No, we always just meant "black people" when we said "divesity" (NYT)
| wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | razzle-dazzle stage candlestick maker | 10/17/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | startled philosopher-king becky | 10/17/17 | | Lavender Alcoholic Faggot Firefighter Prole | 10/17/17 | | snowy national security agency | 10/17/17 | | razzle-dazzle stage candlestick maker | 10/17/17 | | Grizzly Chapel | 10/17/17 | | Fiercely-loyal hall pervert | 10/17/17 | | Jet trump supporter temple | 10/17/17 | | Fiercely-loyal hall pervert | 10/17/17 | | Soggy Amber Ladyboy Idiot | 10/17/17 | | fantasy-prone messiness | 10/17/17 | | Dashing mediation parlour | 10/17/17 | | insecure mint fortuitous meteor | 10/17/17 | | demanding quadroon | 10/17/17 | | Lavender Alcoholic Faggot Firefighter Prole | 10/17/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | ivory judgmental stock car stead | 10/17/17 | | racy office pistol | 10/17/17 | | cracking orchid weed whacker | 10/17/17 | | Lavender Alcoholic Faggot Firefighter Prole | 10/17/17 | | wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | Umber travel guidebook volcanic crater | 10/17/17 | | Grizzly Chapel | 10/18/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | startled philosopher-king becky | 10/17/17 | | wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | Grizzly Chapel | 10/18/17 | | startled philosopher-king becky | 10/17/17 | | flirting irate state sweet tailpipe | 10/17/17 | | wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | flirting irate state sweet tailpipe | 10/17/17 | | wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | flirting irate state sweet tailpipe | 10/17/17 | | Titillating tanning salon shitlib | 10/17/17 | | Sooty property dysfunction | 10/18/17 | | Lavender Alcoholic Faggot Firefighter Prole | 10/17/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | disrespectful masturbator | 10/17/17 | | arousing institution | 10/17/17 | | wonderful corner antidepressant drug | 10/17/17 | | Aromatic Location | 10/17/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | insecure mint fortuitous meteor | 10/18/17 | | arousing institution | 10/18/17 | | zippy shaky theater mexican | 10/17/17 | | galvanic walnut genital piercing dragon | 10/17/17 | | excitant transparent bawdyhouse | 10/17/17 | | Beady-eyed step-uncle's house | 10/17/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 17th, 2017 9:05 AM Author: wonderful corner antidepressant drug
OAKLAND, Calif. — Discussing her work at Apple at an event last week about fighting racial injustice, Denise Young Smith, the company’s vice president of diversity and inclusion, said, “There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blond men in a room and they’re going to be diverse, too, because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation.”
That’s right: a dozen white men, so long as they were not raised in the same household and don’t think identical thoughts, could be considered diverse. After a furor erupted, Ms. Smith clarified her comments in an email to her team that was obtained and published by TechCrunch. It reads in part, “Understanding that diversity includes women, people of color, L.G.B.T.Q. people, and all underrepresented minorities is at the heart of our work to create an environment that is inclusive of everyone,” and “I regret the choice of words I used to make this point.”
But Ms. Smith wasn’t the first to endorse the view in her initial statement. Those of us in the tech industry know that the idea of “cognitive diversity” is gaining traction among leaders in our field. In too many cases, this means that, in the minds of those with influence over hiring, the concept of diversity is watered down and reinterpreted to encompass what Silicon Valley has never had a shortage of — individual white men, each with their unique thoughts and ideas. This shift creates a distraction from efforts to increase the race and gender diversity the tech industry is sorely lacking.
This overlaps with the sentiments expressed in a screed by a Google software engineer that critiqued the company’s race and gender diversity efforts and ascribed the unequal representation of women in tech to “biological causes.” It included the line, “Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity.”
To be sure, cognitive diversity and viewpoint diversity are important. But working to increase them alone won’t do anything to address the well-documented shortcomings that plague tech companies. Whether companies do it intentionally or not, I worry that they will adjust the definition of diversity so that, conveniently, it’s already achieved.
If our focus shifts to cognitive diversity, it could provide an easy way around doing the hard work of increasing the embarrassingly low numbers of blacks and Latinos in the ranks of employees, in leadership roles, as suppliers and vendors, and on boards. The leadership of Apple, where Ms. Smith works, was only 3 percent black and 7 percent Hispanic in 2016. A recent report by Recode found that women made up at most 30 percent of leadership roles and no more than 27 percent of technical roles at major tech companies. The percentages of black and Latino employees in leadership was even more dismal, ranging from 4 percent to 10 percent.
The shift toward focusing on viewpoint or cognitive diversity may trace its roots back to the 1978 Supreme Court decision Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, which set the stage for schools to consider race in admissions because of the educational benefits of diversity, rather than to redress prior discrimination. It is understandable that because the public discourse around affirmative action shifted along these lines, some came to believe that any kind of diversity — including cognitive diversity — must be equally valuable. But that means that the most meaningful ways through which this is formed (cultural, religious, sexual orientation, socioeconomic, ability and especially gender and racial differences) may be forgotten.
If this happens, we could lose an important check on the tendency of people who work at tech companies to hire more people like themselves. According to the Society for Human Resources Management, employee referrals accounted for over 30 percent of all hires in 2016. Employees typically recommend people similar to them in racial identity and gender, so it requires dedicated effort to recruit and hire people who don’t already have identities that match up with those of current employees. Counting up variations of “viewpoints” — however one might do so — won’t achieve that. And, to potential applicants from underrepresented groups, statements about “cognitive diversity” will send an unwelcoming message about a company’s real priorities for inclusion.
As my former Facebook colleague Regina Dugan said recently, even if cognitive diversity is a company’s ultimate goal, “we can’t step away from the idea that diversity also looks like identity diversity.” The effort to hire people with different points of view must not come at the expense of hiring members of actual underrepresented communities who add tangible, bottom-line value — and who deserve to work in tech as much as anyone.
Ms. Smith said in the email clarifying her remarks, “Our commitment at Apple to increasing racial and gender diversity is as strong as it’s ever been.” That kind of diversity — the old-fashioned kind, that still remains elusive — is what I hope my industry won’t abandon.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/opinion/diversity-tech-women-silicon-valley.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region
WTF is wrong with you bigots stop redefining our euphemisms!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461308) |
Date: October 17th, 2017 9:07 AM Author: razzle-dazzle stage candlestick maker
After a furor erupted,
Jesus Christ gas all millenials
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461316) |
Date: October 17th, 2017 9:34 AM Author: startled philosopher-king becky
"To be sure, cognitive diversity and viewpoint diversity are important. But working to increase them alone won’t do anything to address the well-documented shortcomings that plague tech companies."
?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461416) |
|
Date: October 17th, 2017 9:49 AM Author: wonderful corner antidepressant drug
"This person appears to have made an entire career out of changing the meaning of "diverse" to mean "as black as possible."
'Changing'? That's where you made your first mistake, pumo.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461514)
|
Date: October 17th, 2017 10:45 AM Author: arousing institution
“The effort to hire people with different points of view must not come at the expense of hiring members of actual underrepresented communities who add tangible, bottom-line value — and who deserve to work in tech as much as anyone.”
LJL @ this conclusory statement. Has there ever been any attempt to quantity racial/gender diversity alone? Isn’t the point of having racial and gender diversity to expand the viewpoints of an organization? If you can expand your viewpoints without sacrificing quality, why force the racial/gender issue?
If someone is the best in their field and able to add value at a place like Google or Apple, those companies will bend over backward to hire them regardless of gender or race.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461854) |
|
Date: October 17th, 2017 10:49 AM Author: wonderful corner antidepressant drug
cut&paste:
This is just the well-documented shitlib argumentative tactic of referring to something that "we all agree that..." which isn't proven, "well-documented" or even clearly explained.
But believe me, those tech companies are HURTING for the tangible, bottom line value DIVERSITY brings.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34461877) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 1:35 PM Author: insecure mint fortuitous meteor
"Has there ever been any attempt to quantity racial/gender diversity alone?"
Yes there has. By me. I was working on study proposals to help us better understand structural inequalities. I kept getting attacked and told to read all sorts of long papers at which point I would be "educated" into understanding why what I was asking didn't make sense.
I was able to quantify benefits to the quality of professional sports and showed that when parties were free to pursue whatever would best help the teams win they embraced diversity. No one has to force basketball teams to sign black players.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34471380) |
Date: October 17th, 2017 11:27 AM Author: galvanic walnut genital piercing dragon
Couches diversity as means for capturing unique perspectives.
*is forced to admit color of skin is all that matters*
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3766559&forum_id=2#34462122) |
|
|