Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#61

Post by antiufo » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

ewr24 wrote: post #44

antiufo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's some cartman-level trolling. It's of course not my job to distinguish true and false trans people ("no true Scotsman") but if you're a stereotypical male in all senses, it makes very little sense to use that label. (Disclosure, genderqueer trans woman here)

I am serious. There is no such thing as "stereotypical male in all senses" , everyone is gender-fluid . Most men were called a "pussy" or "not a real man" at some point. People come from different backgrounds. In my country people often changed their religion or race, not doing so would bring unpleasant consequences. For example my parents become atheists to get a decent jobs. Some people are also distracted by feedi…

> There is no such thing as "stereotypical male in all senses", everyone is gender-fluid. Most men were called a "pussy" or "not a real man" at some point.

Pardon, in all or most senses. The point is that masculinity is often seen as an arms race. Most men feel outraged if/when they are called pussies (or compared/associated with something seen as feminine/"weak"). Other people have opted out of that arms race and, whether they are male or female, don't feel obliged to obey the gender roles about their clothing/style/personality (or their bodies).

> everyone is gender-fluid

Say that to your average transphobic/antifeminist "activist". Do I fear being discriminated by people like them in the job/housing market, or harassed? Yes. Does it matter whether they are themselves people without self-acceptance? Not much. Just like it makes little difference to be discriminated about homosexuality by a fully heterosexual person, or by a repressed bisexual/homosexual person.

> military outpost

Yeah I think military draft should be either mandatory for all genders, or optional for all.

Edit: formatting

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#62

Post by ewr24 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 5:45 PM UTC

antiufo wrote: post #61

ewr24 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am serious. There is no such thing as "stereotypical male in all senses" , everyone is gender-fluid . Most men were called a "pussy" or "not a real man" at some point. People come from different backgrounds. In my country people often changed their religion or race, not doing so would bring unpleasant consequences. For example my parents become atheists to get a decent jobs. Some people are also distracted by feedi…

> There is no such thing as "stereotypical male in all senses", everyone is gender-fluid. Most men were called a "pussy" or "not a real man" at some point. Pardon, in all or most senses. The point is that masculinity is often seen as an arms race. Most men feel outraged if/when they are called pussies (or compared/associated with something seen as feminine/"weak"). Other people have opted out of that arms race and, w…

There is sort of heroic stereotype of "real men" from the past. And today most men have some feminine traits, and do not fit well into that stereotype. Here is sort of example: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/rod-eccles/where-have-all-...

The point is the fact they were called "pussy", not the outrage. There was some feminine trait for which they were called 'pussy".

> Other people have opted out of that arms race and

Majority of people have opted from traditional gender roles. Marriage is at all time low.

> don't feel obliged to obey the gender roles about their clothing/style/personality (or their bodies).

I assume you are talking about LGBT, more specifically trans. By being trans you are expected to follow another gender stereotype (clothing, style, personality). All trans are expected to overcompensate; wear similar makeup, hairstyle, have mild depression, have certain political opinion. Also being trans should be a result of deep existentialist crisis...

50 years old guy with a beard, truck, wife and kids. Guy who become trans for some trivial reason (job, avoid draft), does not fit well into this gender stereotype. And he should not be a trans (but in theory he has a right to be).

> Say that to your average transphobic/antifeminist "activist".

It depends how you phrase it. Those groups have a folklore about gender-fluid women (hairy feminist). And most guys will agree they are not "men enough" to marry.

> Do I fear being discriminated by people like them in the job/housing market, or harassed?

Guys after divorce have a similar problem. It depends a lot on a vibe.

Rest of the comment is pretty loaded. Feminist interests are not always aligned with trans-gender interests (military service, prison rape..)

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#63

Post by dalke » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 6:24 PM UTC

anexprogrammer wrote: post #56

dalke wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slippers, cardigans and golf clubs are the sign of the 50 year olds of the generation before you. They are not something you take on when you get to your 50s. (As a clearer example, Chloe and Emma are popular names for girls. 100 years ago they were Mary and Dorothy. If you know someone's name you can get an idea of age based on its popularity. But today's Emma will not be changing her name to Dorothy when she become…

> not something you take on For parent's generation it seemed to be very much something they took on. Or there was an expectation to progress through phases of life/clothes/attitudes. As I've got older it's apparent just how much wider the gap was compared to us and the next generation. To look at my parents I see a different world, with the kids it's very much the same world we just disagree on some details. Tattoo?…

Perhaps we have different ideas of "take on."

First off, what you describe fits neither my father nor my grandfathers. As far as I know, none ever played even a round of golf, much less pursued it. Golf has a reputation of being a rich (upper middle class or higher), white, suburban sport, for people with plenty of leisure time to get in a full 18 holes. The working class and lower middle class sport was bowling.

That makes me think it's more likely associated with social class dynamics of the mid-20th century than waiting until one turns 50-something to take on a certain role. That is, did your father at age 20 decide that at age 50 he would get a cardigan and slippers? Or was it an image that was was marketed to members of the professional class, which he adopted?

30 years previous, when he was 20, were the 50 years olds also doing the cardigan, slipper and golf thing? Because I don't think that was the case. I don't think he took on the role that was established for 50 years, but rather helped establish the culturally correct role for people of his social class.

I agree with the "different world". While many like to hype the speed of change in the modern world, I am of the minority view that the world has changed less, in the social sense, in the last 40 years than the previous 40 years. Earlier this year I was reading some letters written in the late 1940s, where the family was deciding to buy a fridge. The mid-20th century brought so many changes that Toffler's 'Future Shock' became an international bestseller.

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#64

Post by antiufo » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 6:47 PM UTC

ewr24 wrote: post #62

antiufo wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no such thing as "stereotypical male in all senses", everyone is gender-fluid. Most men were called a "pussy" or "not a real man" at some point. Pardon, in all or most senses. The point is that masculinity is often seen as an arms race. Most men feel outraged if/when they are called pussies (or compared/associated with something seen as feminine/"weak"). Other people have opted out of that arms race and, w…

There is sort of heroic stereotype of "real men" from the past. And today most men have some feminine traits, and do not fit well into that stereotype. Here is sort of example: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/rod-eccles/where-have-all-... The point is the fact they were called "pussy", not the outrage. There was some feminine trait for which they were called 'pussy". > Other people have opted out of that arms race…

> Majority of people have opted from traditional gender roles. Marriage is at all time low.

Machismo and sexism still play a significant role, especially in some cultures. But still you can't of course compare the discrimination/harassment received by trans people to those of unmarried, straight cis people.

> All trans are expected to overcompensate; wear similar makeup

This makes me wonder about the actual number of trans people you know IRL

> gender-fluid women (hairy feminist)

Straw man?

> Feminist interests are not always aligned with trans-gender interests (military service, prison rape..)

Are you talking about gender equality (eg. military service for all or none, feminism) vs gender-segregated rules/facilities (eg. no mandatory military service for trans, in addition to cis, women)?

The fact that prisons are divided by gender is because it's unfortunately well known that there exists a group of people that is statistically more prone to violence and harassment towards the other half of the population (I'm talking about men and women). Trans women are statistically much closer to this latter population, so it definitely makes sense not to include them with the first group.

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#65

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 7:32 PM UTC

antiufo wrote: post #64

ewr24 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is sort of heroic stereotype of "real men" from the past. And today most men have some feminine traits, and do not fit well into that stereotype. Here is sort of example: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/rod-eccles/where-have-all-... The point is the fact they were called "pussy", not the outrage. There was some feminine trait for which they were called 'pussy". > Other people have opted out of that arms race…

> Majority of people have opted from traditional gender roles. Marriage is at all time low. Machismo and sexism still play a significant role, especially in some cultures. But still you can't of course compare the discrimination/harassment received by trans people to those of unmarried, straight cis people. > All trans are expected to overcompensate; wear similar makeup This makes me wonder about the actual number of…

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#66

Post by anexprogrammer » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 8:18 PM UTC

dalke wrote: post #63

anexprogrammer wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not something you take on For parent's generation it seemed to be very much something they took on. Or there was an expectation to progress through phases of life/clothes/attitudes. As I've got older it's apparent just how much wider the gap was compared to us and the next generation. To look at my parents I see a different world, with the kids it's very much the same world we just disagree on some details. Tattoo?…

Perhaps we have different ideas of "take on." First off, what you describe fits neither my father nor my grandfathers. As far as I know, none ever played even a round of golf, much less pursued it. Golf has a reputation of being a rich (upper middle class or higher), white, suburban sport, for people with plenty of leisure time to get in a full 18 holes. The working class and lower middle class sport was bowling. Tha…

The golf was maybe of our location, there was a council course nearby. He took it up sometime in his 50s, and I guess 5 years after he left the council for the private sector. Maybe it was to progress at work or just for the friends.

We certainly weren't rich, going on the house and lifestyle, though with a car not poor either. That highlights another difference, he'd never talk about work much and money not at all. With our kids we were far more open about work, less so about money - they don't need to share mortgage worries.

Of the rest I think you're entirely right, especially as he grew up in the 30s. The post war world would soon be unrecognisable. From the 30s through to the typical home of 1970, the changes were dramatic and fundamental moving from poverty to consumer society with healthcare.

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#67

Post by dalke » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 8:54 PM UTC

dalke wrote: post #63

anexprogrammer wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not something you take on For parent's generation it seemed to be very much something they took on. Or there was an expectation to progress through phases of life/clothes/attitudes. As I've got older it's apparent just how much wider the gap was compared to us and the next generation. To look at my parents I see a different world, with the kids it's very much the same world we just disagree on some details. Tattoo?…

Perhaps we have different ideas of "take on." First off, what you describe fits neither my father nor my grandfathers. As far as I know, none ever played even a round of golf, much less pursued it. Golf has a reputation of being a rich (upper middle class or higher), white, suburban sport, for people with plenty of leisure time to get in a full 18 holes. The working class and lower middle class sport was bowling. Tha…

"was deciding to buy a fridge" should be "was deciding to buy their first fridge".

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#68

Post by purple-dragon » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:06 PM UTC

cauterized wrote: post #57

purple-dragon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is anecdotal. It has to be. There is no official, legal definition of diversity consideration in hiring. Nor is there any universal culture of applying it to hiring programmers. Edit: I certainly understand that this type of discrimination occurs... I just don't think that age is typically an active consideration for companies with mature/experienced management. We all know that "not a good culture fit"…

Neither are race or gender an active consideration for the vast majority of hiring managers. Just because it isn't among the criteria that they actively apply when filtering candidates doesn't mean the bias doesn't exist.

This issue isn't whether is exists or not (I think it does exist), but that it isn't likely to "qualify for diversity consideration" (whatever that means). Maybe there are scenarios where companies have comparable candidates and need a "tie-breaker", but that's not my experience. Adding someone new to the mix is a big decision for us (small) engineering teams. There's no room for us to award points for circumstances unrelated to job fit and performance.

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#69

Post by purple-dragon » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 9:07 PM UTC

source99 wrote: post #15

purple-dragon wrote: post #3

Serious question: are you trolling? I hire programmers for a startup. When I do, we do not care at all how old you are. We care about attitude, skills, and aptitude.

Swap out "at all how old you are" with "about your skin color".

Why? That's a dumb reason to hire someone too.

Re: Ask HN: I'm an old programmer, do I qualify for diversity consideration?

#70

Post by tominous » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 12:23 AM UTC

dalke wrote: post #59

tominous wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I appreciate your points: (a) that in many cases discrimination laws have resulted in a positive outcome for the person discriminated against, (b) that the modern workplace is better than in the past and (c) that people are trained on the relevant laws, which presumably influences behaviour in a positive way. I can't argue with point (a) because that's obviously true. But as with the Linux/SFC case I mentione…

> "Does the risk of a discrimination lawsuit cause managers to shy away from protected classes?" I do not understand. A company with a pattern of shying away from a protected class is in violation of the law, and risks a lawsuit. How does a manager know which is more likely to incur a lawsuit? > "or due to the general change in society that prompted the laws in the first place" The laws themselves could also have cha…

A manager wouldn't care if their company were sued for a pattern of discrimination based solely on the numbers, because it is extremely hard to prove a pattern, even harder to prove intent, and the burden and blame would fall on the company not the individual.

By contrast a specific anti-discrimination claim would be very personal, very damaging, and (according to your scenario) completely unexpected and uncontrollable.

It's well known that (rational or not) uncertainties of this kind are weighted very highly and such situations trigger avoidance.

As to evidence, I offered an example of the type of evidence that would persuade me and you were the one that claimed it was contentious. So please don't put that label on me.

Regarding social change through laws, I can offer cases where social change came before changes in laws (e.g. blasphemy, slavery, child labour, apartheid) and cases where laws have not produced the desired social change (e.g. prohibition, drugs). I think the burden should be on those who promote certain laws to show that they actually help overall. Every law has a cost, especially one that produces so much uncertainty.

As to being rational, my other original point was that in a market those who act more rationally succeed, grow, gain influence, and crowd out their competitors. This is the kind of bottom-up change that I believe is actually responsible for social change.