Live data from Hacker News

Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

economist.com

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#931
post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they are. Race and sex and sexual attraction are innate qualities. People can and do change their beliefs - I’m not sure why anyone would say otherwise as they can easily confirm this for themselves.

Please change your belief about the innateness of race and sex, so that I can see the voluntary nature of beliefs in action. Again, you can choose how you act in light of your beliefs. And beliefs do change, but at most you can choose to be open those experiences that might lead to a change in belief. Changing them is not a direct act of will.

I chose my beliefs. You don’t.

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#932
post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on what do you mean as being blind to race? Do you want them to see your race, treat different races differently? Aren't we supposed to be a color-blind society? Maybe I am just not understanding what you mean.

There's a context implied, but not explicitly stated here. Being "blind to race" means that the context in which the other person exists is being ignored. Seeing things like race and gender mean that you are keeping context in mind when interacting with people. Systemic racism isn't necessarily about your personal intent, but it is about the results of your actions. Being blind to race effectively results in supporti…

Ignoring is not the same thing as supporting, no matter how many times you repeat the mantra.

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#933

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like there's a vast, decent middle ground between deliberately misgendering your coworkers and the current inquisition-style shitfest.

Being deliberately misgendered at work is a real issue, the law doesn't prohibit it in many states. Look at cases like Meriwether v. Hartop, a professor was disciplined for deliberately misgendering a student repeatedly, then successfully sued the university

Should it be illegal? Is it illegal to call someone by the wrong name, or age, or race? Should it be?

I don’t think we should be making rudeness illegal. On the other hand, professors absolutely shouldn’t be able to sue their institution for punishing them for it. There’s a middle ground

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#934

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moodles and chitowneats I wonder what are some examples of things you'd like to say / opinions you have, but that might make the coworkers angry?

I'll copy my example from below: "There are still many of us out there who believe that hiring candidates based on their race is not healthy for society, the company, or any individual candidate. That opinion is largely being stamped out, by design, in management at the orgs I'm talking about. This has nothing to do with not wanting to step up and manage."

Ok, interesting to hear

Personally I think I like blind job applications (ie where the name, ethnicity, gender, age etc of the job applicants is held unknown for the interviewers, as long as possible), which it seems to me that you like too

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#935

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moodles and chitowneats I wonder what are some examples of things you'd like to say / opinions you have, but that might make the coworkers angry?

I told some stories in the other thread here. I definitely agree with chitowneats' sibling comment about hiring based on race being morally repugnant also.

Ok, I had a look, thanks. (Btw I replied to chitowneats sibling comment.)

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#936
post #869
post #861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have scoured the farthest, deepest reaches of the Leftist Web to retrieve the lost scrolls containing the arcane encoding of this horrifying acronym: L: Lesbian (This means women who like women.) G: Gay (This means men who like men.) B: Bisexual. This means women and men who like both women and men. T: Trans. This means you do not identify with the gender you were assigned at birth. Q: Queer. This means you do not…

I look at all this self segmentation and categorization as a net harm to all queer people as a community, I've actually come around to the idea of GSM (Gender and Sexual Minorities) as a preferred term, because it makes it harder for us to self segregate internally, and no longer view the fight for one groups equality as the fight for all of us. I'm gay, and for me equality was people no longer caring which gender I…

> I'm gay, and for me equality was people no longer caring which gender I was attracted to. I wanted that level of normality - where my orientation just no longer mattered - where I no longer needed a separate support community just to exist, where I no longer needed to fear someone finding out I was different than others, that was supposed to be the goal, wasn't it?

I thought so too. This hits on the crux of problem for me: the continually and arbitrarily moving goal posts.

The thing is, people like me never did care. When I was in school it was a thing to call people/things "gay" as a sign of disapproval, but as soon as I became an adult I stopped that and actually met some gay people, some of which became friends. But ultimately I've always felt the same way about all private matters: it's none of my business and I just don't care. Hell, I don't even have the spare brain capacity to care. I just can't do it.

One of the arguments that used to be made about being gay is that it's not a choice. I never found this a convincing argument. In my view, I don't care whether it's a choice or not. It's still your choice to make. So I think I was progressive even back then.

But now it's changed. It's no longer about not caring but, rather, people like me should care, for some reason. I get that if this was a human rights or civil liberties issue, but it's not. We're past that. So why, then, is "gay pride" a thing, if not to push what should be a private issue into people's faces? Why is it in the workplace? You don't have sex at work so why do I need to know that you're gay? How does that help achieve our goals?

Not caring is now demonised. The goal posts just keep moving. If there were concrete issues that haven't been considered then I'm all ears. But I really don't hear them. It's just "you must acknowledge that I'm different!" while I just keep saying "I don't care!" like I always have done.

There are serious problems in the world. There is crime, corruption, poverty and illness. There are people living in fear every day. There are people living in pain every day. But the most pressing issue is that some people don't like that our language has gendered pronouns? Life is not fair. Nobody ever said it was. At some point we all have to learn to just deal with it.

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#937

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, though it is still a little soul crushing. Obviously making big bucks and providing for your family is more important than debating some cancel culture social justice warrior at work who’ll never be convinced anyway, but listening to some eye rolling inducing faff every day and feeling like if you just told the truth you’d be fired makes you feel weak after a long time. Especially if you vehemently…

how hard is it to just agree? I agree with conservatives and liberals even when they are saying ridiculous things. "Oh yeah, I totally know what you are saying" "mmm hmmm" "Interesting I hadnt thought about it like that before". It is your ego or something else that makes it hard for you to do this.

I don't like doing that because I don't like to lie.

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#938
post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think the answer is a return to 20th century "no politics at work" Why not?

Because this experiment has obviously failed and this attempt to create a less toxic work environment through activism has resulted in a thinly veiled attempt to create a more toxic work environment for those who do not want to conform to neo-marxist orthodoxy.

>neo-marxist orthodoxy

This is one my main gripes with conservatives right now. You go to any of the places you congregate and alongside the more reasonable scepticism towards woke culture, there’s this constant talk of the rise of “neo-marxism”

I have seen zero evidence for this. None

Besides very basic issues like minimum wage, on the whole, the new left does not care about economics. There’s the occasional “bad capitalism bad” meme or tweet, but that’s the extent of it

This whole neomarxism shit just seems like a confluence of:

1. it’s bait to conservatives, so it gets attention

2. If you don’t like BLM etc, it’s much easier to just label them as marxists, rather than actually dismantle their flimsy ideology

3. it’s probably partially a reaction to the media calling Trump a fascist

In conclusion, it’s convenient for a lot of the right to confuse identity politics with marxism, and it puts me off because it’s lazy and ignorant

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#939
post #165

> according to a new Harris poll commissioned by Paradigm, a diversity consultancy, more than two-thirds of adults in America want to be able to discuss racial-justice issues at work I just plain do not believe this poll.

Source is at https://www.paradigmiq.com/2021/05/19/nearly-7-in-10-america... . First off, note the wording (which is actually "we should be able to discuss racial justice issues at work"). This question is a bit open to interpretation, but I'd interpret as "employees should not be prohibited from discussing racial justice issues". Which I certainly agree with... I would not want my employer censoring private conversa…

you could equally phrase it as “30% BELIEVE RACIAL JUSTICE TALK SHOULD BE BANNED IN WORKPLACES” and that would be just as shocking. Although that’s probably the same 30% as Trump’s core base

Re: Woke at Work: Why tech firms are trying to run away from politics and failing

#940
post #231

My problem with politics at work isn’t so much that it’s politics but more that it’s always idiotic performative horseshit. Like please stop pretending you want to “help” a group of people who disproportionately hold the jobs you are automating out of existence etc. More often than not it has more to do with a small number of individuals trying to get more power for themselves than a genuine desire to help anyone.

this kind of captures my problem with the current progressive politics. It’s all about signalling that you’re in a support of all manner of identities, unless that identity is working class, or unemployed

It’s extremely convenient for the neo-liberal elite. They get to sit back and continually rip us all off economically, while the generation that would normally be fighting it is busy fighting an invisible “institutional racism”. The people in power are not racist. Not specifically anyway. They’re just greedy. Often, because of past racism, or just coincidence, that greed disproportionately affects minorities. But the issue is greed and corruption and an improperly regulated society. It is not the invisible racist man, or microaggressions.

These issues still matter, and there’s absolutely a place for social justice politics, but it’s much much less important than economic justice

Post reply on HN