3 ms·

> I worked with a POC who the CEO told me point blank to give them extra leniency with regards to them not performing their duties (an ongoing complaint of mine

> I worked with a POC who the CEO told me point blank to give them extra leniency with regards to them not performing their duties (an ongoing complaint of mine) because a "diverse face" on the pitch deck helped us raise money. So, it sounds like the CEO is using this person of color in order to earn a certain credibility and get more money from investors. And, maybe this person of color is either, a) working hard, but not very experienced yet/able to complete their tasks. Or, they are wrongfully neglecting their duties/have no interest in doing their job. Or, some other nuanced situation, I don't know. You believe they are benefiting though. But either way, exactly what is your point? To be honest, reading this, it seems like you are biased against people of color, and you view this situation as evidence that all people of color do not work hard/are given unfair advantages in life, and therefore, your bias is warranted. In other words, you appear to believe in a common racist trope. To you, it is true, based on this story. Or, you are not biased against people of color, and simply think it unfair that this person, regardless of their ethnicity, is being given a free pass on not doing their work. If the latter, isn't your CEO partly in the wrong here? They are capitalizing on the identity of this person of color, which shouldn't matter, by your logic.

daenz 6y ago
> it seems like you are biased against people of color, and you view this situation as evidence that all people of color do not work hard/are given unfair advantages in life, and therefore, your bias is warranted. In other words, you appear to believe in a common racist trope. You judged me guilty of all of that because I provided an anecdote that some companies bias positively (not always negatively) towards people based on their race and/or gender? Do you expect me to respond and defend myself against each accusation? Because you don't have the right to pressure that from me, especially as an anonymous throwaway account.
- tthhrroowwaway 6y ago
  You believe these companies "bias positively". Which may or may not be true. What do you think this anecdote means? What do you think about this situation? I think that you want people to draw a conclusion from this story.
  - daenz 6y ago
    >I think that you want people to draw a conclusion from this story. Yes, that conclusion is exactly what I already said, which I worded very precisely: "some companies bias positively towards people based on their race and/or gender". So we should not automatically assume, as the person I was replying to suggested, that someone will be biased against because of their race or gender for affirming work boundaries. You reading into that to try to sniff out hints of racism and prejudice says more about your motives and your intentions here than it does mine. >You believe these companies "bias positively". Which may or may not be true. I didn't say "these companies", I said "some companies." And "some companies" is true, because I have personal experiences at "some companies" that show backroom positive biases towards employees and interview candidates, without their knowledge, explicitly because of their identity (both race and sex). You seem to disagree that my experiences are valid, and if they are valid, that I must be sexist or racist for even sharing them.
    - kelnos 6y ago
      > Yes, that conclusion is exactly what I already said, which I worded very precisely: "some companies bias positively towards people based on their race and/or gender". I would not consider the scenario you described to be positive bias. It's still negative, and it still hurts the employee in question, even if they still get to draw a paycheck for a time. It's just a... different... kind of bias than the kind I mentioned. > So we should not automatically assume, as the person I was replying to suggested, that someone will be biased against because of their race or gender for affirming work boundaries.* My original comment didn't suggest that we should automatically assume that, just that it was a possibility. And I'd still expect my possibility to be more likely and pervasive than the scenario you described.
    - tthhrroowwaway 6y ago
      I don't mean to suggest that your experiences are not valid. Or to make you feel like you're on trial. I mean to make you feel that you may benefit from a tweaked perspective. What I disagree with is that there is such a thing as 'biasing positively'. People seek to build diverse teams. In my opinion, your colleague wasn't necessarily being done a favor if it happened they were performing poorly and didn't have a good feedback loop. Your CEO may have been profiting from this situation at the long-term expense of your colleague.

daenz 6y ago

> it seems like you are biased against people of color, and you view this situation as evidence that all people of color do not work hard/are given unfair advantages in life, and therefore, your bias is warranted. In other words, you appear to believe in a common racist trope. You judged me guilty of all of that because I provided an anecdote that some companies bias positively (not always negatively) towards people based on their race and/or gender? Do you expect me to respond and defend myself against each accusation? Because you don't have the right to pressure that from me, especially as an anonymous throwaway account.

tthhrroowwaway 6y ago
You believe these companies "bias positively". Which may or may not be true. What do you think this anecdote means? What do you think about this situation? I think that you want people to draw a conclusion from this story.
- daenz 6y ago
  >I think that you want people to draw a conclusion from this story. Yes, that conclusion is exactly what I already said, which I worded very precisely: "some companies bias positively towards people based on their race and/or gender". So we should not automatically assume, as the person I was replying to suggested, that someone will be biased against because of their race or gender for affirming work boundaries. You reading into that to try to sniff out hints of racism and prejudice says more about your motives and your intentions here than it does mine. >You believe these companies "bias positively". Which may or may not be true. I didn't say "these companies", I said "some companies." And "some companies" is true, because I have personal experiences at "some companies" that show backroom positive biases towards employees and interview candidates, without their knowledge, explicitly because of their identity (both race and sex). You seem to disagree that my experiences are valid, and if they are valid, that I must be sexist or racist for even sharing them.
  - kelnos 6y ago
    > Yes, that conclusion is exactly what I already said, which I worded very precisely: "some companies bias positively towards people based on their race and/or gender". I would not consider the scenario you described to be positive bias. It's still negative, and it still hurts the employee in question, even if they still get to draw a paycheck for a time. It's just a... different... kind of bias than the kind I mentioned. > So we should not automatically assume, as the person I was replying to suggested, that someone will be biased against because of their race or gender for affirming work boundaries.* My original comment didn't suggest that we should automatically assume that, just that it was a possibility. And I'd still expect my possibility to be more likely and pervasive than the scenario you described.
  - tthhrroowwaway 6y ago
    I don't mean to suggest that your experiences are not valid. Or to make you feel like you're on trial. I mean to make you feel that you may benefit from a tweaked perspective. What I disagree with is that there is such a thing as 'biasing positively'. People seek to build diverse teams. In my opinion, your colleague wasn't necessarily being done a favor if it happened they were performing poorly and didn't have a good feedback loop. Your CEO may have been profiting from this situation at the long-term expense of your colleague.