4 ms·

That is a fascinating study. It's definitely true that at both companies I've worked at, HR has been totally dominated by women. So if it is true that women ar

That is a fascinating study. It's definitely true that at both companies I've worked at, HR has been totally dominated by women. So if it is true that women are discriminated against in the tech industry, why is that so, given that most people involved in the hiring process are also women? The fact that attractive women are more discriminated against than plain ones is something that never occurred to me, I always believed it was the other way round. And I never considered that attractive men were treated more favorably. I think at the very least the study shows that discrimination is very hard to root out, and simply hiring along certain quotas doesn't really solve the problem at all.

zo1 12y ago
I have absolutely no idea why you're being down modded. But it sounds like you've struck an uncomfortable observation, and people don't like it.
- zenbowman 12y ago
  I don't think I've said anything remotely offensive, I'm not suggesting that women are not discriminated against, I'm just saying that discrimination is not a simple issue as many people claim.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - zo1 12y ago
    Well, you did also point out that HR is dominated by women. So that means that the hiring process is also dominated by women in quite a few workplaces. Combine that with the observations from the study, and all of a sudden we're put in the uncomfortable situation of explaining the apparently incongruent end-results of hiring processes favoring less-attractive women which doesn't fit the currently "accepted" paradigm of "men are sexist against women in the workplace". And you're completely right, the issue is not simple in any way. We're stuck making half-observations, trying to make connections between disparate points, etc. But what that tells me is that we're dealing with a very vague, soft, and ultimately subjective issue. Which people are trying to measure using quantitative, hard measurements.
Pxtl 12y ago
HR isn't getting the final say on hiring, just on that first crack of filtering out candidates. In my experience, all the "vaguely-eligible" candidates are still going into the hiring manager's hand, at least in software.

zo1 12y ago

I have absolutely no idea why you're being down modded. But it sounds like you've struck an uncomfortable observation, and people don't like it.

zenbowman 12y ago
I don't think I've said anything remotely offensive, I'm not suggesting that women are not discriminated against, I'm just saying that discrimination is not a simple issue as many people claim.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- zo1 12y ago
  Well, you did also point out that HR is dominated by women. So that means that the hiring process is also dominated by women in quite a few workplaces. Combine that with the observations from the study, and all of a sudden we're put in the uncomfortable situation of explaining the apparently incongruent end-results of hiring processes favoring less-attractive women which doesn't fit the currently "accepted" paradigm of "men are sexist against women in the workplace". And you're completely right, the issue is not simple in any way. We're stuck making half-observations, trying to make connections between disparate points, etc. But what that tells me is that we're dealing with a very vague, soft, and ultimately subjective issue. Which people are trying to measure using quantitative, hard measurements.

Pxtl 12y ago

HR isn't getting the final say on hiring, just on that first crack of filtering out candidates. In my experience, all the "vaguely-eligible" candidates are still going into the hiring manager's hand, at least in software.