This is illegal where I live; it is probably why companies never give interview feedback to the interviewees because they make these illegal hiring decisions behind the scenes but then say “it wasn’t a good fit”.
Your reading of this comment is "other stakeholders rejected an excellent candidate solely based on race". The actual information given was that the commenter really liked one candidate, and the other stakeholders preferred a different candidate who was somehow "diverse". While I think the commenter probably agrees with your interpretation, it seems equally likely to me that their candidate evaluation was bad, and that the other stakeholders did not use diversity as their sole criteria.
- evidence
- witnesses who are willing to testify
- legal action
Whether it actually happened or not is irrelevant.
Just like the photo of the C-suite of most companies being 99% male doesn’t count as sexism.
Join us in Alabama! Here, they put up barriers for everyone that wasn't a large landowner or industrialist. This set back descendants of black slaves, but descendants of white sharecroppers were equally caught up in the net. Arguably, the poor whites were worse off - every black guy realized they were being oppressed, but a good number poor whites had the wool drawn over their eyes.
If you've ever read The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan, the best way I can describe it is it almost feels like being ta'veren. Even if I'm having an off-day, not performing well, doing the wrong things, saying the wrong things, I still get the results I need/want and it all works out.
If a company rejects me in favor of diversity, even my struggles are already relatively so easy to resolve that it's just like, good for them, I'll go to the countless other opportunities.
Not saying it's right or wrong, but I feel like the last person who needs a champion.
For me, just growing out my hair and beard, which give away my ethnicity, result in drastically different treatment. Same for attractiveness, if I wear contact lenses and make an effort to look a certain way, life in general becomes significantly easier.
Here's the hypothesis. If life is like an RPG, then whiteness / being male (in America) is a passive buff you get in character creation, like "+10 Social Points"
Truly, for many people, that still isn't enough to offset the many other debuffs life can bring.
I think its great to give personal anecdotes, but I never want to judge an individual person from their group membership. There will definitely be similar experiences across members of a given group.
But if someone who was 'White and Tall' was 'Homeless on Minimum Wage' then that would directly refute the logic that 'Being Tall and White is Easy Mode'.
Just the opposite, it would indicate that 'Being Tall and White is definitely not Easy Mode'.
In terms of why life isn't easy for all tall white guys - being tall, and white, and a guy helps but it's not everything. Some example of how it helps: As a white person I've never had to worry about being pulled over by a cop for "driving while white". A couple years ago when videos of cops shooting black people for things like 'driving away from a traffic stop' horrified me. Obviously it's wrong to drive away from a traffic stop but I couldn't imagine a police officer responding with gunshots if I did that. So yes, my race does make my life easier here in the USA.
Some ways that tall, white, male isn't helpful: none of those things directly get me money/wealth. If I grow up poor I'm going to have a tough life no matter how safe I feel around the police. Being tall is nice, and it's great being able to use the top shelf in my kitchen cabinets, but it doesn't put food on the table (at least, not directly). Similarly, what if one grew up with abusive parents? That can really f*k someone up, and while it's nice not having to worry when I hold hands with my sweetie in public a history of abuse may make it more difficult to find and sustain positive relationships with the women in my life.
So yeah - being tall, and white, and male makes some things easier, but it doesn't fix all the problems for everyone.
[1] https://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-t...
[2] https://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/17/lowest-difficulty-set...
[3] https://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/23/final-notes-for-lowes...
never had to worry about being pulled over by a cop for "driving while white"
I was pulled over twice in three days in Los Altos a few years ago for a light being out, both times by non-white officers.Last spring, I was pulled over in Sunnyvale for expired tags (I paid on time; DMV was horribly behind) by an Asian officer.
While I was politely volunteering my documents and proof of payment, a second unit responded with a Latino officer.
They held me for 45 minutes for what should have been a wave-off. To justify their time, they wrote me a fix-it ticket (which required two trips to the courthouse and 5 months to clear.
Now, I'll wager that if the ethnicities were reversed, the average driver has been sufficiently conditioned by narrative to assume a racist motivation... even if pulled over from behind at night, where it's impossible to know driver ethnicity before the stop.
Being tall, or white, might give you an edge in some circumstances, in some places in life.
It does not put life on 'easy mode'.
It's tiring dealing with woke racism - this new world ideology is troubling.
Privilege is having parents who give you $20M - that's 'easy mode'. Otherwise, it's not.
Surely they know what you think you mean to say about White Privilege, but there's a special kind of authoritarian arrogance in assuming that the notion is settled.
Do White people in Poland, a country with essentially no Black people have White privilege? Or do they only gain privilege when there are sufficient people around them who may not have the same opportunities manifest themselves?
In which case, there clearly is no such thing as 'White Privilege', rather, there are some groups who simply have it harder than others and it's much more rationally described in terms of those who face discrimination, than those who do not.
It's like saying people in the suburbs are 'privileged' to not live in high crime areas, or that kids are 'privileged' to not be bullied in school, or 'privileged' to have access grocery stores nearby.
None of those things are privileges and we'd never describe them as such.
We would always describe those situations wherein a special, negative context applies i.e. 'lives in high crime area' or 'child is bullied' or 'lives 20 miles from the supermarket'.
'White Privilege' is a racist term used by intersectionalists wanting to weaponize issues of race, and project guilt or other groups who frankly have no advantage or privilege, other than in the most narrow of contextualization.
Although for what it's worth, I think you're misunderstanding the term. For instance: "There are millions of 'Tall White Guys' in prison, earning minimum wage, living on the streets. It's really not that much of a privilege." If you believe that it is a valid counterargument against the concept, then you have misunderstood the concept. It is not "the privilege that white people have". It is "the aspect of someone's privilege that comes from their whiteness". One may have many privileges. Being white is one of them. Particularly in America; I can't and wouldn't try to speak to the social dynamics in other countries.
> "It's like saying people in the suburbs are 'privileged' to not live in high crime areas".
> None of those things are privileges and we'd never describe them as such.
The only sense in which those are not privileges is the connotation of the word 'privilege' that it applies to groups of people instead of other categories. They're certainly advantages.
If easy mode can be incredibly difficult...then maybe it shouldn't be called easy mode? Is juggling 40 balls at a time "easy mode" compared to juggling 60 balls at a time? Maybe, but it would be more appropriate to not call juggling 40 balls easy mode
its like that in vancouver too but with far less money and even far less exits