Google cancelled a talk on caste bias • Hacker News Board

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#901

Post by ummonk » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 11:37 PM UTC

unixhero wrote: post #521

harperlee wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean 50% of the india-based team was female, rather than all of the 50% of the team that were based in india, that shouldn’t be surprising?

I realize my sentence was unclear. My onshore team were all males, all offshore (all India, Bang8, Bang7) QA team members were female.

It's an open secret that multinational companies preferentially hire women in India to pad their global engineering diversity statistics without having to conduct affirmative action in America where it would generate negative press.

An all-female offshore team is pretty extreme though.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#902

Post by ummonk » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 11:43 PM UTC

mr_toad wrote: post #627

guru4consulting wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cultural oppression - that might have been a valid reason many decades ago but not these days. Most of the men on H1B visa get married and their spouses arrive on dependent H4 visa. They cannot work with H4 visa (they can work with EAD these days though). Usually, there are a few years gap by the time they get back to workforce.. and what is the easiest field to enter without any programming skill? QA testing !! Ther…

> cultural oppression - that might have been a valid reason many decades ago but not these days. Most of the men on H1B visa get married and their spouses arrive on dependent H4 visa. So why aren’t the women arriving on H1B visas and their spouses on dependent H4s?

Very few H1B women are willing to marry someone from back home and bring him over as a dependent, so you don't see many male H4s.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#903

Post by throwjune22 » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 11:57 PM UTC

There’s another dimension to this that people outside Google don’t understand.

There’s a lot of disengaged Googlers specially in the traditional AdTech part of the business.

Career progression is very slow and the performance review process which has been in place for god knows how long was so damaging to individuals, on top of consuming an amazing amount of time 2x a year as people desperately tried to piece together “packages” proving they’re better than mediocre, that it’s been completely replaced with a new system.

My point being, there’s lots of people bored, feeling like they can’t “win” and with a high degree of uncertainty as to what metrics will have an impact on their career prospects or the company.

combine that with a culture of speaking your mind and potentially a feeling of superiority for being special enough to work a Google… you get some very disparaged but entitled people who I think consciously or not, are trying to denigrate the company.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#904

Post by throwjune22 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:01 AM UTC

throwjune22 wrote: post #903

There’s another dimension to this that people outside Google don’t understand. There’s a lot of disengaged Googlers specially in the traditional AdTech part of the business. Career progression is very slow and the performance review process which has been in place for god knows how long was so damaging to individuals, on top of consuming an amazing amount of time 2x a year as people desperately tried to piece togethe…

I believe these issues are all important and should be dealt with.

I *don’t believe* it should be discussed out in the open within a “for profit business”. Leadership should acknowledge the issue, state their direction clearly and end the conversation.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#905

Post by throwjune22 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:06 AM UTC

throwjune22 wrote: post #904

throwjune22 wrote: post #903

There’s another dimension to this that people outside Google don’t understand. There’s a lot of disengaged Googlers specially in the traditional AdTech part of the business. Career progression is very slow and the performance review process which has been in place for god knows how long was so damaging to individuals, on top of consuming an amazing amount of time 2x a year as people desperately tried to piece togethe…

I believe these issues are all important and should be dealt with. I *don’t believe* it should be discussed out in the open within a “for profit business”. Leadership should acknowledge the issue, state their direction clearly and end the conversation.

Also I’m from a South American background and unfortunately was very ignorant of the Indian culture and have never met an Indian person until I immigrated.

I have Indian colleagues and a one of them became a good friend. I asked him once or twice about castes and how it worked etc. He said it’s all bullshit and it didn’t matter and I felt like it was a topic he was felt awkward discussing so I made a mental note not to ask him about it.

I Googled around and found his surname was from basically the 2nd highest caste. A few years later a young Indian woman joined our company and I was very impressed by her.

She was confident, eloquent and seemed eager to make an impact. I told my friend something like: “man the newbie is here to kick ass isn’t she?! Loved how she spoke at that meeting”

To which he made the only comment on castes I’ve ever seen him make, something along the lines of: “She’s a brahmin bro, she thinks we all work for her”.

That’s when I knew it wasn’t “all bullshit”.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#906

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:10 AM UTC

knorker wrote: post #815

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is - and that is likely what OP was referring to - that if everything is racism then nothing is racism. And if being on time is racist, I guess everything already is racist. It is an odd frame of mind. >>> For your 99.999%, I would say that WAY more than one in a hundred thousand would overtly say that their group (race, religion, skin color, gender) is "better" than another. Especially as you lea…

No, I'm not conflating. Especially when referring to those (like I mentioned) who don't place themselves at the top. That's the opposite of xenophobia, if anything. I'm saying one in a hundred thousand is too few. The US has more than 3000 people who judge even by phrenology, I'm sure.

I don't want to be glib here, but it is very much applicable.

Why is that relevant to the discussion?

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#907

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:13 AM UTC

HelloMcFly wrote: post #889

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Everything is politics. You just happen to be too close and emotionally invested to see it as such. It is fine to hold strong opinions and consider some items 'obvious' or even 'inalienable', but pretending those are all not just a temporary set of values we agreed on as a society is silly. edit: Even saying 'I am apolitical' is a political statement.

Everything may have a political lens with which it can be viewed, but that doesn't make literally everything "political" in the typical usage of the word. Are all workplace conflicts political? Is all unethical workplace behavior political? Is failure to follow IT security guidelines in the workplace political? It's possible to confidently answer "yes" to all of these questions with the right logical contortions, but…

We are actually in agreement. What we don't seem to agree on is that easiest way for a corporations to avoid this particular pitfall is by not being anywhere near it. Especially in 2022.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#908

Post by eyelidlessness » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

namecheapTA wrote: post #882

eyelidlessness wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're trying to take away my guns while leaving it for people that can afford security. I mean this with a surprised but real sincerity. I’m a former gun rights advocate and this notion was a big reason why I was. Don’t get me wrong, I do want to selectively restrict gun access. I want to preserve it for hunters, and potentially for severe cases where individuals are acutely threatened. I don’t otherwise want priv…

Anecdotes about bad things that happen to some people aren't going to phase me and change my mind out about large scale systematic damage the left wants to do. Regardless though, my point is that there are 'sides' and 'groups' and thinking poorly about the other side isn't going to go away when someone running for president of the United States calls people basically evil. People on the right think that people on the…

> aren't going to phase me and change my mind

Already addressed that, try to keep up.

> Regardless though, my point is that there are 'sides' and 'groups' and thinking poorly about the other side isn't going to go away when someone running for president of the United States calls people basically evil.

There are sides. I don’t care for the good/evil distinction, but there is a clear conflict of values and it’s not going away with the actual president who doesn’t seem to muster any effort for the values he claims to represent.

> People on the right think that people on the left are naiive and foolish. People on the left think people on the right are evil. So if anything, the left is doing what this entire thread is about.

Looks like we’re discussing thoughtcrimes not facts. One participating party doing violence and the other perceiving them as resorting to violence isn’t equivalent harm done.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#909

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:44 AM UTC

rmk wrote: post #899

ThinkingAgain wrote: post #884

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was also initially surprised when I heard about caste based discrimination in USA. There are few points which helped me in understanding: 1) Personally a person may not have seen or heard of sexual harassment incidents. It doesn't mean "sexual harassment" doesn't exist. 2) Even if a lower caste person is not being discriminated, but if the person is feeling "uncomfortable" about revealing his/her caste it means tha…

Allowing rabble-rousers to deliver 'talks' about caste discrimination is not going to change the hearts and minds of people who set store by caste affiliations. There will always be people who will be cagey about revealing aspects about themselves, including gay, queer, furries, upper-caste, lower-caste, nudists... the list goes on. People seem to take the aphorism 'bring your real self to work' a bit too literally.…

There’s so much wrong with this comment.

You pejoratively dismiss those who seek to bring attention to discrimination they experience as “rabble-rousers”. You then proceed to acknowledge that this is discrimination is very real (“we can’t change their hearts and minds!”).

You then mention caste with nudism in the same sentence as nudism, like that’s appropriate.

You then blame the victims of the aforementioned discrimination for ‘bringing their real selves to work,’ as if it’s somehow their fault they are being discriminated against.

I’ve heard horror stories from Indian friends in tech. When they start at a new company, upper-caste Indian managers and coworkers will persistently ask them seemingly innocuous questions like where they are from, where they went to school, what Neighbourhood of which city did you grow up in, are you vegetarian, are you vegetarian by choice or birth, what do your parents do, etc. There was an even an episode of planet money where a person who had been discriminated against describes a coworker patting them on the back in the area where Brahmins sometimes where a white thread.

Being born into a caste isn’t some “personality quirk,” and it’s exceedingly offensive to imply it is. Dalit peoples who face discrimination don’t have a choice in the matter, some will always see them as “untouchables” regardless of whether or not they disclose their caste openly.

I seriously suggest you reevaluate your thinking.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#910

Post by civilized » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 12:50 AM UTC

throwaway_1928 wrote: post #894

civilized wrote: post #877

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advocating for the condemnation of casteism is only anti-India if you think casteism is an essential property of India that cannot and should not be changed. Do you think casteism is an essential property of India that should not be changed, throwaway_1928?

India itself condemns casteism by, among other things, granting 60% job reservations ("affirmative action") to its 'lower' castes. Does the US condemn the mass murder of and continent-sized land theft from Native Americans and the mass kidnapping and centuries-long enslavement of Africans by granting them 60% of all jobs at every level of government?

This has nothing to do with the original topic. Why can't a Brahmin in the US condemn casteism? Why did you say it's anti-India to ask for that? And why do you pivot away to a different topic when asked these questions?

As you say, India has acted more resolutely against casteism than the US has against racism in some ways. So it should be incredibly easy for someone coming from that background to condemn casteism. If they didn't, it would be anti-India.

Americans do not fight racism as hard as they should, but almost all of them find it extremely easy to condemn racism. Not sure why it should be different for a US Brahmin and casteism.