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

Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#61

Post by darkchasma »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #53
darkchasma wrote: post #28

I always see these arguments as very very myopic. If I need a developer, then I hire a developer. I am very much discriminating against accountants, because they don't fit the qualifications that I am looking for. But no intelligent person would ever frame it that way. If you're a 10 to 1 ratio, then you need to diversify, and you would discriminate against men the same way you discriminate against accountants. The e…

It's not illegal to discriminate against accountants. It is illegal to discriminate against someone because of their gender.

No, it's not. When is the last time you went to a gentlemans club and saw a naked man on stage?

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#62

Post by evan_ »

The plan is to go to a college campus with a toy helicopter equipped with a camera and fly it over a field where a bunch of young women are sunbathing in various states of undress. If someone comes to tell him to stop it, he's going to launch into a rehearsed speech about how he wants to hire a woman for a made-up-sounding job.

The absolute best outcome here is that someone breaks his helicopter and he goes home. It's probably more likely that someone calls campus security or the cops and he spends the night in jail.

This is the stupidest, most socially-myopic plan I've seen on Hacker News since... well, since last night's "Very Short Response Expected" post.

edit- looks like this post got flagged off the front page, which is not surprising, but while I'm disappointed that fewer people will see how stupid you are at least it might save you from an EEOC discrimination charge.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#63

Post by kefka »

chrisrhoden wrote: post #22
kefka wrote: post #11

We (as a society) allow techniques like Affirmative Action, that encourage [Insert whatever new name for Origination from Africa] to positions in schools, jobs, government, and elsewhere. Women are found severely lacking in the tech sector, due to "bro-tard" style workplace and management. Not to mention, not many women graduate from the heavy tech degrees from universities. Is this not why affirmative action was cre…

> Is this not why affirmative action was created in the first place? No. Affirmative action was not created to allow for diverse workplaces. It was created to correct for differences in opportunity and implicit associations, etc...

So, if I can show (adverse) differences in opportunity, then affirmative action for women would be accepted?

  http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/07/14/high-price-of-being-born-female/  - Covers many topics on lack of women's income.
  http://www.bls.gov/ore/abstract/ec/ec070130.htm - "White fat women need not apply. Where is the White Fat guy study?"
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motherhood_penalty - Penalty any woman pays when they choose to have a child. Affects socioeconomic and educational basis negatively.
  http://blogs.wsj.com/juggle/2009/06/18/the-motherhood-penalty-the-pay-gap-between-working-moms-and-childless-women/ - How about from the WSJ, instead of Wikipedia?
  http://phys.org/news205501664.html - If you do have a child, or cannot get easy access to birth control, the poorer you are the worse your income disparity will be.
  http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents - Scroll down.. Really?
Well, hmm..

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#64

Post by Anechoic »

pdeuchler wrote: post #51
Anechoic wrote: post #13

The original process the OP describes is exactly what many affirmative action opponents think AA does, that is only consider one demographic and ignore all the others. If you want to open opportunities for women, you post the job notice in places where women will see it. That will get you qualified candidates, and if you find a women who is the best person for the job, you hire her. edit: spelling

Wow, so easy! Why do we worry about these things when every case is so cut and dried? Because it's not. What if it's between two applicants, a male and a female, who are more or less equally qualified? Also, in case you haven't realized, there isn't an abundance of graphic designers looking for work in predominantly female areas. It's actually rather difficult to hire a good graphic designer who's not looking to tele…

You'll note the word "easy" appears nowhere in my post. And of course I have no experience whatsoever in experiencing/dealing with under-representation, so I clearly have no idea of any of the issues involved.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#65

Post by Anechoic »

Kluny wrote: post #32
Anechoic wrote: post #13

The original process the OP describes is exactly what many affirmative action opponents think AA does, that is only consider one demographic and ignore all the others. If you want to open opportunities for women, you post the job notice in places where women will see it. That will get you qualified candidates, and if you find a women who is the best person for the job, you hire her. edit: spelling

Like where? Ladies' Craigslist?

Look for a woman's organization (things like The Society of Women Engineers for engineering jobs, student groups that cater to women, perhaps in a hall were sorority members hang out, etc).

Looking at Syracuse, http://wuc.syr.edu/ and http://multicultural.syr.edu/programs/index.html might be avenues.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#66

Post by sodomizer »

If you're hiring someone because of their gender, race, etc., that's discriminatory.

However, you're also going to be judged by the statistics, which is to say, if you don't discriminate, you're going to be seen as discriminatory.

Someone write Congress and have them fix this please :)

As far as solutions, recognize that there's a reason most businesses like to hire people they know. They already know the people are capable and will fit in with the team, rather than "rolling the dice" with an unknown who might be perfectly competent but impossible to work with.

What that means is that you have a networking problem. You need to meet enough people so that if you decide to hire someone for a position, you immediately know some candidates. This means that some of them will be women.

I recommend going to the professors, campus organizations, or other authority figures that people already trust. This enables you to meet people without the somewhat creepy idea of showing up and trying to "recruit women" with some weird geek stunt.

Even better, consider your existing network: your employees. Have a dinner or drinks session where you encourage every employee to bring a friend "who might someday want to come on board."

I can't help you with the inherent paradox of being discriminatory in order to avoid being seen as discriminatory. But with more people on your mental rolodex, you'll have a better choice of finding someone who's a fit, and more of those will be women and other protected groups.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#67

Post by sodomizer »

xemoka wrote: post #42
columbo wrote: post #31

Wanting to increase diversity is a good thing, so kudos for that. However you should -never- -ever- -ever- indicate a preference towards a race, gender, sexual orientation or religious affiliation. Did I say ever? Ever. Ever. Ever. It's discriminatory, it's demeaning and it's illegal. If you want to increase diversity then, well, don't just say 'I need women!', rather go to where the diversity is. There are a ton of…

But how is that not discrimination masked in sheep's clothing? At least be forward with what your looking for, why should a male apply for a position that he wants, fits PERFECTLY but only get rejected because the company was veiling it's intentions to hire a woman? In my opinion, being female is equivalent to a skill—sure a hard coded skill, but a skill none-the-less. When you need to connect with a particular audie…

"But how is that not discrimination masked in sheep's clothing?"

That's what it is. The inconsistency in the law has created a niche market, and people are taking advantage of it. That's why groups like "Women Who Code" exist; show up here to get a job.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#69

Post by jasonlotito »

voidlogic wrote: post #49
jasonlotito wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> maybe make sure your female engineer is on the hiring committee? Doing that for the reasons you are suggesting is hypocritical. On one hand, you want the best person for the job, but then you are suggesting that the female engineer is apart of the decision making process, as if her gender is what qualifies her to hire engineers, or, more precisely, female engineers. That's not what you intended to say, I know, but…

"Doing that for the reasons you are suggesting is hypocritical." I think that is your own projection; The OP already mentioned that his female engineer is an awesome engineer, so I'm assuming she is qualified to be there from an engineering perspective (and I'm not saying she needs to be the only engineer there). And the organization is looking for a check to make sure the hiring team is not discriminating against wo…

> I think that is your own projection

It's not. Regardless, everything else you say ignores the fact that you are bringing the woman in specifically because you think she'll be better at hiring women. It's a strategy.

She's in there not because she's a great engineer, but because she is a woman who happens to be a great engineer.

Re: Turns out Hiring a Woman is Discriminatory

#70

Post by jasonlotito »

bcoates wrote: post #59
jasonlotito wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is wanting a diverse work force. They want the benefits that a diverse work force can provide, and that includes adding women to the team [1]. So how do they hire for that without discriminating? I think it's a fair question, and one that shouldn't be ignored out of some perceived bias. 1. http://www.ncwit.org/ncwit-fact-sheet

You can want a diverse work force all you like but you aren't entitled to one. It's really quite simple, in America an employer doesn't get to pick the gender of his employees. Not to make it all one gender, not for diversity, not to have an exact 50-50 ratio, not to have all the typists be women and all the filers be men or vice versa. In other words, you don't get to "add women to the team" because it's not your de…

> You can want a diverse work force all you like but you aren't entitled to one.

Of course. No one is suggesting otherwise. That's not the point. At all. You are the only one talking about entitlement in this context.

Post reply on HN