10 ms·

You cherry-picked one quote, but he spent the entire rest of the piece making your exact point.

rubashov 15y ago
> insidious nature of the Bamboo Ceiling [...] the discrepancy in these numbers is a matter of unconscious bias. The author spends plenty of time trying to claim there is some sort of racial discrimination going on. Much more plausible is that less likable people aren't getting ahead, and it just so happens that Asians tend not to be likable, or have "leadership potential" if you prefer.
- mquander 15y ago
  No, he spends time discussing a variety of explanations, the least of which is any kind of conscious racism. If you expand the part that you elided, it says: Part of the insidious nature of the Bamboo Ceiling is that it does not seem to be caused by overt racism...More likely, the discrepancy in these numbers is a matter of unconscious bias. Nobody would affirm the proposition that tall men are intrinsically better leaders, for instance. And yet while only 15 percent of the male population is at least six feet tall, 58 percent of all corporate CEOs are. Similarly, nobody would say that Asian people are unfit to be leaders. But subjects in a recently published psychological experiment consistently rated hypothetical employees with Caucasian-sounding names higher in leadership potential than identical ones with Asian names. To become a leader requires taking personal initiative and thinking about how an organization can work differently. It also requires networking, self-promotion, and self-assertion. It’s racist to think that any given Asian individual is unlikely to be creative or risk-taking. It’s simple cultural observation to say that a group whose education has historically focused on rote memorization and “pumping the iron of math” is, on aggregate, unlikely to yield many people inclined to challenge authority or break with inherited ways of doing things. Then the author spends the rest of his time identifying specfic kinds of social skills and leadership qualities, like confidence, risk-taking, and shamelessness, and contrasting how Asians and Westerners frequently approach the development of those skills.
- lsc 15y ago
  this is what was so hard for me when I was trying to learn 'leadership' or whatever you call it. What most people call 'likability' - I call 'being an asshole' Different people have different behavior preferences, and if you think 'likable' means more passive rather than more aggressive, you are likely going to do the wrong thing in most social situations.
  - Psyonic 15y ago
    Passive isn't likable, it's boring and safe.
    - lsc 15y ago
      I understand that's how most people feel. My point is that for those of us who don't fee that way, this truth is hard to spot. I know for me, I always thought that most passive behaviors were respectful, and most aggressive behaviors were not. Don't take up too much space. Don't interrupt people, and if someone is working, stopping to talk to them is interrupting them. Speak at a reasonable volume. Don't assume people want you around. I mean, I now see that this behavior is self-defeating. Most people prefer my loud, expansive self who assumes that you want him around until you make it very clear otherwise to my quiet, small self who assumes that you don't. If I walk by someone who is working without at least an acknowledgement of their existence, most people feel snubbed. I mean, using the word 'asshole' is a value judgement, which probably made the message come off wrong. My point is that 'likable' is a word that means very different things to different people. To this day, I prefer being around people who are less aggressive, even though I've adapted to a world dominated by people like you, who prefer behavior that I find mildly offensive when directed at me.
      - Psyonic 15y ago
        I know exactly what you mean. I'm a convert myself, and while it's mostly natural now, I still fall back into passive mode on occasion.
        15y ago

> insidious nature of the Bamboo Ceiling [...] the discrepancy in these numbers is a matter of unconscious bias. The author spends plenty of time trying to claim there is some sort of racial discrimination going on. Much more plausible is that less likable people aren't getting ahead, and it just so happens that Asians tend not to be likable, or have "leadership potential" if you prefer.

mquander 15y ago
No, he spends time discussing a variety of explanations, the least of which is any kind of conscious racism. If you expand the part that you elided, it says: Part of the insidious nature of the Bamboo Ceiling is that it does not seem to be caused by overt racism...More likely, the discrepancy in these numbers is a matter of unconscious bias. Nobody would affirm the proposition that tall men are intrinsically better leaders, for instance. And yet while only 15 percent of the male population is at least six feet tall, 58 percent of all corporate CEOs are. Similarly, nobody would say that Asian people are unfit to be leaders. But subjects in a recently published psychological experiment consistently rated hypothetical employees with Caucasian-sounding names higher in leadership potential than identical ones with Asian names. To become a leader requires taking personal initiative and thinking about how an organization can work differently. It also requires networking, self-promotion, and self-assertion. It’s racist to think that any given Asian individual is unlikely to be creative or risk-taking. It’s simple cultural observation to say that a group whose education has historically focused on rote memorization and “pumping the iron of math” is, on aggregate, unlikely to yield many people inclined to challenge authority or break with inherited ways of doing things. Then the author spends the rest of his time identifying specfic kinds of social skills and leadership qualities, like confidence, risk-taking, and shamelessness, and contrasting how Asians and Westerners frequently approach the development of those skills.
lsc 15y ago
this is what was so hard for me when I was trying to learn 'leadership' or whatever you call it. What most people call 'likability' - I call 'being an asshole' Different people have different behavior preferences, and if you think 'likable' means more passive rather than more aggressive, you are likely going to do the wrong thing in most social situations.
- Psyonic 15y ago
  Passive isn't likable, it's boring and safe.
  - lsc 15y ago
    I understand that's how most people feel. My point is that for those of us who don't fee that way, this truth is hard to spot. I know for me, I always thought that most passive behaviors were respectful, and most aggressive behaviors were not. Don't take up too much space. Don't interrupt people, and if someone is working, stopping to talk to them is interrupting them. Speak at a reasonable volume. Don't assume people want you around. I mean, I now see that this behavior is self-defeating. Most people prefer my loud, expansive self who assumes that you want him around until you make it very clear otherwise to my quiet, small self who assumes that you don't. If I walk by someone who is working without at least an acknowledgement of their existence, most people feel snubbed. I mean, using the word 'asshole' is a value judgement, which probably made the message come off wrong. My point is that 'likable' is a word that means very different things to different people. To this day, I prefer being around people who are less aggressive, even though I've adapted to a world dominated by people like you, who prefer behavior that I find mildly offensive when directed at me.
    - Psyonic 15y ago
      I know exactly what you mean. I'm a convert myself, and while it's mostly natural now, I still fall back into passive mode on occasion.
      - 15y ago