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

I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 391 posts

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#291

Post by gohrt »

larrys wrote: post #49
bitops wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's even sadder is that there's no obvious or easy way to fix it. There is no easy way to fix it, but there is a way to fix it. I won't go so far as to say that it's obvious to many people. The way to do it? Work to change men's attitudes and biases towards women. It can definitely be done, but it takes hard work and cultural change. I would recommend the book "The Macho Paradox" by Jackson Katz for anyone inter…

"The way to do it? Work to change men's attitudes and biases towards women. It can definitely be done" Are you suggesting that as a hobby, a career, or? Who has the time or inclination to do that? "It can definitely be done" As a practical matter I would personally worry more about other things than spending time reversing established thought process and bias. Now of course if someone wants to start a movement or a n…

You know that your post itself is a bit of work to change people's attitudes, right?

People spend a lot of time communicating. Mutual teaching (gossip, storytelling, etc) is the core of human society.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#292

Post by jack-r-abbit »

newnewnew wrote: post #247
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be a woman to be offended by profanity. So it is hard to say (based on your few sentences) that this had anything to do with man vs woman. Perhaps the two people sitting behind the person were just offended by the language in a general "I don't think we should be cursing at work" sort of way. Not everything has something to do with the gender of the people involved. Wait... that can't be true... can…

If a man that is not a member of a protected minority complains about profanity, the powers that be tell him to suck it up. If a protected minority complains, the user of profanity may be fired (see: Adria Richards)

Sad but true. That is a cross we'll have to bear until everyone else gets rid of their crosses first. :(

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#293

Post by pi18n »

rayiner wrote: post #238
badclient wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It saddens me to know there are people who think the presence of women infringes on their right to make sexist remarks. And that making sexist remarks is such a vital part of their everyday life that hiring women is the unacceptable route. It is a problem when "sexist remark" has a much more vague definition in court than in everyday life.

Is this based on actual court proceedings you've encountered, or the "OMG saying 'hi' will be treated as a sexual advance!" boogyman?

Well, here's a false dichotomy.

I don't know why hiring decisions would be based on gender at all, though, so I don't know why badclient seems to argue for it here. Both men and women can be frivolously litigative.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#294

Post by whiterabbit2 »

anologwintermut wrote: post #254
etler wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a study of response rates on resume's that are nearly the same, except for the gender, and race implied by the name. I feel like that would provide a pretty good measure to figure out how discriminatory our jobs system is.

They've done them, the results strongly imply discrimination. There's been some criticism of the methodology though. I believe there was a chapter in Freakonomics criticizing the "black name" resume studies (though I cannot remember the criticism). With some of the gender ones the claim is that the career trajectories were gender atypical when the names were switched and hence looked odd. I.e. that if you took a resu…

Women "more likely" to drop out to provide childcare doesn't make it "100% women". But without fixing problems of families with small children (lack of affordable childcare, culture of long hours and such), anti-discrimination laws only create more discrimination and stereotyping... All women would be stereotyped as risky. I've known quite a few men providing childcare and needing flex hours, while their wives are too busy at work. Yet, such men are stereotyped as an exception. Because asking questions and deciding on a case by case basis is illegal, so it's a breeding ground for stereotyping.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#295

Post by GhotiFish »

babby wrote: post #286
zanny wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you might just be a male fan of MLP. It happens a lot nowadays! I think it is a good thing it is harder to discriminate people on names, colors, etc. They are all superficial and have nothing to do with sexuality anyway. I think in the end just too many people care what chemical is more prominent in your body between testosterone and estrogen.

>MLP >on my hacker news I feel a little sick.

ho ho, next someone will accuse you of using meme arrows.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#296

Post by leohutson »

bitops wrote: post #13
crazygringo wrote: post #3

That's really, really sad. And the worst part is, it's surely conscious on nobody's part. There have even been studies showing this effect. What's even sadder is that there's no obvious or easy way to fix it.

> What's even sadder is that there's no obvious or easy way to fix it. There is no easy way to fix it, but there is a way to fix it. I won't go so far as to say that it's obvious to many people. The way to do it? Work to change men's attitudes and biases towards women. It can definitely be done, but it takes hard work and cultural change. I would recommend the book "The Macho Paradox" by Jackson Katz for anyone inter…

A more immediate fix for HR departments might involve a two step process for selecting candidates.

The first step is to get the candidates CV and work history, and then re-enter that information into a generic form. Only crucial information should be entered in this step, leave out the candidates gender, marital status, age, the name of their school(s), the names of previous employers, etc. The second step is to pass this "sanitized" information on to someone else to make the actual decision as to whether or not the candidate should be interviewed.

The two step process is repeated in the interview process. Only objective information is taken down by the interviewer, and again this is passed on to someone else, who can make a value judgement about the candidate without their judgement being colored by the candidates gender, race, looks, height, perfume or whatever else is considered to be extraneous information.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#297

Post by anologwintermut »

anologwintermut wrote: post #254
etler wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a study of response rates on resume's that are nearly the same, except for the gender, and race implied by the name. I feel like that would provide a pretty good measure to figure out how discriminatory our jobs system is.

They've done them, the results strongly imply discrimination. There's been some criticism of the methodology though. I believe there was a chapter in Freakonomics criticizing the "black name" resume studies (though I cannot remember the criticism). With some of the gender ones the claim is that the career trajectories were gender atypical when the names were switched and hence looked odd. I.e. that if you took a resu…

Note, the part about criticism was incorrect. The criticism was that if you handed someone a gender inverted resume, it would score lower period. So of course, if you took a "male" looking resume and gave it to someone with a female name on it, they'd find it odd just as they would if they got a female looking resume with a male name on it. The claim was the study failed to account for this.

The study in question: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full.pdf

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#298

Post by guard-of-terra »

orff wrote: post #176
drpgq wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved to Germany to work from Canada after finishing grad school and was amazed to find applicants put pictures on resumes there. Ironically later we made an attractiveness estimator and I suggested we use it to screen somebody applying for a secretary position (I was only joking and actually more pointing out the ridiculousness of having photos on resumes).

... and not only pictures. it is standard to include your birthday and nationality in your CV in Germany. And sometimes, the early career applicants adds the employers of their PARENTS in their CVs !!!

Maybe it's actually because people are less afraid of discrimination there? So they don't have to play it safe.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#299

Post by jack-r-abbit »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #251
falcolas wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women are picking the best man for the job as well. "The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student." http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109#aff-...

Yup. I don't dispute that. Quotas would work against that too. Quotas really are quite a multifaceted fix. - Directly and immediately drive up numbers. - Create a demand for women that pulls the supply. - Create a supply of women leaders with experience and skills. - And create somewhere for them to go, so they don't get discouraged and quit. - Change people's mental image of working with/for women from abstract and…

You forgot one:

- Cause some coworkers to resent a person for being hired just to fill a quota rather than on merit.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#300

Post by LockeWatts »

ajdecon wrote: post #237
LockeWatts wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those seem like caricatures of what an HR person would say, rather than what was actually said. I work at a company notorious for poor work\life balance, and nobody has ever said to me 'we can work harder' in any context. They say things like 'We value people who are commited to growing the company. If a candidate shows us he's willing to go the extra mile to finish the project he's working on, that's a definite posi…

Ironically, the "we can work you harder" one was the one that I actually saw the email for. :) The others, I admit, may have been paraphrased.

Fair enough. Some company you've been at had a bad HR and recruiting department...
Post reply on HN