5 ms·

I'm rolling my eyes at your "supposed minorities" comment. Women are a minority in tech, as I'm sure you know, and this is a forum that mostly targets tech. The

I'm rolling my eyes at your "supposed minorities" comment. Women are a minority in tech, as I'm sure you know, and this is a forum that mostly targets tech. The rest of the groups that we're talking about are also minorities in the population as a whole. As to your contention, I'm still not getting it. Why don't we play a game? I list off a few things that I've known companies to do in the past as a way of reaching out to or accommodating minorities, and you tell me which ones are objectionable to you and why. Here goes: 1. A company makes a prayer room available for their Muslim employees to do their daily prayers 2. A company hosts a Women in Tech conference 3. A company hosts a GLBT in Tech mixer during Pride Week 4. A social media company creates a couple special features for Black History month (e.g., Twitter's @Blackbirds bot)

belorn 8y ago
Let me jump in in the discussion and answer why those are objectionable and how to fix them so the same objective can be achieved while not be discriminative. > 1. A company makes a prayer room available for their Muslim employees to do their daily prayers Services and gifts are from a practical point of view just different forms of bonuses given to employees. A extra room cost money to rent, and if employees are given free time in there then that also cost the company money. The solution is to calculate how much the prayer room cost, divide it per employee that wish to use it, and give each employee that money to do as they wish. The Muslim employees can pool their bonus for the room, and the rest can either pool it together for something else or increase their individual pay check. This way the company do not discriminate and a person who believe in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has the same benefit and support at the company as a Muslim. > 2. A company hosts a Women in Tech conference If you have to ask attendees or speakers if they identify as a woman, then what you are doing is explicit discrimination. This is objectionable so simply don't. Organize event instead so that you reaching out to intended minorities by looking at what works and interests those groups. > 3. A company hosts a GLBT in Tech mixer during Pride Week Same as #1. If a company spend money on one group, then that is an indirect bonus to those employees who belong to that group. If its not possible to provide every employee the same benefit, at least make the selection process transparent and as fair as possible so both a GLBT mixer as well as a nudist mixer can be created if both exist as groups at the company. > 4. A social media company creates a couple special features for Black History month (e.g., Twitter's @Blackbirds bot) Very similar to the above one. Who decide which group deserve the special feature? I would suggest something similar to Wikipedia's featured articles, where any topic can be suggested and a fair process decide which one get selected. The more transparent the better.
- methodover 8y ago
  This is a joke response, right? In case not, you’re way over thinking this. In points one and three, you’re looking to try and give something like compensation for these individual things. You’re not looking at (1) the value of being an accommodating, inclusive company or (2) that an individual who doesn’t take advantage of those particular accommodations enjoys other ones. Your whole point about point four is silly. You don’t need some gigantic transparent democratic process to let some enterprising employees take it upon themselves to do a cool project like blackbirds. Just let them go do it. About the women in tech conference, Grace Hopper allows men to attend; seems reasonable to follow their lead.
  - belorn 8y ago
    That you view it as a joke shows the problem. Bonuses and gifts are a real problem, and is recognized as taxed income here in Sweden. Just a few weeks ago I had a similar situation at work where a coworker said "I would be fine if they just gave it as a bonus to every one", so discriminative gifts is very noticeable for those not being in the receiving end. Gifting one group might feel very accommodating and inclusive for them, but it is no different than raising the wages based on religion identity no matter how one tries to dress it up. If a company want to discriminate and gift a selected people based on gender, race, religion or sexual orientation then naturally they don't need any gigantic transparent democratic process. They can just do what past discrimination has done, flying as close to the law of illegal behavior as they can. I don't agree with it and I find it wholly immoral. And yes there are conference and people who has learned to be less discriminative when doing outreach programs. However allowing men to enter a conference is a rather low bar, just as it would be if the genders were reversed. My personal line is if Grace Hopper has "only if you identify as women then..." in the way they operate. Looking at the scholarship application it does seem to say that both men and women can apply, but given the image on the site it seems that only women has ever been awarded scholarships. If there is a unofficial rule that only allow women then that is discrimination as any other.
- mike10010100 8y ago
  > The solution is to calculate how much the prayer room cost, divide it per employee that wish to use it, and give each employee that money to do as they wish. No, the solution is to call it a "wellness room", and have it be open to anyone who needs it: diabetics who need to inject their insulin, nursing mothers, Muslims who need prayer time, etc. > If you have to ask attendees or speakers if they identify as a woman, then what you are doing is explicit discrimination. Why do the majority (men in tech) always have to insert themselves into a minority's (women in tech) space to discuss issues intrinsic to being a minority in a field? What valuable input on a subject do you believe that a member of the majority could give to members of said minority? > If a company spend money on one group, then that is an indirect bonus to those employees who belong to that group. It's just as much a bonus to the company, who wishes to attract more LGBT folks. > as well as a nudist mixer can be created if both exist as groups at the company. In most tech companies, if you wish to create a nudist group and organize a nudist mixer, you're more than free to do so, provided you can acquire a space that will allow you to be freely nude. > Who decide which group deserve the special feature? So the fact that it's Black History month isn't somehow deserving of this special feature?

belorn 8y ago

Let me jump in in the discussion and answer why those are objectionable and how to fix them so the same objective can be achieved while not be discriminative. > 1. A company makes a prayer room available for their Muslim employees to do their daily prayers Services and gifts are from a practical point of view just different forms of bonuses given to employees. A extra room cost money to rent, and if employees are given free time in there then that also cost the company money. The solution is to calculate how much the prayer room cost, divide it per employee that wish to use it, and give each employee that money to do as they wish. The Muslim employees can pool their bonus for the room, and the rest can either pool it together for something else or increase their individual pay check. This way the company do not discriminate and a person who believe in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has the same benefit and support at the company as a Muslim. > 2. A company hosts a Women in Tech conference If you have to ask attendees or speakers if they identify as a woman, then what you are doing is explicit discrimination. This is objectionable so simply don't. Organize event instead so that you reaching out to intended minorities by looking at what works and interests those groups. > 3. A company hosts a GLBT in Tech mixer during Pride Week Same as #1. If a company spend money on one group, then that is an indirect bonus to those employees who belong to that group. If its not possible to provide every employee the same benefit, at least make the selection process transparent and as fair as possible so both a GLBT mixer as well as a nudist mixer can be created if both exist as groups at the company. > 4. A social media company creates a couple special features for Black History month (e.g., Twitter's @Blackbirds bot) Very similar to the above one. Who decide which group deserve the special feature? I would suggest something similar to Wikipedia's featured articles, where any topic can be suggested and a fair process decide which one get selected. The more transparent the better.

methodover 8y ago
This is a joke response, right? In case not, you’re way over thinking this. In points one and three, you’re looking to try and give something like compensation for these individual things. You’re not looking at (1) the value of being an accommodating, inclusive company or (2) that an individual who doesn’t take advantage of those particular accommodations enjoys other ones. Your whole point about point four is silly. You don’t need some gigantic transparent democratic process to let some enterprising employees take it upon themselves to do a cool project like blackbirds. Just let them go do it. About the women in tech conference, Grace Hopper allows men to attend; seems reasonable to follow their lead.
- belorn 8y ago
  That you view it as a joke shows the problem. Bonuses and gifts are a real problem, and is recognized as taxed income here in Sweden. Just a few weeks ago I had a similar situation at work where a coworker said "I would be fine if they just gave it as a bonus to every one", so discriminative gifts is very noticeable for those not being in the receiving end. Gifting one group might feel very accommodating and inclusive for them, but it is no different than raising the wages based on religion identity no matter how one tries to dress it up. If a company want to discriminate and gift a selected people based on gender, race, religion or sexual orientation then naturally they don't need any gigantic transparent democratic process. They can just do what past discrimination has done, flying as close to the law of illegal behavior as they can. I don't agree with it and I find it wholly immoral. And yes there are conference and people who has learned to be less discriminative when doing outreach programs. However allowing men to enter a conference is a rather low bar, just as it would be if the genders were reversed. My personal line is if Grace Hopper has "only if you identify as women then..." in the way they operate. Looking at the scholarship application it does seem to say that both men and women can apply, but given the image on the site it seems that only women has ever been awarded scholarships. If there is a unofficial rule that only allow women then that is discrimination as any other.
mike10010100 8y ago
> The solution is to calculate how much the prayer room cost, divide it per employee that wish to use it, and give each employee that money to do as they wish. No, the solution is to call it a "wellness room", and have it be open to anyone who needs it: diabetics who need to inject their insulin, nursing mothers, Muslims who need prayer time, etc. > If you have to ask attendees or speakers if they identify as a woman, then what you are doing is explicit discrimination. Why do the majority (men in tech) always have to insert themselves into a minority's (women in tech) space to discuss issues intrinsic to being a minority in a field? What valuable input on a subject do you believe that a member of the majority could give to members of said minority? > If a company spend money on one group, then that is an indirect bonus to those employees who belong to that group. It's just as much a bonus to the company, who wishes to attract more LGBT folks. > as well as a nudist mixer can be created if both exist as groups at the company. In most tech companies, if you wish to create a nudist group and organize a nudist mixer, you're more than free to do so, provided you can acquire a space that will allow you to be freely nude. > Who decide which group deserve the special feature? So the fact that it's Black History month isn't somehow deserving of this special feature?