That’s not how racism & sexism work. Racism & sexism require a structural power reinforcement of the preference. That structure makes itself known in statistical aggregates such as pay & promotion gaps, and glass ceilings & cliffs.
-
-
Replying to @sarahmei @IdarMethod and
So, if there were no pay or promotion gaps, and no glass ceilings or cliffs, then placing value on the backgrounds that white women & people of color bring would be sexist &/or racist. But that’s not the world we live in.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei @IdarMethod and
The power structure we have right now favors white men, as shown by pay & promotion gaps, and glass ceilings & cliffs. So placing value on the race & gender of white men is racist & sexist. But going the other way is not.
1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei @IdarMethod and
To put it another way, the “best-qualified person for the job” is a judgement that needs to include the value of the background the candidate brings, and how different it is from the existing team. More different means better qualified.
1 reply 6 retweets 12 likes -
It seems to me that what you are describing as the solution to discrimination is more discrimination. I think we should try for less discrimination.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @unclebobmartin @sarahmei and
Of course, you're not actually serious about "less discrimination", because then you'd be opposed to discriminating against candidates on the basis of their qualifications. On your logic, "the best person for the job" is also a form of "discrimination".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @arkwrite
"Discrimination" has multiple definitions. Apparently,
@unclebobmartin referred to the 2nd one (where it's a bad thing) and you referred to the 1st (the more generic one, not inherently bad). See:http://www.dictionary.com/browse/discrimination …1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bswierczynski @arkwrite
I think that discrimination on the basis of gender or race is always detrimental; irrespective of the intent.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't doubt that you think that. And many folks see this is a fair minded way to think, because the playing field is so self-evidently level because of your pure minded intent, that this is the only rational choice. Data as
@sarahmei, pointed out, indicates otherwise.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pconrad @unclebobmartin and
The playing field is far from level, has never been level, and that's even true when every single person in the process is fully committed *in their own minds* to fairness. Empirically, discrimination on the basis of race and gender *happens anyway* even when it isn't intended.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's an illusion to think that any organized social process in the United States, given our social and political history, happens free of gender and racial discrimination. It isn't surprising that you might not see it if you are, like me, a white male. But it shows up in the data
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.