Comment by belorn | Hacker News Reader

Comment by belorn | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

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.

> 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?

> it a "wellness room"

A rather common solution that partly solves the issue of making the service universal. It could easily benefits one group more than an other, but at least it would be equally accessible for any religion to use as their space. Historically through there hasn't been many churches that successfully served multiple religions at the same time. My hat is off to those Muslims that will share pray room with nursing mothers at the same time.

> What valuable input on a subject do you believe that a member of the majority could give to members of said minority?

That the majority and minority belong to the common group called human, where everyone share more in common than not. Why do people in progressive topics (women in tech) think that people should be treated different based on gender? To quote Carl Sagan, gender stereotyping and reducing people down to a single bit, male or female, is lazy thinking.

> It's just as much a bonus to the company, who wishes to attract more LGBT folks.

They would get the same bonus if they wish to attract any other group in the world. There is an infinitive number of grouping and classification that humans being can sort them selves in, and thus a company has by this logic a infinitive amount of bonus to get. Is one group more worthy than an other?

> 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.

Same is true for the LGBT folks. Everyone should have the same liberty to to organize events if they can acquire a space to do so.

> So the fact that it's Black History month isn't somehow deserving of this special feature?

Every month is a special month for some group. Every day is "day of X". There is not a single day on the year that don't get celebrated by one group or an other. Should we start ranking those, and if so, where does Black History month rank up compared to other special days, weeks or months? Lesser than Christmas but better than Thanks Giving? This not something that is measurable but rather completely up to the ever changing local culture to define how special it is.

> Historically through there hasn't been many churches that successfully served multiple religions at the same time. My hat is off to those Muslims that will share pray room with nursing mothers at the same time.

In our company, there are multiple wellness rooms big enough to house a handful of people, with a queueing system managed via iPad. This solves the problem quite nicely.

> That the majority and minority belong to the common group called human

Just being human doesn't give someone the knowledge/experience of being on the lesser end of a power binary. If their conference is specifically to talk about, commiserate, and discuss strategies around being on the lesser end of a power binary, then what unique perspective would those on the greater end of said binary bring to the table?

If the only thing they have to contribute is the fact that they're human, then they have absolutely no unique perspective to give, and are thus unnecessary.

> Why do people in progressive topics (women in tech) think that people should be treated different based on gender?

Should be? No. They're recognizing the fact that they are treated differently. That's not a "should be" situation.

Much like recognizing and calling out racism doesn't make one racist.

> They would get the same bonus if they wish to attract any other group in the world.

Indeed, however this particular group has been historically discriminated against on a systemic level. Therefore, additional steps must be taken to ensure their inclusion.

> Is one group more worthy than an other?

Is your world really so simplistic that every attempt at inclusion is a zero-sum game?

> Everyone should have the same liberty to to organize events if they can acquire a space to do so.

They are, generally. So I don't really see why you're upset.

> Every month is a special month for some group. Every day is "day of X".

Are you seriously comparing Black History Month with something like International Bagel Day?

> Should we start ranking those

Nope. But some are bigger than others, so some will take priority.

> This not something that is measurable but rather completely up to the ever changing local culture to define how special it is.

And why is that a problem, exactly?

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.

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com