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

Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

journals.plos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 666 posts

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#511

Post by oaiey »

oppositelock wrote: post #130
nabaraz wrote: post #67

During my career, I've seen enough discrimination in the name of DEI as well. But what bothers me more is the ageism. The number of times an old person has been rejected from a job is too damn high. The reasons have always been "he may not work well with young people", "seniority complex", "he is over qualified" etc. Most of the times, they were more than qualified. I fear when I am into 40s or 50s, I will face the s…

I'm almost 50. I've been working in tech since 1996, and at this point, despite being a strong and seasoned engineer, I'm getting comments like, "it's different now", or "back in your day", etc, and the very young engineers fresh from school are the ones throwing this around. Those with a few years of experience under their belt don't. It's really disheartening, but it's also my job to train these bozos and turn them…

Oh and do not give up on them. Junior engineers are like teenagers. You need to raise them even if they are their worst.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#512

Post by bradlys »

Manuel_D wrote: post #466
colinmhayes wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree that society is implanting ideas in girls that they're not capable of succeeding in tech. Then why do you think girls are self selecting away from computer science? Unless you believe they are somehow biologically wired to enjoy tech less it has to be because they're receiving messaging that causes them to believe they will enjoy it less than other fields relative to boys, right? I guess from your link y…

Is it really hard to believe that, even without external bias or force, women might on average enjoy some things more or less than men? Your question is rooted in a gender-essentialist assumption that anything other than 50/50 representation has to be the result of some type of bias or external influence, and this is an assumption I do not share.

When you take this to the extreme, it's like, "men should enjoy another man's penis as much as women do if it wasn't for those damn external societal pressures." It's like... there can't ever be biological differences or biological reasons for any kind of preference at all?

It doesn't add up. If you acknowledge men and women are different then you have to acknowledge there are biological reasons for why some people might prefer some other things than others. If you don't acknowledge any differences then you must not believe sexual orientation is real - in which case, you're fucking crazy.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#513

Post by exolymph »

colinmhayes wrote: post #447
Manuel_D wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the whole, the weaker the gender roles in society the lower women's representation are in STEM [1]. I'm nearly 30 and there was ample messaging to try and get girls into technology when I was in elementary school decades ago. I disagree that society is implanting ideas in girls that they're not capable of succeeding in tech. This is a disparity that persists despite ample efforts to try and encourage girls to go i…

> I disagree that society is implanting ideas in girls that they're not capable of succeeding in tech. Then why do you think girls are self selecting away from computer science? Unless you believe they are somehow biologically wired to enjoy tech less it has to be because they're receiving messaging that causes them to believe they will enjoy it less than other fields relative to boys, right? I guess from your link y…

> Unless you believe they are somehow biologically wired to enjoy tech less

Duh? Women and men are not the same (on average, in aggregate, #NotAllWomen etc. etc.) I find this blindingly obvious and I am a woman.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#514

Post by johnnyanmac »

mkl95 wrote: post #491
johnnyanmac wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why do you assume burnout by default?

I'm not assuming, I'm just saying a vast majority of 40+ devs in my area fall into those groups. It's a different story at tech hubs where there's actual career growth.

I see. This conversation tends to be focused around tech hubs, so I figured you were talking about tech hubs by default. Which goes starkly in contrast to my exprience with senior developers.

At least in tech hubs, it seems like by the 30's they'd burn out. Those still kicking in their 40's seem to still enjoy their work, IC and mangement alike.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#515

Post by voakbasda »

lkxijlewlf wrote: post #173
mikepurvis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of ageism-adjacent, but I wonder if some of it is a bias that expects that past 40 you shouldn't really be needing to apply to jobs by resume drops any more. So like, seeing that type of application is in an indication that the person's first twenty years of career haven't yielded the kinds of achievements and contact network that have bumped them out of the hustle and into the world where they no longer be…

> It's kind of ageism-adjacent, but I wonder if some of it is a bias that expects that past 40 you shouldn't really be needing to apply to jobs by resume drops any more. I really wish people would stop this. I don't really keep in touch with many coworkers due to time. My friends tend to come from outside of work and they're not software devs. It definitely is age-ism adjacent; having to "network" to get a job is muc…

This is just plain ageism; there is nothing “adjacent” about it. It makes a generally untenable correlation between your age with some other trait that has no bearing on your ability to do the job, then bases decisions using that correlation. The result is discrimination based on your age, plain and simple.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#516

Post by QuarterReptile »

PeterStuer wrote: post #128
QuarterReptile wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed a part. From GP: >The recruiting team was all women I guess this is what you get when you outsource hiring.

In house HR is predominately female nowadays as well.

Fair point. I guess the ideal for getting actual "culture fit" would be for the good applications to somehow reach the team needing the new hire without being filtered for "culture" by a completely unrelated team elsewhere in the company. Come to think of it, I believe that's what an in-house referral is...

Hopefully someone becomes rich for solving that problem without needing a friend of a friend to get your foot in the door.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#517

Post by Manuel_D »

dheera wrote: post #350
johnnyanmac wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're in the time range to edit your comment, there is time to actually delete your comment instead of making a passive agressive edit. I feel that simply invites more in-fighting, with less context.

I didn't have a delete button, only an edit button. Also I wasn't trying to be passive aggressive, I think it's worth leaving a trail of instances of when "agree with the masses or shut up" happen on HN.

By deleting your comment you're depriving people of the chance to evaluate whether the downvotes really are an echo chamber or a reasonable reaction to reprehensible statements. If you're confident that what you wrote was reasonable, and HN's reaction unreasonable, it'd be a lot better to leave the comment up.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#518

Post by ipaddr »

treeman79 wrote: post #420
JCM9 wrote: post #184

There are very concerning patterns developing at the moment in the DEI space. DEI efforts, and often those leading them, are increasingly the most biased and close minded parts of the organization. Spreading selected stereotypes and often solving concerns about “discrimination” by being very biased and inequitable. For example at my last company a report showed that slightly fewer of a certain minority were promoted.…

Got hired at a place that apparently only hired anything except white men. Unless they were non cis. Apparently an exception was made in my case because they were absolutely desperate for someone qualified to do the work. Company meetings were mostly just complaining about straight white males. Figuring out ways to force the males to do extra work to make up for… I don’t even know. Mocking their own customers constan…

Name and shame.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#519

Post by daenz »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #500
daenz wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After conducting an interview, before I had a chance to write my review (which was customary, while it was fresh), I was sat down by someone more senior than me who said, explicitly "we are hiring this person." There was a "wink wink" dynamic to it. This person was pretty inexperienced, but a woman. This never happened with any of the male candidates. We hired her. Unrelated, it turned out to be a horrible fit for he…

Getting a job and then immediately loosing it is obviously a bad fit for everyone , running the whole hiring process in the first place that close to folding seems pretty dishonest.

I remember there was a conversation about this from some of the managers. It was basically, "we don't know if things will go south, so we need to operate as normal." It did definitely feel wrong.

Re: Hiring discrimination: a problem for men in female-dominated occupations

#520

Post by vineyardmike »

qwerpy wrote: post #434
t0mas88 wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not American, so I'm not as deep into the exact political party differences, but why do you think that's the solution?

I have a similar opinion as the person you replied to. There are many issues that I care about, but this is probably the most important to me because it will affect the educational and career prospects of my children. Unfortunately in this country the only meaningful votes are "blue" or "red", and "blue" is the side that is pushing DEI to the detriment both of my family and (in my opinion) the competitiveness and eff…

> "blue" is the side that is pushing DEI to the detriment both of my family

> I will vote for [red] until "blue" stops with DEI.

And this is why equality in America is still an issue.

Post reply on HN