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

The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–75 of 75 posts

Re: The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

#71

Post by pyre »

apineda wrote: post #5
pyre wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he had decided to give preference to (e.g.) Syrian refugees because he felt a sense of wanting to help, would you have the same response? If he gave preference to a veteran out of Patriotism or an ex-con out of a belief in "second chances" would you have the same reaction?

Interesting argument. So you are equating being born the female sex the same as being a war time refugee, war veteran or ex-con? Could you explain that analogy a little better?

I was just presenting other situations where an employer might give someone hiring preference.

Is it just the idea that someone was getting hiring preference that isn't 100% tied to skills that is the issue? Or is it specifically because it was women that were getting hiring preference?

Re: The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

#72

Post by adamnemecek »

easuter wrote: post #69
adamnemecek wrote: post #17

> implying being born in Slovakia is winning some sort of lottery

Yeah, unfortunately a lot of these blog posts are very US-centric. There are still plenty of people in Europe living in poverty and their white privilege somehow didn't save them. It's interesting how these racist ideas get tossed about proudly here and in the US media.

The author was actually born in Slovakia but it seems like he got infected with white guilt when he came to the US.

Re: The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

#73

Post by vorotato »

stale2002 wrote: post #65
romanhn wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with you up until the very last sentence. It does not make business sense to break the law (and gender discrimination is a real thing a company can get sued over). No matter how tempting, you can't magically wish the problem away and say "I'll hire 5 women, then 10 people of color, then a couple of LGBT folks, then I won't have any diversity problems". It doesn't work that way. Yes, it is a chicken and egg prob…

Ehh, there are effectively equivalent ways of ensuring that you hire X more women without discriminating against men in the interview process. If you have X people interviewing at your company, you should hire the best person who interviews, no matter the gender. The REAL way to go about this is to discriminate at the referral/reachout stage. If you go to your all male engineering team and announce "We are hiring! Re…

>The REAL way to go about this is to discriminate at the referral/reachout stage. >If you go to your all male engineering team and announce "We are hiring! Refer all your friends!". What you are effectively doing is discriminating against women, because you are going to receive 20 male referrals and 1 women referral. But THIS isn't illegal.

God this hit me like a sack of bricks. It's exactly what I would do and I now realize, dudes gonna have dude friends, just like how ladies are gonna have lady friends.

Re: The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

#74

Post by jacalata »

forthefuture wrote: post #70
jacalata wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, would it apply retroactively? That seems weird.

It's not necessarily retroactively. If he has 10 people (8m, 2f) and wants parity (8m, 8f) then hes guaranteeing that the 16th person he hires will be a woman.

technically he could just fire a guy today and then hit parity at 14 and say the initiative is over.

Re: The gender wage gap in Silicon Valley – based on AngelList data

#75

Post by flukus »

epistasis wrote: post #34
smegel wrote: post #13

> Born white and male in today’s world I won the lottery without having a clue. Here we go. (actually I stopped reading).

There's a couple comments to this effect. Why? It comes across as being unwilling to consider ideas at all.

Because it equates being white with privilege when it's more about socio-economic factors.

A white Eastern European probably faced plenty of disadvantage.

A white farmer in zimbabwe probably faced plenty of disadvantage.

The ancestors of someone of Irish heritage have probably faced plenty of institutional racism but managed to overcome it.

Post reply on HN