Here's the thing about "dsicrimination" - it happens. All the time. In fact, it's pretty much required. If it weren't, they wouldn't bother with interviews,

Here's the thing about "dsicrimination" - it happens. All the time. In fact, it's pretty much required. If it weren't, they wouldn't bother with interviews, and instead would just hire whatever person first said, "do you have a job?" Here's the other thing about "discrimination" - you can [almost] never prove someone illegally discriminated against you. I'm white and male (two instastrikes for some places in today's politically-correct climate). But was I not contacted because I'm white and male? If so, then the other few 100 millions white males should sue for discrimination, because they were passed-over, too. You wanna hire "under-represented minorities" or women? Cool. Recruit whomever you want. The "unlawful" discrimination comes when I, or someone else also qualified (but not fitting your looks-based "criteria") apply and you turn me down because I don't fit your looks-based criteria. So if you're going to turn me down, you had better have some documented reasons from the interview process (and trust me, this isn't especially hard) that pass the legal sniff test over discrimination :) I want to hire people who can do the job. I don't care what skin color you have, or whether you've got a penis or a vagina - the only thing that matters is: can you do the job? Maybe more accurately, "can you do the job here?"