I would argue that if your goal is to fix systemic racism, a much more effective approach would be to target the pipeline problem early on by focusing on improving education systems in poor/racial minority communities. Their difficulties in competing later on in life stem directly (and I would argue most strenuously) from disadvantages they experience early on. If companies see improvements in the resumes of racial minorities, they will naturally be more likely to hire them; I would argue that their greed for having the best employees will override the racial biases of White CEOs and HR managers.
Better resumes are good, but there are plenty of studies showing bias towards the name alone on a resume and that a white-sounding name gets more bites than names more associated with a minority race.
People have biases, conscious or not. Did you know that women’s positions in orchestras increased greatly after switching to blind auditions? And I can’t find a legit source in 2 min of searching, but there’s also been indication that the sound of high heels affects hiring outcomes even in blind auditions.
Example studies on names and hiring outcomes: 2004, 2023, 2024 (even the “best” companies still showed a 3% bias towards white candidates vs 24% for the worst), 2016
So yeah, there are a fuckton of steps to addressing systemic racism and starting early in the process is a critical step. But the narrative that an equivalent resume is all that’s needed to close the gap is false and dangerous.
Oh, I agree, and I wasn’t trying to suggest what I wrote above was all that’s needed. I’m a big proponent of racially blind admissions/hiring processes. Exclude any data that could be construed as being race-identifying. The more we can force admissions/hiring to base their choices solely on performance-relative metrics alone, the better.
However, I have to admit that such a goal is a bit unrealistic. Race-identifying information will likely always find a way into admissions/hiring processes, simply because of interviews. I don’t claim to know how to create the perfect system, obviously. This is a complex problem that people a lot smarter and more educated than I have been striving to solve for decades.
But I think that raising people up from the very bottom of society is still the best approach, the most efficient way to do that is by focusing on disadvantages experienced early in life. If you can level the playing field during kindergarten, you provide a more equal launch pad for every stage of life thereafter; keep working up from there and we’ll eventually wind up with a more equal result in adulthood.
I never said addressing systemic racism was limited to addressing said issues in educational attainment alone. Clearly, it’s a multifaceted problem that requires a broad range of fixes.
Do you think these things aren’t connected? The racism that makes cops murder Black people is the same racism that makes it harder for Black people to get good jobs. It stems from the same problem and it sure as fuck isn’t their resumes.
Sure, they’re connected. You give me a formula for simply rid racist thought from all human minds and I’ll concede you have a point here. Until then, I’m gonna keep operating on the fact that racist thought manifests differently in different areas of society and that they require unique solutions. In the area of discrimination in hiring practices, resumes absolutely are a contributing factor.
You’re not going to get me to simplify my thinking on this enormously complex issue by pointing to the abstract notion of “people are fucking racist!” You can’t address that directly. You have to take the more pragmatic approach of addressing the concrete elements in society that you can actually change. In fact, if you’d studied any actual literature on the topic, you’d know this already, because all the academics agree with what I just wrote.
Eh. Yes, if you’re looking at the data from efficacy studies alone. However, I would argue that DEI programs create political turmoil that creates harm to society that these studies don’t take into account. Addressing systemic racism is important, but DEI approaches have created understandable division about majority groups being discriminated against in the service of fixing the problem. I think focusing on wealth inequality has the overlapping effect of helping minority racial groups while sidestepping the race politics inherent to DEI programs that give fuel to racist groups in society.
Only in the same sense that most political opinions are “manufactured” by mainstream news outlets. It doesn’t really matter. DEI’s problems are valid criticisms, and you can’t simply dismiss them because they’re highlighted by right-wing outlets.
I would argue that if your goal is to fix systemic racism, a much more effective approach would be to target the pipeline problem early on by focusing on improving education systems in poor/racial minority communities.
Well the Republicans are getting rid of DEI and the Department of Education.
So our education is about to get a lot worse, but at least minorities will have a harder time getting jobs!
Republicans’ motivations for getting rid of DEI certainly aren’t mine. Believe it or not, there are people out there who disagree with the DEI approach but still agree that systemic racism/sexism in society is a problem that needs addressing. Don’t lump me in with the GOP.
I would argue that if your goal is to fix systemic racism, a much more effective approach would be to target the pipeline problem early on by focusing on improving education systems in poor/racial minority communities. Their difficulties in competing later on in life stem directly (and I would argue most strenuously) from disadvantages they experience early on. If companies see improvements in the resumes of racial minorities, they will naturally be more likely to hire them; I would argue that their greed for having the best employees will override the racial biases of White CEOs and HR managers.
Better resumes are good, but there are plenty of studies showing bias towards the name alone on a resume and that a white-sounding name gets more bites than names more associated with a minority race.
People have biases, conscious or not. Did you know that women’s positions in orchestras increased greatly after switching to blind auditions? And I can’t find a legit source in 2 min of searching, but there’s also been indication that the sound of high heels affects hiring outcomes even in blind auditions.
Example studies on names and hiring outcomes: 2004, 2023, 2024 (even the “best” companies still showed a 3% bias towards white candidates vs 24% for the worst), 2016
So yeah, there are a fuckton of steps to addressing systemic racism and starting early in the process is a critical step. But the narrative that an equivalent resume is all that’s needed to close the gap is false and dangerous.
Oh, I agree, and I wasn’t trying to suggest what I wrote above was all that’s needed. I’m a big proponent of racially blind admissions/hiring processes. Exclude any data that could be construed as being race-identifying. The more we can force admissions/hiring to base their choices solely on performance-relative metrics alone, the better.
However, I have to admit that such a goal is a bit unrealistic. Race-identifying information will likely always find a way into admissions/hiring processes, simply because of interviews. I don’t claim to know how to create the perfect system, obviously. This is a complex problem that people a lot smarter and more educated than I have been striving to solve for decades.
But I think that raising people up from the very bottom of society is still the best approach, the most efficient way to do that is by focusing on disadvantages experienced early in life. If you can level the playing field during kindergarten, you provide a more equal launch pad for every stage of life thereafter; keep working up from there and we’ll eventually wind up with a more equal result in adulthood.
Black people with good education are still more likely to be shot by police or go to jail.
I never said addressing systemic racism was limited to addressing said issues in educational attainment alone. Clearly, it’s a multifaceted problem that requires a broad range of fixes.
You really fucking implied it.
You can externalize your assumptions all you want; it doesn’t change the fact that interpersonal communication is the responsibility of all involved.
I.e., grow up and stop winging about minor details on internet forums.
You literally said that it’s “more effective” to give Black people better resumes than to stop systematic racism at the top.
Yes, but I was referring solely to DEI programs, which have nothing to do with systemic racism in police brutality or judicial prejudice areas.
Do you think these things aren’t connected? The racism that makes cops murder Black people is the same racism that makes it harder for Black people to get good jobs. It stems from the same problem and it sure as fuck isn’t their resumes.
Sure, they’re connected. You give me a formula for simply rid racist thought from all human minds and I’ll concede you have a point here. Until then, I’m gonna keep operating on the fact that racist thought manifests differently in different areas of society and that they require unique solutions. In the area of discrimination in hiring practices, resumes absolutely are a contributing factor.
You’re not going to get me to simplify my thinking on this enormously complex issue by pointing to the abstract notion of “people are fucking racist!” You can’t address that directly. You have to take the more pragmatic approach of addressing the concrete elements in society that you can actually change. In fact, if you’d studied any actual literature on the topic, you’d know this already, because all the academics agree with what I just wrote.
That’s one factor, yes. Both is better.
Eh. Yes, if you’re looking at the data from efficacy studies alone. However, I would argue that DEI programs create political turmoil that creates harm to society that these studies don’t take into account. Addressing systemic racism is important, but DEI approaches have created understandable division about majority groups being discriminated against in the service of fixing the problem. I think focusing on wealth inequality has the overlapping effect of helping minority racial groups while sidestepping the race politics inherent to DEI programs that give fuel to racist groups in society.
The turmoil is manufactured. Nobody actually gives a shit except Fox News being livid about companies having the woke, and people who regurgitate it.
Only in the same sense that most political opinions are “manufactured” by mainstream news outlets. It doesn’t really matter. DEI’s problems are valid criticisms, and you can’t simply dismiss them because they’re highlighted by right-wing outlets.
Well the Republicans are getting rid of DEI and the Department of Education.
So our education is about to get a lot worse, but at least minorities will have a harder time getting jobs!
Republicans’ motivations for getting rid of DEI certainly aren’t mine. Believe it or not, there are people out there who disagree with the DEI approach but still agree that systemic racism/sexism in society is a problem that needs addressing. Don’t lump me in with the GOP.