3 ms·
Only if you think that "diversity" is somehow abnormal. Why is it a calculated move for companies like Google, whose CEO has brown skin, to have some of their a
by knolax 5y ago
Only if you think that "diversity" is somehow abnormal. Why is it a calculated move for companies like Google, whose CEO has brown skin, to have some of their advertisements include brown skinned people? The real cynical move would be to make them all white to appease middle America. Why do you feel the rest of us have to hide our existence to appease you?
- vehemenz 5y agoI too use my identity as a cudgel, except I am a philosopher. > Only if you think that "diversity" is somehow abnormal. I don't, and you chose the value-laden term "abnormal" instead of "demographically atypical". Convenient that you chose the term that I would never use and that makes your argument look less preposterous. > Why is it a calculated move for companies like Google, whose CEO has brown skin, to have some of their advertisements include brown skinned people? This implies that brown skin is an indicator of diversity. To use your method of reductio: ...only if you think that diversity is determined by superficial attributes like skin color. > The real cynical move would be to make them all white to appease middle America. You one-percenters in the Bay Area must be very insulated; appealing to "diversity" does appease middle America. You could never get away with all white characters now, and I'm sure you know that. > Why do you feel the rest of us have to hide our existence to appease you? False attribution.
- knolax 5y ago> This implies that brown skin is an indicator of diversity. To use your method of reductio: ...only if you think that diversity is determined by superficial attributes like skin color. I started my comment by mentioning skin tone. It's you and the comments I quoted who decided to label this "diversity" with scare quotes, and now you're arguing about the definition of a term you brought into the argument. > I don't, and you chose the value-laden term "abnormal" instead of "demographically atypical". That's not a counterargument, you're just nitpicking word choice here. Regardless of what you call it the skin tone distribution matches that of the people who make these graphics. It's also not far off from the national average. According to Wikipedia 60% of the US Population is non-hispanic white[0]. I imagine the number of Hispanic and Asian people with light skin is around the same as white people with darker skin so this is a good proxy for skin color distribution. If I count one of the first Google Image results for "corporate memphis" about 54/71 = 76% of them have light skin and look white to me. So no, it's only statistically abnormal in that there are probably not enough cartoon brown people. > I too use my identity as a cudgel, except I am a philosopher. You either have a poor understanding of philosophy or an inflated ego if you think the semantic games you're playing counts as philosophy. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_Un... [1] https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5e662715857fa52fe14b379c/1613389440117-MB1T5R0A6KIUPDI9L5Q1/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kDt0hgxSrpuXIovpUB0aLg8UqsxRUqqbr1mOJYKfIPR7LoDQ9mXPOjoJoqy81S2I8N_N4V1vUb5AoIIIbLZhVYxCRW4BPu10St3TBAUQYVKcSonwm8Wv5nNw3XkdEnWcBt_Srn6q7wA9bsc7YuN978vj0v0Rvl8T3ZLWb70pL6_5/ergrsy6ehc151.jpg https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5e662715857fa5...