29 ms·

And, it'll be awesome. In the short term, the few black kids and women who end up in engineering will get respect for making it into the program. And, hopefull

And, it'll be awesome. In the short term, the few black kids and women who end up in engineering will get respect for making it into the program. And, hopefully a few years later, they'll no longer be looked at as diversity hires.

etchalon 4y ago
People were accusing people of being "diversity hires", or having "slept their way to top", or similar dismissive nonsense long before AA was in wide use.
- givemeethekeys 4y ago
  Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. I don't think affirmative action affects "sleeping their way to the top".
  - HelloMcFly 4y ago
    > Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. I mean... this isn't what AA does at all.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. No, it doesn’t.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - nullifidian 4y ago
      Disparate impact jurisprudence does https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-dead-end-of-disparate-impact https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-dead... "Despite this assertion, the development of the Griggs doctrine has proved anything but friendly to meritocratic objectives. Although the Supreme Court has never held that all workplaces must be racially balanced, lower courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is charged with administering Title VII, have firmly embraced the presumption that the racial profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the racial composition of the broader population." "Recently, prompted by the racially adverse impact of measures of verbal and abstract analysis — areas in which some minority groups underperform — experts have also developed alternative instruments that employ audio or video techniques, or that make use of so-called "assessment center" protocols based on job simulations, real-time problem solving, or actual work samples." "Although few disparate-impact lawsuits are actually filed, and though defendants win most of those that are, the specter of disparate-impact lawsuits nonetheless dangles like a Sword of Damocles over employers' heads. The prospect of onerous, unpredictable, and protracted litigation provides employers with a strong incentive to find some way to avoid being sued. One temptation is to satisfy diversity targets by relaxing personnel-selection standards across the board. Firms can also switch to more haphazard staffing methods that tend to obscure informal affirmative action or other race-conscious practices. Some of these tactics pose the risk of yielding a less effective work force, while others (such as the use of race-based criteria) are legally suspect or even expressly forbidden under Title VII."
    - Manuel_D 4y ago
      By definition, it means some people were extended offers that would not have absent positive discrimination. Well, I suppose it could be the case that the level of positive discrimination didn't alter the outcomes, but then the affirmative action program achieved literally nothing. At least, that's with the typical meaning of "affirmative action". It's a nebulous term that some use to encompass things like blind orchestra auditions. In the tech world this could be equated with anonymous resumes and blind zoom interviews with modulated voices. But few tech companies seem to be interested in this type of affirmative action.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  I recently went down a bit of a rabbit hole and learned about "pre-code" Hollywood. There's actually a 1933 movie called "Baby Face" that features a woman who does basically sleep her way to the top of a company (despite being pre-code, it's still quite chaste by modern standards and much is left to implication, but it's not subtle). So the trope does indeed have some history.
  - etchalon 4y ago
    The notion that the reason certain groups of people aren't taken seriously in certain roles is because of "D&I" or "AA" is flatly ahistorical. Certain people just refuse to accept certain groups of people are capable of accomplishment without outside help or uniquely uncommon circumstances. But every generation finds some excuse that their prejudices are "rational".
    - yucky 4y ago
      Certain people just refuse to accept certain groups of people are capable of accomplishment without outside help or uniquely uncommon circumstances. Sounds like the solution then is to remove that outside help, and thus all doubt. Right?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > "diversity hires", or having "slept their way to top" Those seem like quite distinct issues, like you might as well lump in 'good at office politics' into it
qzw 4y ago
Oh, certainly. A few years is all black kids and women need to overcome racial and gender prejudices in this country. Or how about we don’t assume all black kids and women are diversity hires now, and maybe, I don’t know, treat each one as an individual and judge them based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin or the number of their X chromosomes?
- givemeethekeys 4y ago
  Without affirmative action, all thats left is meritocracy and nepotism. So, I imagine an increasing number of black people and women (or anyone else perceived as less deserving) will be seen as "friend of the boss" or "the boss is doing them a favor". Either way, those can be easily addressed and therefore better than being forever labeled as a diversity hire (aka naturally inferior).
- eru 4y ago
  If you lower admission standards for any group, say blue people, than statistically speaking blue people will have a lower average. Just like when you see the the son of the CEO working at the company, there's a certain probability that he didn't get in based on his performance alone. Of course, as you suggest, there are sons of the CEO who really are the most qualified candidate for whatever job they are holding. But there's also nepotism.
- dasil003 4y ago
  This comment is a perfect microcosm of the title. Of course the issues you raise are real, and there is a whole constellation of systemic racism issues that specifically affect black people in a unique way. But when it comes to affirmative action there's a fundamental issue that goes beyond privilege narratives: > Or how about we don’t assume all black kids and women are diversity hires now, and maybe, I don’t know, treat each one as an individual and judge them based on the content of their character That's a nice sentiment, but it overlooks the fact that AA introduces this doubt, the doubt is in fact real, and can't be papered over with good intentions and turning a blind eye to cause and effect. The question is whether the net good in counter-balancing other systemic racism is worth the cost. That's not an easy question to answer. Some individuals would be more than happy to take any advantage they can get, and others want to be judged purely on their individual character.
8note 4y ago
I can't say I respect anyone for getting into an engineering program. It's sticking through to graduate that matters
- crackercrews 4y ago
  Research shows that graduation rates for minorities in engineering programs will likely increase if affirmative action goes away: > Black college freshmen are more likely to aspire to science or engineering careers than are white freshmen, but mismatch causes blacks to abandon these fields at twice the rate of whites. [1] 1: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-pai...
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    Actually, there may be even higher graduation rates among URM students in STEM fields - this is the claim of some recent research [1]. URM students have lower persistence rates[2] in STEM fields at most universities. Some claim this is due to racism, but the data shows that the persistence rates is actually the same for all races when normalized for academic preparedness. A student with 700s on their SATs is just as likely to persist regardless of white, Asian, Black, etc. Students with 600s and 500s are less likely, again regardless of race. It's just that there's a lot more URM students attending with lower scores. The expected consequence of eliminating race-based affirmative action is that URM students will instead attend less selective universities where they're more likely to persist. Sure, the university they graduate from may not be as prestigious. But on the flipside, they'll be more likely to graduate in the field they actually wanted to study. They'll also probably save a lot of money, since changing majors partway through usually means that these students take 5 or 6 years to graduate. 1. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w14885/w14885.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w14885/w148... 2. "Persistence rate" means the rate at which students complete their declared major. It's rare for students to drop out of university entirely, much more common is that they change to a less demanding major - that is, they don't persist in their initial major.
BoorishBears 4y ago
> they'll no longer be looked at as diversity hires Only racist losers assume I'm a diversity hire. And I'd actually rather they seethe at the "diversity hire" who just happens to somehow magically drive high-impact projects at every company he's ever worked at culminating in a career that's seen him work on everything from some of the most used apps in the world to self-driving cars. For that particular brand of loser if it isn't affirmative action it'll be something else: - Our CTO is from a West African nation, I'm from a West African nation, we bonded over that so actually its neopotism - Affirmative action may be banned and we dropped D&I but actually the hiring manager has a personal secret agenda to hire blackies - One of the people that interviewed him was black so obviously they gave me a pass. But of course let's forget about the legacy admission that landed you in a school, let's forget how you bond with your interviewers over in-office beer kegs and inside jokes from your favorite shows in your shared culture, let's forget about that internship from a family friend, etc. etc.
- ipaddr 4y ago
  This isn't a movie I don't think anyone is seething or really cares. They may look at you and wonder where you rank, so it forces you to prove yourself. But in this industry every interview wants you to prove yourself in pointless ways regardless if you have 20 year or 1.
  - BoorishBears 4y ago
    > This isn't a movie I don't think anyone is seething or really cares. If you think people who assume minorities are diversity hires only exist in movies I'm not sure if you're naïve, clueless, or both. > They may look at you and wonder where you rank, so it forces you to prove yourself I mean you want to tell yourself no one cares, but you also want to say that removing AA forces me to prove myself? (actually that's just a really vaguely written sentence, removing AA? or being black? what is "it"?) Why do white people get so uncomfortable at the thought that other whites can be racist? I didn't say you think of me as a diversity hire, I didn't say any majority of white people think of me as one either, yet you immediately feel the need to start throwing yourself in front of the bullet with statements like "this isn't a movie". Is this some sort of cognitive dissonance from the people who have these thoughts deep down or something?
wrp 4y ago
I can illustrate one way that "diversity" hiring has affected perceptions of a demographic. In the 1980s, I worked around engineering departments a lot. Women were rare, but it seemed to be widely assumed that any woman in engineering would be exceptionally capable and driven. These days, when I hear discussion about inclusive hiring, regardless of whether people are for or against it, there is a common assumption that allowances will have to be made for employees of lesser ability. My impression is that this change in attitude started in the mid-1990s.
kodah 4y ago
I'm not really sure how I feel about this. I'm white, not a woman, and I've been (almost certainly) a diversity hire. In some ways, someone arbitrarily opening the door for you sheds a lot of load in the short-term. You still need all the grit that a chip on your shoulder gives you in order to succeed in the long run. When you do succeed you'll have to shed that load unless you want to sound like a bitter ass the rest of your life. My point here is, I didn't really need anyone to tell me that I was looked down on (by certain people) for a period of time to know it, and I'm not sure college admissions or jobs that are attracting diversity hires are attracting people who give a shit what you think in the short term. Your opinion of me will be established long after the initial thought of, "Oh this guy is a diversity hire" has left the space between your ears.
- boppo1 4y ago
  How did you wind up a diversity hire?
  - kodah 4y ago
    Former military. I had been programming prior to being in the military, but after getting out nobody really wanted to hire me. My skills weren't really relevant any more, so I don't blame them. A couple firms ended up giving me a chance in the network and systems space.
    - happyopossum 4y ago
      Hiring veterans is completely different from hiring for racial diversity - being former military is a strong signal for many positive qualities that employers look for.
      - kodah 4y ago
        Maybe to some degree, but it's not all that different. The way I look at it, for that job and one other, was that I was underqualified, came with a built-in tax break, and preferential resume review. It's still a form of affirmative action, and its purpose is similar. I'm specifically referring to being a campaign badge class, and to a time period in my career that was when I first got out.
MrMan 4y ago
there won't be any black students, they will get weeded out in elementary school

etchalon 4y ago

People were accusing people of being "diversity hires", or having "slept their way to top", or similar dismissive nonsense long before AA was in wide use.

givemeethekeys 4y ago
Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. I don't think affirmative action affects "sleeping their way to the top".
- HelloMcFly 4y ago
  > Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. I mean... this isn't what AA does at all.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Well, affirmative action mandates diversity hires. No, it doesn’t.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - nullifidian 4y ago
    Disparate impact jurisprudence does https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-dead-end-of-disparate-impact https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-dead... "Despite this assertion, the development of the Griggs doctrine has proved anything but friendly to meritocratic objectives. Although the Supreme Court has never held that all workplaces must be racially balanced, lower courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is charged with administering Title VII, have firmly embraced the presumption that the racial profiles of particular workplaces should reflect the racial composition of the broader population." "Recently, prompted by the racially adverse impact of measures of verbal and abstract analysis — areas in which some minority groups underperform — experts have also developed alternative instruments that employ audio or video techniques, or that make use of so-called "assessment center" protocols based on job simulations, real-time problem solving, or actual work samples." "Although few disparate-impact lawsuits are actually filed, and though defendants win most of those that are, the specter of disparate-impact lawsuits nonetheless dangles like a Sword of Damocles over employers' heads. The prospect of onerous, unpredictable, and protracted litigation provides employers with a strong incentive to find some way to avoid being sued. One temptation is to satisfy diversity targets by relaxing personnel-selection standards across the board. Firms can also switch to more haphazard staffing methods that tend to obscure informal affirmative action or other race-conscious practices. Some of these tactics pose the risk of yielding a less effective work force, while others (such as the use of race-based criteria) are legally suspect or even expressly forbidden under Title VII."
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    By definition, it means some people were extended offers that would not have absent positive discrimination. Well, I suppose it could be the case that the level of positive discrimination didn't alter the outcomes, but then the affirmative action program achieved literally nothing. At least, that's with the typical meaning of "affirmative action". It's a nebulous term that some use to encompass things like blind orchestra auditions. In the tech world this could be equated with anonymous resumes and blind zoom interviews with modulated voices. But few tech companies seem to be interested in this type of affirmative action.
hotpotamus 4y ago
I recently went down a bit of a rabbit hole and learned about "pre-code" Hollywood. There's actually a 1933 movie called "Baby Face" that features a woman who does basically sleep her way to the top of a company (despite being pre-code, it's still quite chaste by modern standards and much is left to implication, but it's not subtle). So the trope does indeed have some history.
- etchalon 4y ago
  The notion that the reason certain groups of people aren't taken seriously in certain roles is because of "D&I" or "AA" is flatly ahistorical. Certain people just refuse to accept certain groups of people are capable of accomplishment without outside help or uniquely uncommon circumstances. But every generation finds some excuse that their prejudices are "rational".
  - yucky 4y ago
    Certain people just refuse to accept certain groups of people are capable of accomplishment without outside help or uniquely uncommon circumstances. Sounds like the solution then is to remove that outside help, and thus all doubt. Right?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> "diversity hires", or having "slept their way to top" Those seem like quite distinct issues, like you might as well lump in 'good at office politics' into it

qzw 4y ago

Oh, certainly. A few years is all black kids and women need to overcome racial and gender prejudices in this country. Or how about we don’t assume all black kids and women are diversity hires now, and maybe, I don’t know, treat each one as an individual and judge them based on the content of their character instead of the color of their skin or the number of their X chromosomes?

givemeethekeys 4y ago
Without affirmative action, all thats left is meritocracy and nepotism. So, I imagine an increasing number of black people and women (or anyone else perceived as less deserving) will be seen as "friend of the boss" or "the boss is doing them a favor". Either way, those can be easily addressed and therefore better than being forever labeled as a diversity hire (aka naturally inferior).
eru 4y ago
If you lower admission standards for any group, say blue people, than statistically speaking blue people will have a lower average. Just like when you see the the son of the CEO working at the company, there's a certain probability that he didn't get in based on his performance alone. Of course, as you suggest, there are sons of the CEO who really are the most qualified candidate for whatever job they are holding. But there's also nepotism.
dasil003 4y ago
This comment is a perfect microcosm of the title. Of course the issues you raise are real, and there is a whole constellation of systemic racism issues that specifically affect black people in a unique way. But when it comes to affirmative action there's a fundamental issue that goes beyond privilege narratives: > Or how about we don’t assume all black kids and women are diversity hires now, and maybe, I don’t know, treat each one as an individual and judge them based on the content of their character That's a nice sentiment, but it overlooks the fact that AA introduces this doubt, the doubt is in fact real, and can't be papered over with good intentions and turning a blind eye to cause and effect. The question is whether the net good in counter-balancing other systemic racism is worth the cost. That's not an easy question to answer. Some individuals would be more than happy to take any advantage they can get, and others want to be judged purely on their individual character.

8note 4y ago

I can't say I respect anyone for getting into an engineering program. It's sticking through to graduate that matters

crackercrews 4y ago
Research shows that graduation rates for minorities in engineering programs will likely increase if affirmative action goes away: > Black college freshmen are more likely to aspire to science or engineering careers than are white freshmen, but mismatch causes blacks to abandon these fields at twice the rate of whites. [1] 1: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-pai...
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  Actually, there may be even higher graduation rates among URM students in STEM fields - this is the claim of some recent research [1]. URM students have lower persistence rates[2] in STEM fields at most universities. Some claim this is due to racism, but the data shows that the persistence rates is actually the same for all races when normalized for academic preparedness. A student with 700s on their SATs is just as likely to persist regardless of white, Asian, Black, etc. Students with 600s and 500s are less likely, again regardless of race. It's just that there's a lot more URM students attending with lower scores. The expected consequence of eliminating race-based affirmative action is that URM students will instead attend less selective universities where they're more likely to persist. Sure, the university they graduate from may not be as prestigious. But on the flipside, they'll be more likely to graduate in the field they actually wanted to study. They'll also probably save a lot of money, since changing majors partway through usually means that these students take 5 or 6 years to graduate. 1. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w14885/w14885.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w14885/w148... 2. "Persistence rate" means the rate at which students complete their declared major. It's rare for students to drop out of university entirely, much more common is that they change to a less demanding major - that is, they don't persist in their initial major.

BoorishBears 4y ago

> they'll no longer be looked at as diversity hires Only racist losers assume I'm a diversity hire. And I'd actually rather they seethe at the "diversity hire" who just happens to somehow magically drive high-impact projects at every company he's ever worked at culminating in a career that's seen him work on everything from some of the most used apps in the world to self-driving cars. For that particular brand of loser if it isn't affirmative action it'll be something else: - Our CTO is from a West African nation, I'm from a West African nation, we bonded over that so actually its neopotism - Affirmative action may be banned and we dropped D&I but actually the hiring manager has a personal secret agenda to hire blackies - One of the people that interviewed him was black so obviously they gave me a pass. But of course let's forget about the legacy admission that landed you in a school, let's forget how you bond with your interviewers over in-office beer kegs and inside jokes from your favorite shows in your shared culture, let's forget about that internship from a family friend, etc. etc.

ipaddr 4y ago
This isn't a movie I don't think anyone is seething or really cares. They may look at you and wonder where you rank, so it forces you to prove yourself. But in this industry every interview wants you to prove yourself in pointless ways regardless if you have 20 year or 1.
- BoorishBears 4y ago
  > This isn't a movie I don't think anyone is seething or really cares. If you think people who assume minorities are diversity hires only exist in movies I'm not sure if you're naïve, clueless, or both. > They may look at you and wonder where you rank, so it forces you to prove yourself I mean you want to tell yourself no one cares, but you also want to say that removing AA forces me to prove myself? (actually that's just a really vaguely written sentence, removing AA? or being black? what is "it"?) Why do white people get so uncomfortable at the thought that other whites can be racist? I didn't say you think of me as a diversity hire, I didn't say any majority of white people think of me as one either, yet you immediately feel the need to start throwing yourself in front of the bullet with statements like "this isn't a movie". Is this some sort of cognitive dissonance from the people who have these thoughts deep down or something?

wrp 4y ago

I can illustrate one way that "diversity" hiring has affected perceptions of a demographic. In the 1980s, I worked around engineering departments a lot. Women were rare, but it seemed to be widely assumed that any woman in engineering would be exceptionally capable and driven. These days, when I hear discussion about inclusive hiring, regardless of whether people are for or against it, there is a common assumption that allowances will have to be made for employees of lesser ability. My impression is that this change in attitude started in the mid-1990s.

kodah 4y ago

I'm not really sure how I feel about this. I'm white, not a woman, and I've been (almost certainly) a diversity hire. In some ways, someone arbitrarily opening the door for you sheds a lot of load in the short-term. You still need all the grit that a chip on your shoulder gives you in order to succeed in the long run. When you do succeed you'll have to shed that load unless you want to sound like a bitter ass the rest of your life. My point here is, I didn't really need anyone to tell me that I was looked down on (by certain people) for a period of time to know it, and I'm not sure college admissions or jobs that are attracting diversity hires are attracting people who give a shit what you think in the short term. Your opinion of me will be established long after the initial thought of, "Oh this guy is a diversity hire" has left the space between your ears.

boppo1 4y ago
How did you wind up a diversity hire?
- kodah 4y ago
  Former military. I had been programming prior to being in the military, but after getting out nobody really wanted to hire me. My skills weren't really relevant any more, so I don't blame them. A couple firms ended up giving me a chance in the network and systems space.
  - happyopossum 4y ago
    Hiring veterans is completely different from hiring for racial diversity - being former military is a strong signal for many positive qualities that employers look for.
    - kodah 4y ago
      Maybe to some degree, but it's not all that different. The way I look at it, for that job and one other, was that I was underqualified, came with a built-in tax break, and preferential resume review. It's still a form of affirmative action, and its purpose is similar. I'm specifically referring to being a campaign badge class, and to a time period in my career that was when I first got out.

MrMan 4y ago

there won't be any black students, they will get weeded out in elementary school