting to not look at basic science and dive instead into conspiracy theories implicating "the Patriarchy" and super evil White men.
sdnlafkjh34rw 7y ago
It's weird to use the nursing example since the population of male nurses is exploding. Male nurses have gone from 2% of the population to 13% in just a few decades: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/04/upshot/male-nurses.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/04/upshot/male-n... When we see extremes of representation we should take a step back and question why. In a lot of cases you are dealing with something systemic that may be able to change. For nursing, in the 1950s it was perceived as a female profession but as that viewpoint is going away, more men are joining the field.
rocqua 7y ago
The desire for diversity is not for its own sake. Recruiting people that 'fit the job' leads to a mono-culture. Besides being unfair, this is bad for companies. It means you get collective blind-spots, collective hype-trains. Moreover, you reduce the effective hiring pool. Because, if you have a mono-culture then there is significant disruption to adding things outside the mono-culture. This reduction in the hiring pool means there is a lot of talent left on the table. This means you hit a local maximum that is not a global one. Trying to move to the global maximum means moving away from the local maximum for a while. > Moreover, you can’t complain about so-called systemic sexism or racism when your policy is to not recruit white, asian or men that could fulfill the job precisely because of their race/sex. You can however complain about systemic disadvantages conferred to women and people who aren't Caucasian and have a policy to prefer people who are women or not Caucasian. Especially if you think that these people would have a positive effect on your company.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- TurkishPoptart 7y ago
  While we're at it, can we stop using the word Caucasian to talk about white people?[0] It's completely historically and factually inaccurate. Unless you're talking about Georgians, Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Dagestanis, Chechens, etc. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_of_the_Caucasus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_of_the_Caucasus
TurkishPoptart 7y ago
What these people are arguing on behalf of is affirmative action, and the end result has been white people having to tip-toe around each other in order to not seen like bigots to other white people. Ironically, most people of color I've met find this all to be quite silly - they are professionals in their career, and want to be treated as such.

rofo1 7y ago

> The real issue is that "diversity" had became a metrics to reach for its own sake by companies instead of simply recruiting people that fit the job. Completely insane. I can't understand who came up with and spread it around with a straight face. "hey we better hire predetermined % of <insert any group that is non-white-christian-men> otherwise we are bigots" Truly remarkable how insane it is. I haven't seen a single case where the people that ought to be employed are white Christian men. Why is that so? Does nobody ask this question? Can it be coincidence that nobody, ever, ever raised an issue that not enough white Christian men were employed? A lot of illogical and improbable things, and IMHO it's just not a coincidence. But I don't have good understanding on why it happens, though.

tasogare 7y ago
> Can it be coincidence that nobody, ever, ever raised an issue that not enough white Christian men were employed? Multiple reasons: - in European countries (USA is particular because of imported slaves) the white unemployment used to be the general unemployment rate until 40 years ago. Tons of white men are seeking jobs, at this moment. So yes, the issue exists. - some minorities are in the business of complaining, other aren’t. In my country, which has a significant East-Asian population, none of them plays the victim cards. It seems going to school make wonders, who would have guess? - then there is the natural difference between sexes that drive different interests, and the average IQ difference between races. Of course someone with a 80 IQ will have hard time competing on the education and job market against people with 100+. That’s why Jews and East-Asian are over represented in Ivy league. So, there are few reasons that explain the state of things very well. But of course, I guess it’s more interesting to not look at basic science and dive instead into conspiracy theories implicating "the Patriarchy" and super evil White men.

sdnlafkjh34rw 7y ago

It's weird to use the nursing example since the population of male nurses is exploding. Male nurses have gone from 2% of the population to 13% in just a few decades: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/04/upshot/male-nurses.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/04/upshot/male-n... When we see extremes of representation we should take a step back and question why. In a lot of cases you are dealing with something systemic that may be able to change. For nursing, in the 1950s it was perceived as a female profession but as that viewpoint is going away, more men are joining the field.

rocqua 7y ago

The desire for diversity is not for its own sake. Recruiting people that 'fit the job' leads to a mono-culture. Besides being unfair, this is bad for companies. It means you get collective blind-spots, collective hype-trains. Moreover, you reduce the effective hiring pool. Because, if you have a mono-culture then there is significant disruption to adding things outside the mono-culture. This reduction in the hiring pool means there is a lot of talent left on the table. This means you hit a local maximum that is not a global one. Trying to move to the global maximum means moving away from the local maximum for a while. > Moreover, you can’t complain about so-called systemic sexism or racism when your policy is to not recruit white, asian or men that could fulfill the job precisely because of their race/sex. You can however complain about systemic disadvantages conferred to women and people who aren't Caucasian and have a policy to prefer people who are women or not Caucasian. Especially if you think that these people would have a positive effect on your company.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
TurkishPoptart 7y ago
While we're at it, can we stop using the word Caucasian to talk about white people?[0] It's completely historically and factually inaccurate. Unless you're talking about Georgians, Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Dagestanis, Chechens, etc. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_of_the_Caucasus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_of_the_Caucasus

TurkishPoptart 7y ago

What these people are arguing on behalf of is affirmative action, and the end result has been white people having to tip-toe around each other in order to not seen like bigots to other white people. Ironically, most people of color I've met find this all to be quite silly - they are professionals in their career, and want to be treated as such.