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

A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

throwww.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 108 posts

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#41

Post by jquery »

simonsarris wrote: post #7

I'm slightly apprehensive (terrified) about commenting on this topic or any relating to gender/race because it seems like the bar for public crucifixion is somewhat low, even to those who just want to add data or other side-points to a discussion. Anyway, and I apologize in advance if I derail the topic, but I think there's a semi important distinction to qualify this discussion, because I do think the discussion app…

At my company, the senior male executives are much taller than average. There is only a single male executive of mere average height.*

Nothing to see here. Just diet and environmental factors in our grand meritocracy, surely.

*EDIT: Removed semi-personal information.

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#42

Post by mtrimpe »

john_b wrote: post #29

Interestingly, I just spoke with a colleague yesterday who admitted (without shame) that he recently campaigned (successfully) to have an attractive female hired into his group. I asked him about her qualifications, and he said she seemed capable, but not exceptional. He stressed that, at least to him, her appearance outweighted her abilities. Incidents like this make me wonder if some sort of anonymous interviewing…

Not to mention that incidents like this debase the efforts of (possibly attractive) women whom are trying to compete on merits instead.

As far as I'm concerned blatant positive discrimination such as this should be treated as harshly as af it were negative discrimination based on race.

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#43

Post by sageikosa »

simonsarris wrote: post #7

I'm slightly apprehensive (terrified) about commenting on this topic or any relating to gender/race because it seems like the bar for public crucifixion is somewhat low, even to those who just want to add data or other side-points to a discussion. Anyway, and I apologize in advance if I derail the topic, but I think there's a semi important distinction to qualify this discussion, because I do think the discussion app…

There's a line in the John Adams miniseries where the Continental Congress had just selected Washington to lead the army. Ben Franklin turns to Adams and says: "he was bound to lead something; he's the tallest man in the room".

Apocryphal, sure. A clever mnemonic, you bet.

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#44

Post by jauer »

simonsarris wrote: post #7

I'm slightly apprehensive (terrified) about commenting on this topic or any relating to gender/race because it seems like the bar for public crucifixion is somewhat low, even to those who just want to add data or other side-points to a discussion. Anyway, and I apologize in advance if I derail the topic, but I think there's a semi important distinction to qualify this discussion, because I do think the discussion app…

You can only take the height thing so far. From the OK Cupid data you link to it appears that there is a sharp falloff for men right after 6'6". I suspect that's the point where "wow! you're tall" kicks in and attractiveness turns to curiosity.

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#46

Post by betterunix »

Does anyone know of a study on this that breaks down the effect between different types of leadership positions? In particular, I am wondering if positions that involve sales or otherwise interacting with the customers or general public exhibit this phenomenon more strongly than engineering or "internal" positions.

The reason I say this is that it would help identify where the problem really lies. If it affects all categories of work equally, then I would be more likely to say that organizations themselves are basing decisions on attractiveness. On the other hand, if this is affecting people who interact with the public to a greater degree than those who do not, I would point to a broader problem: that perhaps such people are simply more successful at their jobs, because their attractiveness is an asset in their work (which would make a solution pretty tricky).

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#47

Post by vadman »

wmf wrote: post #24
kvb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's also possible that height and attractiveness are correlated with competence (e.g. because healthy diets as children influence all three attributes), in which case we'd expect to see more tall/attractive people promoted even in a meritocracy (though perhaps not to the observed degree).

In the developed world I would hope that virtually everyone has good enough health/nutrition and thus variation in height and appearance is due more to genetics.

I would guess (based just on observing people in the New York subway) that around 20% of people, at least in the USA, do not have education/income/some other contributing factor to provide a healthy diet for their kids. And they themselves were likely even worse off as kids.

Quick googling result: http://frac.org/initiatives/hunger-and-obesity/are-low-incom...

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#48

Post by edouard1234567 »

wmf wrote: post #24
kvb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's also possible that height and attractiveness are correlated with competence (e.g. because healthy diets as children influence all three attributes), in which case we'd expect to see more tall/attractive people promoted even in a meritocracy (though perhaps not to the observed degree).

In the developed world I would hope that virtually everyone has good enough health/nutrition and thus variation in height and appearance is due more to genetics.

Agreed, diet is a poor explanation for developed countries. What seems more likely is that the discrimination start earlier, in college or high school where athletic students have an easier time going to the best colleges simply because they are good at a sport (assuming height is correlated to being good at a sport popular in college)

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#49

Post by voidlogic »

_mulder_ wrote: post #25
k_kelly wrote: post #5

Here are the female CEO's of the fortune 500. Meg Whitman, HP (#10) Virginia Rometty, IBM (#19) Patricia A. Woertz, Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) (#28) Indra K. Nooyi, PepsiCo, Inc. (#41) Irene B. Rosenfeld, Mondelez International Marillyn Hewson, Lockheed Martin (#58) Ellen J. Kullman, DuPont (#72) Phebe Novakovic, General Dynamics (#92) Carol M. Meyrowitz, The TJX Companies, Inc. (#125) Ursula M. Burns, Xero…

With image links so you can judge for yourself whether the conclusions of the article hold true or not. Personally I don't think so. Whilst I wouldn't describe any of these hugely succesful women as unattractive, I think they would compare to the attractiveness ratings of male CEOs (also a bit above average). Meg Whitman, HP (#10) https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Meg+Whitman&tbm=isch Virginia Rometty, IBM (#19) http…

This does not prove anything. Even if fewer smart but less attractive females were hired due to the discrimination we would still expect to see intelligent women that did get hired, attractive or not, end up making it.

Re: A Truth About the Glass Ceiling No One Wants to Talk About

#50

Post by alxp »

erikj54 wrote: post #21
russell wrote: post #11

I recall reading about a similar prejudice in the promotion of men. In the case of men it's height not prettiness. EDIT: simonsarris beat me by 3 minutes wit better data, so I'll throw in another data point. In the past 25 presidential elections the taller or tying candidate won 19 times. Before that it is more even, perhaps because it was harder to see the differences.

This is true. There is indeed a biological explanation for many of these behaviours. We are programmed to believe that tall men would infer strong mating partners, or someone to avoid in the case of a male. For females, it is quite similar. Women who possess certain qualities appear more attractive and we generally look more favourably upon them in society. This problem is indeed real, but it is perhaps more subconsc…

Beware of using biology to explain behaviours when those behaviours re-enforce the status quo. Evolutionary psychology is struggling to seem legit and using it to make 'that's just how things are' statements sound scientific is not helping at all.
Post reply on HN