3 ms·

This post is mostly an exposition of the author's strongly-held opinion that A) technology communities are all currently meritocracies, which is good; B) self-i

This post is mostly an exposition of the author's strongly-held opinion that A) technology communities are all currently meritocracies, which is good; B) self-imposed quotas will result in something that isn't a meritocracy, which is bad; and C) organizations which strive to help minorities (women who code etc) are bad because they try to help minorities. I'm only going to respond to C because it's the most ludicrous. Recently, I (an asian male) was a teacher assistant at the very first ClojureBridge, and during the training I learned more about why these workshops are useful and important. They create an environment where attendees feel more comfortable learning, making it much more likely that attendees will be successful in learning to program. You can argue whether or not it's "right" that women would feel more comfortable attending a workshop geared specifically toward women, but frankly I think that's irrelevant. The author says that these organizations give the message that "These people are different from the majority so we need to treat them differently." Well, yes. What's wrong with that? The author doesn't explain. In any case, I think this is a good thing because the majority already has special treatment, thanks to human nature. There is ample evidence that women and black people are seen as less capable, even by people who have no desire to be prejudiced. How easy will it be for you to learn if the people surrounding you all assume that you're not as smart as them just because you're a woman or you're black? It's important that these conscious efforts to combat the results of our unconscious biases exist.

icebraining 12y ago
The author says that these organizations give the message that "These people are different from the majority so we need to treat them differently." Well, yes. What's wrong with that? The author doesn't explain. I think it's pretty obvious - he thinks that those groups are reinforcing the idea that they're trying to dispel. From his POV, if you don't want people treated as different, it makes no sense for you to do the same.
- fennecfoxen 12y ago
  "The way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." -- Chief Justice John Roberts, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 ... which isn't to say that this measure (or, in the field of technology, an analogous one) is sufficient on its own, but that it is necessary.
- CocaKoala 12y ago
  But they ARE different, and trying to pretend they're not doesn't make sense? Off the top of my head, one clear difference I can think of between the minority groups who don't have a strong presence in the tech industry and white males who do is that the minority groups don't have a strong difference in the tech industry. So if that's a difference you want to resolve, I'm not sure how creating groups to help encourage the minority groups to enter the tech industry is bad.
- nonrecursive 12y ago
  In that case I think he's wrong. Being "different" and being "less than" are two different things, but it sounds like he's equating them, as if by going out of your way to help under-represented groups you're implying that they're under-represented because they're inferior. To clarify what I meant in my earlier post: Yes, they are different, by definition - one group is the majority, the others are minorities. That doesn't mean that they're different in terms of intelligence, ability, or worth. Treating minorities "differently", otherwise known as "helping", is logical. It recognizes that the majority already gets "special treatment", because those in the majority are already looking after each others' interests.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

icebraining 12y ago

The author says that these organizations give the message that "These people are different from the majority so we need to treat them differently." Well, yes. What's wrong with that? The author doesn't explain. I think it's pretty obvious - he thinks that those groups are reinforcing the idea that they're trying to dispel. From his POV, if you don't want people treated as different, it makes no sense for you to do the same.

fennecfoxen 12y ago
"The way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." -- Chief Justice John Roberts, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 ... which isn't to say that this measure (or, in the field of technology, an analogous one) is sufficient on its own, but that it is necessary.
CocaKoala 12y ago
But they ARE different, and trying to pretend they're not doesn't make sense? Off the top of my head, one clear difference I can think of between the minority groups who don't have a strong presence in the tech industry and white males who do is that the minority groups don't have a strong difference in the tech industry. So if that's a difference you want to resolve, I'm not sure how creating groups to help encourage the minority groups to enter the tech industry is bad.
nonrecursive 12y ago
In that case I think he's wrong. Being "different" and being "less than" are two different things, but it sounds like he's equating them, as if by going out of your way to help under-represented groups you're implying that they're under-represented because they're inferior. To clarify what I meant in my earlier post: Yes, they are different, by definition - one group is the majority, the others are minorities. That doesn't mean that they're different in terms of intelligence, ability, or worth. Treating minorities "differently", otherwise known as "helping", is logical. It recognizes that the majority already gets "special treatment", because those in the majority are already looking after each others' interests.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]