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

What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

meghanboilard.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 416 posts

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#321

Post by ravenstine »

fabian2k wrote: post #62
ravenstine wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really makes me wonder what the common experience is for others not just in tech but Corporate America in general. I myself have run into anti-white and anti-male phenomena, unconscious bias pseudoscience training, diversity pledges, and so on, as have now others in my peer group. Dilbert's commentary has so far been entirely appropriate based on my experience, hence it's puzzling to me when people think there's s…

Plain old racism/xenophobia and sexism was very common and still is to some extent, though it is not as socially acceptable as it used to be. So I find it odd to only consider anti-white bias you encountered while ignoring any discrimination in the other direction. I strongly doubt it does not exist. There is certainly stuff under the diversity banner, especially when done primarily with PR/image concerns that reason…

To highlight an inconsistency in a system isn't ignoring the system's other problems. If anything, it compliments a broader perspective rather than a narrow one. I don't think a lot of people here are suggesting that there aren't other forms of racism and sexism taking place.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#322

Post by clutchdude »

tenpies wrote: post #281
clutchdude wrote: post #34

I find it humorous that the usual tone deaf HR stuff suddenly becomes a lightning rod of "wokeness" for certain folks because it personally offends them. But with Scott Adams, you can see that this sort of stuff always irked him - look back at Dilbert poking fun at sensitivity training in the 90's - he did have the progressive take of making Asok and Alice as the equally, if not more, competent than their peers(ed: t…

Is it now well known that Dilbert exists solely because Scott Adams was told - as a young executive - that he would not be promoted further because he is a white male? [1] --- [1] https://twitter.com/scottadamssays/status/127766727657395404...

It doesn't seem well known - I can't find any many claims prior to the Summer of 2020.

I found one quote in passing from 2005 - note this in regards his working time frame from 1979 to 1995.

  You got an MBA at night a few years later. This should have put you right on track for a boss-type position at the bank. What happened?

  Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because there was too much attention on the fact that there was no diversity in senior management. She told me I didn’t have a future with the bank. And so I put my resumé out and went to Pacific Bell. A couple of years later, [Pacific Bell] told me exactly the same thing. And that’s when I started looking at cartooning as an option.
and

  You were placed on a series of doomed projects at Pacific Bell as punishment for mocking a boss’ memo in your cartoons. Did that actually work to your advantage by providing better grist for your cartoon mill?

  Well, it certainly made me angry, which is good. There’s a correlation between anger and humour. The angrier you are, the funnier you can be. You can drive things to the next level. But as far as material goes, I didn’t need any special bad projects to give me material – there was plenty.
I urge you to read the full interview - I suspect his lack of promotion may be more related to him as an individual than his race or gender.

https://www.itworldcanada.com/article/escape-from-platos-cub...

Given he is the only source for this claim, I dunno what you want or expect me to say.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#323

Post by dragonwriter »

robd003 wrote: post #320

What's wrong with mocking HR? It's so easy to have a meritocracy rather than measuring the immutable characteristics of your employees... I can't fathom how HR can justify selective racism without lawsuits galore.

> It's so easy to have a meritocracy

Evidence for this claim would be useful.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#324

Post by leereeves »

clutchdude wrote: post #322
tenpies wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it now well known that Dilbert exists solely because Scott Adams was told - as a young executive - that he would not be promoted further because he is a white male? [1] --- [1] https://twitter.com/scottadamssays/status/127766727657395404...

It doesn't seem well known - I can't find any many claims prior to the Summer of 2020. I found one quote in passing from 2005 - note this in regards his working time frame from 1979 to 1995. You got an MBA at night a few years later. This should have put you right on track for a boss-type position at the bank. What happened? Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because ther…

> Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because there was too much attention on the fact that there was no diversity in senior management.

Good find. He was telling the same story 15 years ago.

Absent some other evidence, it seems the main reason to be skeptical is simply that it's not a pleasing thing to hear.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#325

Post by jacobolus »

hanifc wrote: post #260
jacobolus wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Other people in the world are inconsiderate assholes, therefore I should be an inconsiderate asshole to help my coworkers prepare for the inevitable. And if they can’t handle it, too bad.” By the same token do you cheat at every game with your children to teach them the cold truth about society?

This is a very uncharitable and needlessly aggressive take.

The recommendation of «you shouldn’t let your quieter coworkers speak unless they interrupt their way into the conversation in meetings because that will set them up for failure when their future coworkers talk right over them» is a pretty uncharitable and needlessly aggressive attitude toward those quieter coworkers.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#326

Post by danaris »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #227
danaris wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't track. When people who are and have been marginalized, after centuries of fighting, finally get some of the establishment on their side, it doesn't suddenly become "punching up" to mock and satirize the efforts to get them the recognition, opportunity, and equity they deserve, even if said punches are, on the surface, aimed at individuals with positions of power.

I think you have an interesting point. I think to explore this further we'd need a clearer definition of "punching up".

To me, at least, the difference between what Scott Adams is doing and a good-faith definition of "punching up" is that he's trivializing genuine issues faced by marginalized people, and trying to make it all about him (the way most things have been about well-off white men for so much of Western history).

I think that if you really wanted to make a workplace comic that skewers HR departments' often hamfisted attempts to promote diversity (which is often because they themselves don't really care about it, and have just been given a mandate), you need to center the people with the real issues, rather than the ones who are being mildly inconvenienced by it.

Have a trans employee complaining that HR is happy to jump down people's throats for accidental misgendering, but still hasn't actually processed their name change paperwork and informed IT, so the intranet is still deadnaming them.

Have an employee of color upset that they've plastered black, Hispanic, and Asian people all over the company's website, but he's just gotten passed up for promotion for the third time to a white guy who worked there less than a year and who does nothing but kibitz all day.

Have a Jewish employee angry that the company has branded kippahs that they give out alongside their other swag, but won't give the Jewish High Holidays off as paid holidays.

In general, play up the empty tokenism, while emphasizing what's really important. (Making it also funny is left as an exercise for the reader; I don't claim to be a comic.)

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#327

Post by leephillips »

Rand4ObvReasons wrote: post #303
leephillips wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is in the U.S., surely this is a violation of federal law. And if you complied you are an accomplice. I would document everything and report it to the feds promptly, to cover your ass.

I feared retaliation, but I documented at least part of it. When I went to report it seems the statute of limitations expired. And yes, this is USA.

You acted wisely. I’m glad the statute of limitations expired without any consequesnces.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#328

Post by clutchdude »

leereeves wrote: post #324
clutchdude wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem well known - I can't find any many claims prior to the Summer of 2020. I found one quote in passing from 2005 - note this in regards his working time frame from 1979 to 1995. You got an MBA at night a few years later. This should have put you right on track for a boss-type position at the bank. What happened? Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because ther…

> Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because there was too much attention on the fact that there was no diversity in senior management. Good find. He was telling the same story 15 years ago. Absent some other evidence, it seems the main reason to be skeptical is simply that it's not a pleasing thing to hear.

I guess - I would also guess that one not getting promoted might also be related to the lack skills at leadership, etc.

Given his thoughts on leadership:

  Well, my theory is that all leadership is a form of evil, because the whole point of managing people is getting them to do stuff they don’t want to do on their own. You don’t need a manager to tell people to eat chocolate chip cookies, because they want to do that. But you do need a manager to tell them to work extra hours for the same amount of pay, and I’m not good at that. If managing were truly a case of win-win scenarios – you give me more and you get more out – I could definitely do that. But the “best” managers are not like that, [according to real-world corporate behaviour]. The “best” ones are the ones getting you to do stuff and giving you nothing in return.
I can see that he might not be promoted due to skill and ability.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#329

Post by leereeves »

clutchdude wrote: post #328
leereeves wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, one day, my boss called me in, and said they couldn’t promote a white male because there was too much attention on the fact that there was no diversity in senior management. Good find. He was telling the same story 15 years ago. Absent some other evidence, it seems the main reason to be skeptical is simply that it's not a pleasing thing to hear.

I guess - I would also guess that one not getting promoted might also be related to the lack skills at leadership, etc. Given his thoughts on leadership: Well, my theory is that all leadership is a form of evil, because the whole point of managing people is getting them to do stuff they don’t want to do on their own. You don’t need a manager to tell people to eat chocolate chip cookies, because they want to do that.…

If that were the reason, then why would his boss tell him it was about race?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#330

Post by dariusj18 »

the_doctah wrote: post #305
dariusj18 wrote: post #156

The token hire strip would be funny if it wasn't an actual reflection of the strip and it's lack of diversity (and the obvious reticence of the creator to consider diversity as important). What would have been a smarter and less controversial move would be to subtly introduce people of color over time, then add a strip about a diversity hire, with the other characters visibly getting ticked off.

There are like 5 main (human) characters. 1 is Indian and 1 is female. Your argument is a strawman.

It is an understandable situation, but there are more people in the comic than the main characters. There are often consultants, designers, dates, and other characters introduced all the time. I'm not someone who believes you need to shoehorn in diversity, it's just something to consider in this day and age. When introducing a new primary, secondary or background character, why wouldn't they be X? If the answer is, "because they contemporaneously are more likely to be Y", sometimes that's because of systematic problems that don't self correct without active social awareness.

I had forgotten about Asok, of course race and ethnicity get even more charged when you get into Indian culture and American corporate culture.

Post reply on HN