Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#41

Post by str33t_punk »

Fraztastic wrote: post #21
ng12 wrote: post #12

Here's a question: what if I don't want to hire people like that? If you know something about underwater basket weaving I absolutely expect you speak up when we're considering switching to twine from seagrass. I don't want you to keep quiet and let us make a bad decision because you're concerned your knowledge is invalid.

Then you're selecting for people who are overconfident blowhards, who don't really know as much as they think they do.

but what ng is saying is that if someone is lacks too much confidence they are not useful. His example shows this --- the under confidant but knowledgable person does not contribute their knowledge when needed so they are not useful despite their knowledge.

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#42

Post by rorosaurus »

wmccullough wrote: post #26
Fraztastic wrote: post #18

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but can you provide examples of how privileged men are? Specifically, can you provide examples of how the person you responded to is privileged without meeting them? Can you also please cite reputable sources? This is the other source of alienation. Enforcing guilt onto someone based on how they were born (e.g. Gender, race). The last time I checked, this is outright bigotry.…

If you associate privilege with guilt, I think that provides some valuable insight on your attitude regarding this topic.

I think you can recognize being privileged without feeling responsible (or guilty) for its existence.

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#43

Post by Fraztastic »

wmccullough wrote: post #26
Fraztastic wrote: post #18

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but can you provide examples of how privileged men are? Specifically, can you provide examples of how the person you responded to is privileged without meeting them? Can you also please cite reputable sources? This is the other source of alienation. Enforcing guilt onto someone based on how they were born (e.g. Gender, race). The last time I checked, this is outright bigotry.…

There's an overwhelming amount of evidence, you could put the slightest bit of effort into looking it up. Being privileged isn't something that takes effort or one is guilty of. Let's say I'm 6' 4"; it's intrinsically easier for me to reach things high up. That's a privilege. I'll spend 3 minutes on Google then I need to get back to work.

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2015.11...

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/upshot/the-measuring-stic...

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/upshot/the-measuring-stic...

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#44

Post by [deleted] »

Fraztastic wrote: post #28
decebalus1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm an oh-so-privileged white male I must have had a ridiculously easy life Been waiting for that privilege to kick in yet... however, after reading all those articles about women in tech and realizing that a) I tend to not negotiate and avoid conflict b) terrified (for my family's wellfare) of confronting my boss when I feel I'm being unjustly compensated\treated, c) shitting my pants when the next round of layoff…

Maybe put the slightest bit of effort into researching this. Look at yourself. You got the job, right? You don't want to admit this to yourself, but it was easier for you than a woman.

[deleted]

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#45

Post by Exofunctor »

Fraztastic wrote: post #18

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in who chooses to go into STEM fields in college, right?

Privige has nothing to do with it; for whatever reasons, women don't actually want to study tech fields. I actually find it pretty ridiculous and patronizing that people like you insist that there's something wrong with the world because women don't make the career choices you think they ought to.

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#46

Post by burkaman »

Exofunctor wrote: post #37
burkaman wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what privilege means, it's not an on-off switch. It's just about recognizing factors out of your control that might give you slight advantages over other people. When people talk about "white privilege" they don't mean your life must be great because you're white, they mean regardless of your situation, you have more opportunities because of your skin color, which increases the odds of having a better life…

This approach may work (I say "may" because most of the time it's not actually backed up by hard evidence free of confounding variables), but it's also lazy; there are vastly more accurate predictors of a priori success rate than race or gender. It's especially lazy for organizations that have access to those more accurate predictors, like universities, to use race and gender instead. More accurate predictors include…

You don't have to pick just one though, right? Gender clearly has an effect even if it's less predictive than other factors, so why not try to account for every factor you know of?

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#47

Post by decebalus1 »

Fraztastic wrote: post #28
decebalus1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm an oh-so-privileged white male I must have had a ridiculously easy life Been waiting for that privilege to kick in yet... however, after reading all those articles about women in tech and realizing that a) I tend to not negotiate and avoid conflict b) terrified (for my family's wellfare) of confronting my boss when I feel I'm being unjustly compensated\treated, c) shitting my pants when the next round of layoff…

Maybe put the slightest bit of effort into researching this. Look at yourself. You got the job, right? You don't want to admit this to yourself, but it was easier for you than a woman.

wow.

Been working like an ass my whole life. If I only knew how easy it actually would have been.. :(

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#48

Post by chipgap98 »

taway_1212 wrote: post #39
Fraztastic wrote: post #18

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?

Aren't many tech companies eager to improve the gender ratio, and thus lowering the bar for women hires?

Is there any evidence to back up that claim?

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#49

Post by Fraztastic »

the_gastropod wrote: post #36
Fraztastic wrote: post #18

You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?

There absolutely is. What are you suggesting? The "privilege" slinging used to belittle the accomplishments of people based on birth attributes _is_ rather obnoxious. To pretend that, for example, women are universally less privileged than men is of course ridiculous. Paris Hilton is clearly more privileged than a low-income boy growing up in Flint, Michigan.

Obviously true. Women as a group are shorter than men as group, but some women are taller than some men. That seems so trivially obvious as to not bear mentioning.

But, there's a substantial amount of evidence that if you pair up a woman and man in the same situation, the man in contemporary society has a lot of intrinsic advantages. He has easier access to relevant education and social networks. His applications, work, and words are judged more highly simply for having a male name on them.

Re: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

#50

Post by Exofunctor »

Fraztastic wrote: post #21
ng12 wrote: post #12

Here's a question: what if I don't want to hire people like that? If you know something about underwater basket weaving I absolutely expect you speak up when we're considering switching to twine from seagrass. I don't want you to keep quiet and let us make a bad decision because you're concerned your knowledge is invalid.

Then you're selecting for people who are overconfident blowhards, who don't really know as much as they think they do.

Being more confident than average is not the same thing as being overconfident.
Post reply on HN