4 ms·

It is a big problem that in our current political climate people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top. Gender and race should only be b

It is a big problem that in our current political climate people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top. Gender and race should only be brought up if there is evidence that someone is being discriminated against or harassed based on those traits. I see all kinds of articles immediately pulling race and gender into the equation and it’s dangerous and dishonest because it robs credibility from situations where there is truly discrimination/harassment based on this occurring.

rbanffy 6y ago
It's incredibly hard to prove discrimination or harassment was based on ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, or political views, even when it is. You say "people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top" aren't you implying their positions are not earned based on merit and, therefore, that they are less competent than their peers?
- suifbwish 6y ago
  I am implying that they often scare away their competition by attacking the character of the individuals who they work with, rather than focusing on true accomplishments that would give them legitimate merit for the positions they aspire to. Their supervisors can even be intimidated into promoting them if they have a history of filing complaints of discrimination when things don’t go their way. It’s also possible that some promotions/hires are based on desired political appearance of the company. Promoting someone based on certain race and gender types ironically makes your company seem less racist and sexist to the casual outside observer.
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    I think there’s definitely a dynamic in any dogmatic arena (social justice is dogma heaven) where the most pathological people thrive. In the high-dogma arena there’s incredibly easy and visible signals that give you the ability to appear like “one of the good ones.” I think coincidentally this is highly attractive to elite circles too. Follow all the social justice rituals and shibboleth and you suddenly get the camouflage of an empathetic, good person.
    - rbanffy 6y ago
      > Follow all the social justice rituals and shibboleth and you suddenly get the camouflage of an empathetic, good person. If a person is indistinguishable from a good human being, isn't it actually a good human being?
      - username90 6y ago
        No, plenty of rapists and abusers etc do all the social justice rituals.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        It's like they didn't read any I wrote - or just demonstrated how much the woke let down their guard if people shut up and do whatever they say.
        rbanffy 6y ago
        Then they are distinguishable by observable behavior.
- lawnchair_larry 6y ago
  > You say "people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top" aren't you implying their positions are not earned based on merit and, therefore, that they are less competent than their peers? Many are, yes. I had to hire one because my director’s bonus was implicitly tied to a diversity quota OKR, and the VP’s bonus was explicitly tied to one, which he blogged about as a shameful virtue signaling PR exercise. They didn’t even interview her. Then we way over-leveled her to boot, because there was another stupid OKR to grow diversity among senior levels. And this was at a big tech company that you’ve definitely heard of. This is happening at many companies who claim that they aren’t lowering the bar. Truth be told I had already lowered the bar and wanted to pass her but still couldn’t justify it. I didn’t want to deal with the diversity police and had my fingers crossed that she would be the one. Some perfectly capable white guy didn’t get an opportunity as a result.

rbanffy 6y ago

It's incredibly hard to prove discrimination or harassment was based on ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, or political views, even when it is. You say "people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top" aren't you implying their positions are not earned based on merit and, therefore, that they are less competent than their peers?

suifbwish 6y ago
I am implying that they often scare away their competition by attacking the character of the individuals who they work with, rather than focusing on true accomplishments that would give them legitimate merit for the positions they aspire to. Their supervisors can even be intimidated into promoting them if they have a history of filing complaints of discrimination when things don’t go their way. It’s also possible that some promotions/hires are based on desired political appearance of the company. Promoting someone based on certain race and gender types ironically makes your company seem less racist and sexist to the casual outside observer.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  I think there’s definitely a dynamic in any dogmatic arena (social justice is dogma heaven) where the most pathological people thrive. In the high-dogma arena there’s incredibly easy and visible signals that give you the ability to appear like “one of the good ones.” I think coincidentally this is highly attractive to elite circles too. Follow all the social justice rituals and shibboleth and you suddenly get the camouflage of an empathetic, good person.
  - rbanffy 6y ago
    > Follow all the social justice rituals and shibboleth and you suddenly get the camouflage of an empathetic, good person. If a person is indistinguishable from a good human being, isn't it actually a good human being?
    - username90 6y ago
      No, plenty of rapists and abusers etc do all the social justice rituals.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        It's like they didn't read any I wrote - or just demonstrated how much the woke let down their guard if people shut up and do whatever they say.
      - rbanffy 6y ago
        Then they are distinguishable by observable behavior.
lawnchair_larry 6y ago
> You say "people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top" aren't you implying their positions are not earned based on merit and, therefore, that they are less competent than their peers? Many are, yes. I had to hire one because my director’s bonus was implicitly tied to a diversity quota OKR, and the VP’s bonus was explicitly tied to one, which he blogged about as a shameful virtue signaling PR exercise. They didn’t even interview her. Then we way over-leveled her to boot, because there was another stupid OKR to grow diversity among senior levels. And this was at a big tech company that you’ve definitely heard of. This is happening at many companies who claim that they aren’t lowering the bar. Truth be told I had already lowered the bar and wanted to pass her but still couldn’t justify it. I didn’t want to deal with the diversity police and had my fingers crossed that she would be the one. Some perfectly capable white guy didn’t get an opportunity as a result.