4 ms·

This is why the Civil Rights Act passed when the congressman from Virginia (can't remember the name) tried to kill it by including women in the bill. A law desi

This is why the Civil Rights Act passed when the congressman from Virginia (can't remember the name) tried to kill it by including women in the bill. A law designed to save the endangered black family was instead coopted to boost the career prospects of successful women, so I guess the poison pill worked despite the bill passing.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
The black family was only endangered because of those very same people who wrote all sorts of asinine rules for the social safety net programs that penalized stable households, penalized married couples and penalized above the table jobs. Were they poor? Sure. Were they marginalized? You bet. But the single mother, the child without a father figure and the idle black man were not serious issues, let alone stereotypes, until after people tried to "help" them.
- golergka 5y ago
  Seems like they purposefully created people now dependent on these government programs in order to secure electorate.
  - oslsla 5y ago
    No, it's more complex than that. Racism in large portions of the united states still exists today. Individuals are not given opportunites in the u.s. simply because of something as simple as their last name. While people may base on DEI initiatives in the majority of America in non large corporate and even on those companies they are still refused if any opportunities which add on each other resulting in inequality.
    - golergka 5y ago
      I don't understand how anything of what you wrote (which, BTW, I agree with) contradicts my point.
  - themitigating 5y ago
    Those programs are given to people based on economic situations not race.
    - golergka 5y ago
      Just as another sibling comment this is both obviously true and doesn't contradict my point in any way.
  - QuarterReptile 5y ago
    More likely, the misplaced notions of how to easily fix a complex problem created people dependent on them these government programs, which have in turn perpetuated an electorate. I don't mean to say that good intentions justify the policy, as the 20th century disproved time and time again, but your phrasing attributes malice or cynicism where none is needed or helpful.
- oslsla 5y ago
  Also horribly flawed. In several states if you are not white your resume is just thrown in the trash. There are several studies on this. People simply do not like others who they do not see as equals or as similar to them.
  - ponow 5y ago
    So that somehow justifies unequal treatment of people in another state? The only long term solution is not being part of the problem by discriminating on anything except on value brought to the job.
  - zo1 5y ago
    I don't think we can attribute as much of that happening to racism only. With all the DEI initiatives happening its becoming more so the case that people are seeing through the experience and realizing a lot of the accomplishments by minorities are due to favoritism and "help" than actual experience. Whether that is true or not is irrelevant because people believe it. I personally feel bad for the dedicated, accomplished and smart minority developers that I've met. They get drowned out in all the noise caused by these DEI drives. Worst of all, we can't even talk about it.
- QuarterReptile 5y ago
  I wasn't meaning to imply that federal legislative action was the solution; I considered that question to be outside the scope of my comment.
jrsj 5y ago
And still not much is being done to help them in practice. There’s a deep culture of classism in American corporations which these initiatives completely ignore, so the people who really need help and more opportunities don’t get much.
- oslsla 5y ago
  Most women leave the startup space regardless due to the sacrifices required by the system. It's the same with men but less so due to the cultural norms in American culture. This also applies to corporations. The lack of childcare leads to the inevitability as families are forced to decide who needs to stay at home to take care of their offspring. Typically it's the women as we condition them to take jobs with lower paying fields but also more complex issues such as lost experience and other issues that force them out. I'm not saying it's entirely sexism but rather a systemic issue that effects both men and women. A lot of feminist arguments are just plain wrong. It makes me wonder who is controlling those narratives to ignore the real issues for issues such as pay as we see in companies such as google when you account for experience and job titles the standing does not hold but my example is also flawed as google forces women to take certain careers and only hires women for certain things. Still very complex.
  - Damogran6 5y ago
    My wife worked for a permanent-part time placement firm...it's 'contract', 4 days a week, 6 hours a day. She was able to send the kids off to school and be there when they got back and continued to have a Programmer/SQL job with no gaps in her resume. When the kids were old enough to not need it...she stayed in that position. The extra time lets her volunteer and it's been a pretty awesome arrangement.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

The black family was only endangered because of those very same people who wrote all sorts of asinine rules for the social safety net programs that penalized stable households, penalized married couples and penalized above the table jobs. Were they poor? Sure. Were they marginalized? You bet. But the single mother, the child without a father figure and the idle black man were not serious issues, let alone stereotypes, until after people tried to "help" them.

golergka 5y ago
Seems like they purposefully created people now dependent on these government programs in order to secure electorate.
- oslsla 5y ago
  No, it's more complex than that. Racism in large portions of the united states still exists today. Individuals are not given opportunites in the u.s. simply because of something as simple as their last name. While people may base on DEI initiatives in the majority of America in non large corporate and even on those companies they are still refused if any opportunities which add on each other resulting in inequality.
  - golergka 5y ago
    I don't understand how anything of what you wrote (which, BTW, I agree with) contradicts my point.
- themitigating 5y ago
  Those programs are given to people based on economic situations not race.
  - golergka 5y ago
    Just as another sibling comment this is both obviously true and doesn't contradict my point in any way.
- QuarterReptile 5y ago
  More likely, the misplaced notions of how to easily fix a complex problem created people dependent on them these government programs, which have in turn perpetuated an electorate. I don't mean to say that good intentions justify the policy, as the 20th century disproved time and time again, but your phrasing attributes malice or cynicism where none is needed or helpful.
oslsla 5y ago
Also horribly flawed. In several states if you are not white your resume is just thrown in the trash. There are several studies on this. People simply do not like others who they do not see as equals or as similar to them.
- ponow 5y ago
  So that somehow justifies unequal treatment of people in another state? The only long term solution is not being part of the problem by discriminating on anything except on value brought to the job.
- zo1 5y ago
  I don't think we can attribute as much of that happening to racism only. With all the DEI initiatives happening its becoming more so the case that people are seeing through the experience and realizing a lot of the accomplishments by minorities are due to favoritism and "help" than actual experience. Whether that is true or not is irrelevant because people believe it. I personally feel bad for the dedicated, accomplished and smart minority developers that I've met. They get drowned out in all the noise caused by these DEI drives. Worst of all, we can't even talk about it.
QuarterReptile 5y ago
I wasn't meaning to imply that federal legislative action was the solution; I considered that question to be outside the scope of my comment.

jrsj 5y ago

And still not much is being done to help them in practice. There’s a deep culture of classism in American corporations which these initiatives completely ignore, so the people who really need help and more opportunities don’t get much.

oslsla 5y ago
Most women leave the startup space regardless due to the sacrifices required by the system. It's the same with men but less so due to the cultural norms in American culture. This also applies to corporations. The lack of childcare leads to the inevitability as families are forced to decide who needs to stay at home to take care of their offspring. Typically it's the women as we condition them to take jobs with lower paying fields but also more complex issues such as lost experience and other issues that force them out. I'm not saying it's entirely sexism but rather a systemic issue that effects both men and women. A lot of feminist arguments are just plain wrong. It makes me wonder who is controlling those narratives to ignore the real issues for issues such as pay as we see in companies such as google when you account for experience and job titles the standing does not hold but my example is also flawed as google forces women to take certain careers and only hires women for certain things. Still very complex.
- Damogran6 5y ago
  My wife worked for a permanent-part time placement firm...it's 'contract', 4 days a week, 6 hours a day. She was able to send the kids off to school and be there when they got back and continued to have a Programmer/SQL job with no gaps in her resume. When the kids were old enough to not need it...she stayed in that position. The extra time lets her volunteer and it's been a pretty awesome arrangement.