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

I only got that job because I’m a girl

technologywoman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 90 posts

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#11

Post by alid »

btilly wrote: post #8
alid wrote: post #6

This is such an important issue, and it affects bottom line! - a recent Forbes article highlighted that companies with more women at senior levels earn upwards of 33% more on important financial metrics. Global research group Catalyst recently interviewed 325 American chief executives and 10,000 female executives around the obstacles to womens' progression into senior leadership roles. 52% of women cited male stereot…

I did not see that article, but would be interested to. Do you have a link? The only research that I am aware of along those lines was specific to South Korea.

Hey man, here's the link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswomanfiles/2012/01/26/the-...

"Companies with more women at senior levels earn upwards of 33% more on important financial metrics. Failure to resolve the obstacles that keep women from these roles means executives are leaving money on the table."

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#12

Post by glaak »

btilly wrote: post #7

It is easy to rail against employers for showing the complained about bias against minorities and women. And doing so is clearly against the law. However playing Devil's advocate it is justifiable by the fact that hiring decisions are naturally risk adverse. The difference between a perfect hire and a merely good one is typically not that big. The difference between a hire that works out and one that does not is huge…

Have you ever seen a white person not be good at their job? Yet you don't associate their failures with their race. Why do so with black people?

Also, read the studies. Black people and women actually have a harder time getting a job. So by your logic, of people getting jobs that they may not be the most qualified for, you'd be better off hiring women or black people. They have to be more qualified into to be seen as equals.

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#13

Post by alid »

btilly wrote: post #7

It is easy to rail against employers for showing the complained about bias against minorities and women. And doing so is clearly against the law. However playing Devil's advocate it is justifiable by the fact that hiring decisions are naturally risk adverse. The difference between a perfect hire and a merely good one is typically not that big. The difference between a hire that works out and one that does not is huge…

Sorry man, I appreciate your point but the general tone of your argument comes across like you think women are more of a 'risky' hire?

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#14

Post by waterlesscloud »

alid wrote: post #11
btilly wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not see that article, but would be interested to. Do you have a link? The only research that I am aware of along those lines was specific to South Korea.

Hey man, here's the link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswomanfiles/2012/01/26/the-... "Companies with more women at senior levels earn upwards of 33% more on important financial metrics. Failure to resolve the obstacles that keep women from these roles means executives are leaving money on the table."

I would be very curious to see actual data (not hand-wavy conjecture) as to why that would happen.

Most of what I've seen in that area is merely stereotyping of a different sort (women work by consensus etc).

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#15

Post by waterlesscloud »

glaak wrote: post #10
Zimahl wrote: post #5

To level the argument, let's just say that everyone has the same skill for a position. You can probably assume that there are a lot of equally qualified 'A' players who have applied at Google, Valve, Facebook, etc. So what sets all of them apart? Off the top of my head, I can only think of two things: personality and looks. While I can't comment on the personality of the author, from the picture in the article it see…

Interesting, but I disagree. (1) You can't assume that there are a lot of equally qualified A players for those companies. In fact, those companies struggle to hire enough qualified engineers. (2) You're assuming that those companies, if they were presented with multiple qualified people, can only hire one of them. In many cases, they would just hire all of them. (3) You're assuming that, if a company has to decide b…

The implications of your point 4 are precisely the same as the implications of the GP post.

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#16

Post by breadbox »

Zimahl wrote: post #5

To level the argument, let's just say that everyone has the same skill for a position. You can probably assume that there are a lot of equally qualified 'A' players who have applied at Google, Valve, Facebook, etc. So what sets all of them apart? Off the top of my head, I can only think of two things: personality and looks. While I can't comment on the personality of the author, from the picture in the article it see…

In my experience (and studies seem to bear this out), most people will automatically assume an attractive woman has poor skills in X (where X is anything that doesn't involve dealing with customers). So I don't think your "commonsense" argument actually holds in the real world.

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#17

Post by btilly »

glaak wrote: post #12
btilly wrote: post #7

It is easy to rail against employers for showing the complained about bias against minorities and women. And doing so is clearly against the law. However playing Devil's advocate it is justifiable by the fact that hiring decisions are naturally risk adverse. The difference between a perfect hire and a merely good one is typically not that big. The difference between a hire that works out and one that does not is huge…

Have you ever seen a white person not be good at their job? Yet you don't associate their failures with their race. Why do so with black people? Also, read the studies. Black people and women actually have a harder time getting a job. So by your logic, of people getting jobs that they may not be the most qualified for, you'd be better off hiring women or black people. They have to be more qualified into to be seen as…

Have you ever seen a white person not be good at their job? Yet you don't associate their failures with their race. Why do so with black people?

The specific situation that is burned in my mind was a black girl who was in a math PhD program at the same time that I was. The department wound up bending their rules to the breaking point to give her a Masters on her way out because nobody wanted to risk the discrimination lawsuit that she was threatening. Her actual math knowledge was not even to the level that I would expect from a BSc in math.

I have never witnessed anything involving a white person that was anywhere near being similarly egregious. And I had experiences with that department which demonstrated in spades that white people were not given anywhere near as much leniency.

As for your final point, I thought I pretty much said that. I've not seen the specific studies that you're referring to.

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#18

Post by btilly »

alid wrote: post #11
btilly wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not see that article, but would be interested to. Do you have a link? The only research that I am aware of along those lines was specific to South Korea.

Hey man, here's the link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswomanfiles/2012/01/26/the-... "Companies with more women at senior levels earn upwards of 33% more on important financial metrics. Failure to resolve the obstacles that keep women from these roles means executives are leaving money on the table."

They unfortunately do not source that stat.

The South Korean study that I'm aware of is described at http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6498.html and found that a 10% increase in women managers was associated with a 1% return on assets. There is every reason to believe that this effect is stronger in South Korea than in the USA, and there is no way to get near the quoted 33% more with that measured effect.

Re: I only got that job because I’m a girl

#19

Post by DenisM »

btilly wrote: post #7

It is easy to rail against employers for showing the complained about bias against minorities and women. And doing so is clearly against the law. However playing Devil's advocate it is justifiable by the fact that hiring decisions are naturally risk adverse. The difference between a perfect hire and a merely good one is typically not that big. The difference between a hire that works out and one that does not is huge…

>Can you really blame an employer for leaning towards being risk adverse in this situation?

Yes. It's called "the right thing to do", not "the easy and convenient thing to do", and for a reason.

Discriminating by race is convenient, but it puts a number of people in a dead end through no fault of their own. Had everyone done the convenient thing to do, those people would be locked out forever. For employers it's a matter convenience, for recruits it's a matter of having or not having a life. The impact is disproportionate.

Post reply on HN