As I said in my first comment, the nature of dog whistles is that some people use it innocently, without invoking the deeper context. > ...only intentional pro

As I said in my first comment, the nature of dog whistles is that some people use it innocently, without invoking the deeper context. > ...only intentional processes that ensure everyone gets a fair shake. Care to elaborate? The overtly discriminatory policies I listed above were supposedly just ensuring everyone gets a fair take. The language of "ensure everyone gets a fair shake," is no different than how my previous employers described our policy to restrict a segment of headcount to one gender. If you're interested in non-anecdotal evidence on tech hiring bias, here's a few studies tracking applicants submitted to companies and universities: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112, the chart with the important data: https://www.pnas.org/cms/10.1073/pnas.1418878112/asset/fc20a04b-ec76-419f-8d45-0e4217b249ad/assets/graphic/pnas.1418878112fig01.jpeg https://www.pnas.org/cms/10.1073/pnas.1418878112/asset/fc20a... Study on sending resumes to SV tech companies: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3672484 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3672484, HN discussion on the paperhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644