SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a stunning example of failure to understand the meaning of the word equality, Github's "social impact team" is now actively discriminating against people based on gender and skin color; white women in particular:
One insider criticized GitHub's "social impact team," which is in charge of figuring out how to use the product to tackle social issues, including diversity within the company itself. It's led by Nicole Sanchez, vice president of social impact, who joined GitHub in May after working as a diversity consultant.
While people inside the company approve of the goal to hire a more diverse workforce, some think the team is contributing to the internal cultural battle.
"They are trying to control culture, interviewing and firing. Scary times at the company without a seasoned leader. While their efforts are admirable it is very hard to even interview people who are 'white' which makes things challenging," this person said.
Sanchez is known for some strong views about diversity. She wrote an article for USA Today shortly before she joined GitHub titled, "More white women does not equal tech diversity."
At one diversity training talk held at a different company and geared toward people of color, she came on a bit stronger with a point that says, "Some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women."
From a site policy standpoint, this really makes me want to argue for finding another host for our rehash repository, enormous pain in the ass though that would be.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ledow on Monday February 08 2016, @08:00PM
If they're too stupid to mentally do this, without having to blank out bits of paper and spray-paint the candidates green, or whatever, then they shouldn't be hiring.
Or be allowed to hold down any adult job.
Do people REALLY need to be told to put their prejudices aside, or that they shouldn't even HAVE prejudices?
Even in courts, as a member of the jury, you're told to "strike that from the record", etc. and you have to act as if you NEVER knew that piece of information. Exactly the same.
Any adult should be able to do this, the same way they don't stare at people with disfigurement, or sigh because the person on crutches is taking a while to enter the room, or start talking over the guy with the stammer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2016, @08:12PM
> Any adult should be able to do this,
Puh-lease. Spare us the arm-chair pseudo-intellectualism. It is beyond dispute that we are all affected by subconscious bias. The problem here is that people like you still think that if it isn't formal racism it isn't racism.
> Even in courts, as a member of the jury, you're told to "strike that from the record", etc. and you have to act as if you NEVER knew that piece of information. Exactly the same.
Your own example contradicts your point - lawyers deliberately do and say things that get "struck from the record" precisely because they know that no matter how rigorous the jury, those things can't be unheard. If a lawyer does it too much they'll get sanctioned by the judge too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2016, @08:21PM
everybody's a little bit racist
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday February 08 2016, @08:31PM
You forgot the link [youtube.com]