Here we have a story about four engineers who seem to be extremely happy to be accepting an award on behalf of Slack, so your concern over how you would feel if you were pressured to take the kind of award you're considering seems entirely synthetic.
As I said, I can't speak to the experiences and perspectives of these women because the circumstances are very different.
On this topic of identity politics in the workplace I'm offering my perspective as a quasi-minority.
When you're put in any situation in which you're somehow singled out because of your background, you should, if you feel it warranted, quit and then write the story up. Then we can discuss your concern in a context where it actually makes sense. I was not being sarcastic: if that ever happens to you, I feel like most people on this site will be very sympathetic to your problem.
There is an old message board term for the practice of synthesizing a concern and imputing it to someone else for the purpose of argumentation. It isn't a positive term.
How is that not a reasonable way to start a discussion? I recognize that I will never fully understand the perspective of a black woman, however I still live in the same society as black women and must live with the consequences of identity politics whatever my relationship with identity is.
I am not a black woman so what would be a reasonable way to approach this story and its wider social implications?
I suspect you simply don't approve of this discussion taking place.
My issue is not that you chose to describe your own feelings, though I feel like those feelings are pretty banal and uninteresting. My issue is that you chose to share those feelings by reframing someone else's feelings. You would be uncomfortable. These people are not. Your circumstances are so different from theirs that we can safely assume there are plenty of valid reasons why they feel differently.
A cis-gendered heterosexual male WASP's perspective on this would still be a reasonable jumping off point for discussion to me. I simply offer my perspective as a Jew because at least it gives me some iota of room to criticize identity politics in the minds of people who believe deeply in identity politics.
I'm a person, not a prop to be used by a corporation to score social points.
All the evidence in this story points to the conclusion that these particular people do not feel so used.
Considering this was done consciously what is message we are meant to come away with?
Is it
a) to show the world that black women can be engineers at successful companies?
b) to show the world that companies can be successful with black women engineers?
c) to show the world that companies are more successful with black women engineers?
In each of those cases what are the implications of them not feeling like a prop?
d) to show the world that companies are more successful when they don't adopt practices that exclude black women engineers?
Then, to be fully charitable, replace "black women" with "statistically underrepresented people", or whatever term you feel comes closest to that which will allow us not to pointlessly litigate.
Then, I think the answer is (a, b, d).
Finally, the simplest, most obvious implication of them not feeling "like a prop" is that they share the objective that their employer has in promoting the idea. The term "prop" is derisive. We don't feel like "props" when we work with other people towards shared goals, even though our work is, directly or indirectly, helping those other people as well.
I suppose that's not exactly a charitable assumption or provable.
But I'm generally happy when the interests of companies line up with what I believe to be the interests of society as a whole.
Companies that go out of their way to be environmentally friendly are most often doing that in order to seize a marketing niche. That's a signal sent with a profit motive. But that doesn't bother me; why should it?
Like you, I do remain wary of the motives of companies when they send signals about social values. Their actions might not match the signals they're sending, or, having firmly established those social values as part of their "brand", they may cease serving those values altogether. I think it's good to be wary of companies.
But I think we should be careful about about letting the social values themselves take flak due solely to that wariness. The ulterior motives of Slack are a small issue. Whichever way you feel about it, diversity is a big issue. Let's not lose the forest for the shrubs.
I suspect we may not entirely agree about the merits of the particular social values ("diversity", whatever) at stake here. I believe the underrepresentation of women and African Americans in tech is a major problem. But either way: you seem like a pretty reasonable person, so, thank you for being that way.
You think minorities are treated the same by society, law enforcement and employers?
It's all in how they asked them, especially if they were given a real choice and allowed to express their ideas/concerns.
This is why "politically correct" exists in the first place. It forces people to practice best behavior even before they realize what they are doing/saying is wrong, until they "get it". At one point it was completely okay to employ only white males. Now it's not.
I think you've focused on the right question: is highlighting superficial differences now the best way to reduce discrimination against superficial differences in the future?
I don't find it obviously true, but I'm open the the possibility that it is. What's convinced you that it's the best approach? What would convince you that it's not?
But now our country has "original sin". Countering the damage that has been done by the generational, institutional holding back of minorities takes great effort.
There are far too many people who think there are no women who code, now add minorities to the mix.
So yes, right now we have to highlight such achievements.
Someday it won't be necessary.
My company lost a woman engineer by badgering her about representing the company in terms of diversity. Turns out she just wanted to be an engineer.
I didn't start programming when I was 10 because there are Jews in tech. I never associated my race or ethnicity with any sort of permission to do anything. The thought never crossed my mind. I didn't grow up in a racialized community even though, yes, I was one of few Jews in the town I grew up in.
I appreciate this question because it gives further evidence that identity politics is detrimental to minorities and society at large.