5 ms·

One person's positive discrimination is another person's negative discrimination. Negative discrimination is seen by those its applied to as punishment. In th

One person's positive discrimination is another person's negative discrimination. Negative discrimination is seen by those its applied to as punishment. In their mind punishing someone for something that they had no hand in is a terrible technique to engineer a society and usually only leads to a backlash. Further, it's easy to model what society should look like and how it should act by reducing it to mathematical models, but human behavior is not strictly dominated by mathematics.

eropple 12y ago
Personally speaking, as the kind of white guy who, nine years ago or so, should have in theory been being negatively affected by programs like this, I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "dudes are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for women too." I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. We dudes will be just fine without being the implicit focus of every place we go.
- 12394344131 12y ago
  Personally speaking, as the kind of black woman who, nine years ago or so, should have in theory been being negatively affected by male culture like this, I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "women are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for men too." I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. We women will be just fine without being the implicit focus of every place we go. See how that sounds. EDIT: Please, kindly, don't speak for the entirety of your gender. Nor for the opposite gender. Don't speak in absolutes, just speak for yourself, thanks.
  - eropple 12y ago
    I'll pretend you're not being disingenuous, because good gravy only one of us is saying things reflective of reality and you tipped your hand real hard, and point out the obvious: I'm not speaking for the "entirety of my gender." I'm speaking for me. And I'm saying that we have everything and that people like me can stand to give a little because we're certainly not going to be materially hurt by it. And y'know? You can disagree with that all you want. I think you're wrong, and I think spinning up a new account to say something you fear is unpopular (but, let's not front, is so openly accepted here that I've exchanged some disappointed emails with dang) is real shitty, but you can disagree and I never said I spoke for you. You can hang yourself by your own words without my help.
    - 12394344131 12y ago
      Just to be completely honest and because I dislike mudding another person's opinion/posts/reputation, I am not a throwaway account made by the person you were originally replying to and I have nothing to do with that person. You can personally not believe this, a mod could verify it if it were that important, however please don't take it as such. I think we all know why I made a throwaway account and why unpopular opinions are hard to express on a non-throwaway one. I'm all for helping unprivileged classes and people, however there have been a lot of very dangerous thinking where privileged classes end up being discriminated in the first place. As the grandparent was stating, exclusion and segregation is not a solution for the 'privilege wars', we should be working towards inclusion and acceptance and not by forcing it by banning specific classes of privileged people. The privileged of today will be the unprivileged of tomorrow and nothing would have been solved, and I see this line of reasoning way too much to be comfortable. Speaking as a so-called privileged person myself, I am all for acceptance and inclusion of those less fortunate than me, but let's not turn this into an unnecessary war of the least privileged.
      - eropple 12y ago
        I didn't think you were patzerhacker. I don't agree with patzerhacker, but I think she's honest with her thoughts and feelings. I don't think the same of you. Men of today will not be the unprivileged of tomorrow by a few people saying "you know, it's probably not a bad idea to have a few places where it's not automatically expected that you're a man or you're The Other." Your post is the same kind of reductionist zero-sum crap that ruins everything it touches, and I wish you would stop hurting people in a worse position than you are with it. And I've never, not once, had a problem with expressing unpopular opinions without a green username. See? Look elsewhere in this thread. Oh no. Somebody downvoted me for having the temerity to think bias exists. My life is now so hard. Grow up.
      - codygman 12y ago
        > Speaking as a so-called privileged person myself, Wait didn't you say you were a black woman? Why do you call yourself a "so-called privileged person"?
- patzerhacker 12y ago
  >I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "dudes are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for women too." Since things are the way that they are its wonderful that you feel that way. Personally, it smacks as a bit sexist for organizations to say to me 'we created this program to get women into things' because it reads to me like them saying "we created this program to get women into things because they can't hack it any way else". That's how minority outreach programs read to me as a woman of color. >I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. If you've read my posts as "but what about the menz?!" (as I hear often) then I'm afraid that it looks like you're being reductionist. My position on this issue is both a combination of my lived experience having never felt discrimination in the tech community while simultaneously watching several of my equally qualified colleagues be denied opportunity through no fault of their own because somebody thought I deserved a better shot so their percentages looked better.
  - eropple 12y ago
    > That's how minority outreach programs read to me as a woman of color. I am 100% hearing you, and I understand how you get to that position. Here's where my head's at: if, as a culture, we think that diversity of self, thought, and action matter, then we have two options. One, which I think is relying on the better angels of natures that haven't proven to have them, is a sea change of culture where the usual bullshit is not tolerated, the casual sexism that I've heard (and objected to, and become the No Fun Guy for) amongst just-us-guys is stamped out. The other is to facilitate a demographic shift, to offer early, supportive services (I mean, even internship programs are fairly introductory). I tend to see these programs as doing the latter towards a goal I find to be a net positive and, additionally, beneficial to me, in the long run. I understand the potentially problematic nature of such programs and I think it's important for folks to keep those potential issues in mind, but I disagree with you in calling these programs, the ones that I am personally aware of, problematic in that way. > If you've read my posts as "but what about the menz?!" (as I hear often) then I'm afraid that it looks like you're being reductionist. That wasn't my read, and "worrying" was flip, I apologize. Let me try again: I come at solving social issues from an economic point of view; while it's not zero-sum, something's got to give to get things moving and to make the multipliers work. In the aggregate, I find it very unlikely that white dudes are going to have problems finding opportunities. And so, I, personally, am okay with making that trade and theoretically (but, I continue to think, probably not really) causing low-level harm to a few folks in a privileged position in the pursuit of a better end state for everyone. And I respect that you haven't felt discrimination in the tech community. I'm glad you've had better experiences than the folks I know, and whose experiences have soured me on a lot of what I see as the insular nature of tech. In particular I am thinking of two of my dearest friends, two of the most level-headed people I know, who exited stage right because the trouble of being a visible member of outgroups wasn't worth the benefits of working in tech. That irks the shit out of me, and I want it to stop. (It's with this in mind that I try to put into practice what I say, and a major red flag for me is a homogeneous development group. I want to work with people unlike me, because in the long run it's better for me, too.) > several of my equally qualified colleagues be denied opportunity through no fault of their own because somebody thought I deserved a better shot so their percentages looked better Can I flip this around for a second? Because I don't think these feelings are restricted to a single "side" of anything. I've seen candidates lose out because they're not enough like the pack of white dudes doing the hiring decisions, too, and I'm certain I've benefitted from those same things too. You don't want to benefit unduly, and I respect that. But neither do I, you know?
- wtbob 12y ago
  I was a white guy who was (mildly) negatively affected by affirmative action in high school, and only by luck wasn't more strongly affected. Way back when, I'd applied for a position at a local university's geek-kids summer programme (I'm keeping this as non-specific as possible). I never heard back from them with an acceptance or rejection, until days before the programme started. 'You're in,' they said, and so my folks had to scramble to readjust our summer plans, arrange their finances to cover the program and so forth. Not really a big deal, but a bit of a nuisance. What's the affirmative-action angle? Well, it turns out that I'd been on the alternates list because I'm a white guy, and the programme wanted more girls and non-whites. One of the accepted folks had cancelled, and so I got a spot after all. It's not too much of an exaggeration to say that this programme changed my life. It opened my eyes to what eventually became my career. It exposed me to other high-schoolers like me. It made me friends I still have today. It still stands as one of my most formative experiences. Now, in this programme there were some students who clearly didn't belong. They were fundamentally unprepared (i.e., they had never been taught the fundamentals of the material). They didn't understand the material. They cried because they were failing what was for everyone else and easy pass (literally, as in not even bothering to worry). They held the entire class back because the professors had to spend so much time trying—and, mostly, failing—to explain basic concepts to them. The programme was a waste of their time: they learned little, if anything, and had an utterly miserable experience. They were, of course, uniformly non-white, non-Asian girls. I'll pause here to note that none of this is an attack on those students qua people. I'm sure that they were perfectly good people, but they had no business at a university geek-kid programme. I'll also note that there were plenty of young women in the programme who were quite capable and intelligent and did just as well as the young men. The poor students weren't poor students because they were female, or because they were non-white, but because they were unintelligent and/or uneducated. Now, each spot once of those poor students occupied was a spot which could have been occupied by an excellent student. Each of those spots represented a young life which wasn't changed like mine was. Which of those students, unaccepted because of their gender or colour, dropped out of high school, never applied to college, committed suicide or majored in some non-technical field? How dare anyone think that's right? So no, I don't think 'we dudes will be just fine.'
  - Total_Meltdown 12y ago

eropple 12y ago

Personally speaking, as the kind of white guy who, nine years ago or so, should have in theory been being negatively affected by programs like this, I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "dudes are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for women too." I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. We dudes will be just fine without being the implicit focus of every place we go.

12394344131 12y ago
Personally speaking, as the kind of black woman who, nine years ago or so, should have in theory been being negatively affected by male culture like this, I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "women are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for men too." I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. We women will be just fine without being the implicit focus of every place we go. See how that sounds. EDIT: Please, kindly, don't speak for the entirety of your gender. Nor for the opposite gender. Don't speak in absolutes, just speak for yourself, thanks.
- eropple 12y ago
  I'll pretend you're not being disingenuous, because good gravy only one of us is saying things reflective of reality and you tipped your hand real hard, and point out the obvious: I'm not speaking for the "entirety of my gender." I'm speaking for me. And I'm saying that we have everything and that people like me can stand to give a little because we're certainly not going to be materially hurt by it. And y'know? You can disagree with that all you want. I think you're wrong, and I think spinning up a new account to say something you fear is unpopular (but, let's not front, is so openly accepted here that I've exchanged some disappointed emails with dang) is real shitty, but you can disagree and I never said I spoke for you. You can hang yourself by your own words without my help.
  - 12394344131 12y ago
    Just to be completely honest and because I dislike mudding another person's opinion/posts/reputation, I am not a throwaway account made by the person you were originally replying to and I have nothing to do with that person. You can personally not believe this, a mod could verify it if it were that important, however please don't take it as such. I think we all know why I made a throwaway account and why unpopular opinions are hard to express on a non-throwaway one. I'm all for helping unprivileged classes and people, however there have been a lot of very dangerous thinking where privileged classes end up being discriminated in the first place. As the grandparent was stating, exclusion and segregation is not a solution for the 'privilege wars', we should be working towards inclusion and acceptance and not by forcing it by banning specific classes of privileged people. The privileged of today will be the unprivileged of tomorrow and nothing would have been solved, and I see this line of reasoning way too much to be comfortable. Speaking as a so-called privileged person myself, I am all for acceptance and inclusion of those less fortunate than me, but let's not turn this into an unnecessary war of the least privileged.
    - eropple 12y ago
      I didn't think you were patzerhacker. I don't agree with patzerhacker, but I think she's honest with her thoughts and feelings. I don't think the same of you. Men of today will not be the unprivileged of tomorrow by a few people saying "you know, it's probably not a bad idea to have a few places where it's not automatically expected that you're a man or you're The Other." Your post is the same kind of reductionist zero-sum crap that ruins everything it touches, and I wish you would stop hurting people in a worse position than you are with it. And I've never, not once, had a problem with expressing unpopular opinions without a green username. See? Look elsewhere in this thread. Oh no. Somebody downvoted me for having the temerity to think bias exists. My life is now so hard. Grow up.
    - codygman 12y ago
      > Speaking as a so-called privileged person myself, Wait didn't you say you were a black woman? Why do you call yourself a "so-called privileged person"?
patzerhacker 12y ago
>I don't find a meaningful dose of negative discrimination in "dudes are welcomed with hugs and handpounds pretty much everywhere, let's make sure there's a place for women too." Since things are the way that they are its wonderful that you feel that way. Personally, it smacks as a bit sexist for organizations to say to me 'we created this program to get women into things' because it reads to me like them saying "we created this program to get women into things because they can't hack it any way else". That's how minority outreach programs read to me as a woman of color. >I respect your stance and your viewpoint, but I think you're worrying about folks who don't need much worrying done on their behalf. If you've read my posts as "but what about the menz?!" (as I hear often) then I'm afraid that it looks like you're being reductionist. My position on this issue is both a combination of my lived experience having never felt discrimination in the tech community while simultaneously watching several of my equally qualified colleagues be denied opportunity through no fault of their own because somebody thought I deserved a better shot so their percentages looked better.
- eropple 12y ago
  > That's how minority outreach programs read to me as a woman of color. I am 100% hearing you, and I understand how you get to that position. Here's where my head's at: if, as a culture, we think that diversity of self, thought, and action matter, then we have two options. One, which I think is relying on the better angels of natures that haven't proven to have them, is a sea change of culture where the usual bullshit is not tolerated, the casual sexism that I've heard (and objected to, and become the No Fun Guy for) amongst just-us-guys is stamped out. The other is to facilitate a demographic shift, to offer early, supportive services (I mean, even internship programs are fairly introductory). I tend to see these programs as doing the latter towards a goal I find to be a net positive and, additionally, beneficial to me, in the long run. I understand the potentially problematic nature of such programs and I think it's important for folks to keep those potential issues in mind, but I disagree with you in calling these programs, the ones that I am personally aware of, problematic in that way. > If you've read my posts as "but what about the menz?!" (as I hear often) then I'm afraid that it looks like you're being reductionist. That wasn't my read, and "worrying" was flip, I apologize. Let me try again: I come at solving social issues from an economic point of view; while it's not zero-sum, something's got to give to get things moving and to make the multipliers work. In the aggregate, I find it very unlikely that white dudes are going to have problems finding opportunities. And so, I, personally, am okay with making that trade and theoretically (but, I continue to think, probably not really) causing low-level harm to a few folks in a privileged position in the pursuit of a better end state for everyone. And I respect that you haven't felt discrimination in the tech community. I'm glad you've had better experiences than the folks I know, and whose experiences have soured me on a lot of what I see as the insular nature of tech. In particular I am thinking of two of my dearest friends, two of the most level-headed people I know, who exited stage right because the trouble of being a visible member of outgroups wasn't worth the benefits of working in tech. That irks the shit out of me, and I want it to stop. (It's with this in mind that I try to put into practice what I say, and a major red flag for me is a homogeneous development group. I want to work with people unlike me, because in the long run it's better for me, too.) > several of my equally qualified colleagues be denied opportunity through no fault of their own because somebody thought I deserved a better shot so their percentages looked better Can I flip this around for a second? Because I don't think these feelings are restricted to a single "side" of anything. I've seen candidates lose out because they're not enough like the pack of white dudes doing the hiring decisions, too, and I'm certain I've benefitted from those same things too. You don't want to benefit unduly, and I respect that. But neither do I, you know?
wtbob 12y ago
I was a white guy who was (mildly) negatively affected by affirmative action in high school, and only by luck wasn't more strongly affected. Way back when, I'd applied for a position at a local university's geek-kids summer programme (I'm keeping this as non-specific as possible). I never heard back from them with an acceptance or rejection, until days before the programme started. 'You're in,' they said, and so my folks had to scramble to readjust our summer plans, arrange their finances to cover the program and so forth. Not really a big deal, but a bit of a nuisance. What's the affirmative-action angle? Well, it turns out that I'd been on the alternates list because I'm a white guy, and the programme wanted more girls and non-whites. One of the accepted folks had cancelled, and so I got a spot after all. It's not too much of an exaggeration to say that this programme changed my life. It opened my eyes to what eventually became my career. It exposed me to other high-schoolers like me. It made me friends I still have today. It still stands as one of my most formative experiences. Now, in this programme there were some students who clearly didn't belong. They were fundamentally unprepared (i.e., they had never been taught the fundamentals of the material). They didn't understand the material. They cried because they were failing what was for everyone else and easy pass (literally, as in not even bothering to worry). They held the entire class back because the professors had to spend so much time trying—and, mostly, failing—to explain basic concepts to them. The programme was a waste of their time: they learned little, if anything, and had an utterly miserable experience. They were, of course, uniformly non-white, non-Asian girls. I'll pause here to note that none of this is an attack on those students qua people. I'm sure that they were perfectly good people, but they had no business at a university geek-kid programme. I'll also note that there were plenty of young women in the programme who were quite capable and intelligent and did just as well as the young men. The poor students weren't poor students because they were female, or because they were non-white, but because they were unintelligent and/or uneducated. Now, each spot once of those poor students occupied was a spot which could have been occupied by an excellent student. Each of those spots represented a young life which wasn't changed like mine was. Which of those students, unaccepted because of their gender or colour, dropped out of high school, never applied to college, committed suicide or majored in some non-technical field? How dare anyone think that's right? So no, I don't think 'we dudes will be just fine.'
- Total_Meltdown 12y ago