Hacker News Reader

Comment by creepydata | Hacker News Reader

>Yesterday, I had a wide-ranging Slack conversation with some very nice people who patiently allowed this privileged white male to repeatedly touch the third rail of diversity and inclusion.

Read this three times and I can't understand what it means. Can anyone "translate?"

On the overall topic, it seems really obvious in retrospect that removing formalities in the workplace turns the office into a social club and those who don't want to socialize are excluded. Its certainly an unintended consequence though.

I can certainly see the benefits of formality in the office now that I'm older.

View on HN

The term "third rail" comes from underground subway systems where there is a third, electrified rail to provide power to trains. There are usually warnings in the subway not to touch the rail due to the risk of electrocution. "The third rail" is used colloquially to describe a topic that is socially or politically difficult to discuss because of the reactions it can bring up.

In this context, I think the author is describing conversations he had with people who were patient with him as he asked (possibly naive or hurtful) questions about a hot-button and loaded topic that they had more experience with than he did.

These topics can be particularly tough to ask about because it isn't an oppressed persons job to be an "oppression explainer". I thought his recognition of this was very respectful.

FWIW in other parts of the world an electrified third rail is the norm on overground railroads too.

>These topics can be particularly tough to ask about because it isn't an oppressed persons job to be an "oppression explainer". I thought his recognition of this was very respectful.

If you leave it up to the oppressors to decide for themselves how to make the world a more inclusive space for you without your input, I don’t think you can expect better results than what we’ve had thus far.

However, if it's the oppressed's responsibility to educate every person they interact with, it becomes trivial to DoS them through willful ignorance.

There can't be a social expectation that the privileged are entitled to cognitive labor from already-oppressed individuals, because that can and has been abused.

(That said, people are more likely to be open to a person that they can sense has already done the basic research.)

This isn't a question of ought, it's just a matter of is. People with power will act in their own interests always. The only way to make them act in your interests is to make their interests align with yours.

If nobody is willing to do that, they will appeal to your interests only in the most perfunctory way that never threatens their privileged position. Thus, you get a lot of "diversity panels" that are full of old White men speculating as to what makes you tick.

Fairness and "problematicness" don't enter into it. That's just how the world works. It's easy enough to differentiate ignorance born out of good faith from malicious sea-lioning without having to assume bad faith on everyone's parts simply because of how they present to the world.

OP was expressing frustration at having to deal with explaining third rail topics and the lack of awareness of the asker of how annoying it can be.

It doesn't need to be in bad faith to be annoying. To illustrate the problem, I had a visible medical problem that didn't resolve quickly and had to deal with constant questions about how it was going. While I appreciated the sympathy, it was a bit annoying after answering the same question to tens of people.

> The term "third rail" comes from underground subway systems where there is a third, electrified rail to provide power to trains. There are usually warnings in the subway not to touch the rail due to the risk of electrocution. "The third rail" is used colloquially to describe a topic that is socially or politically difficult to discuss because of the reactions it can bring up.

An older metaphor for the same thing: minefield.

Current social norms require a degree of self-abasement before it's socially acceptable for certain types of people to offer an opinion on certain cultural topics. This is a ritualized phrase designed to fulfill this norm. It's not intended to convey any information.

I wish to subscribe to a newsletter in which you annotate, line by line, speeches by politicians and other popular figures.

That's a cultural norm only among groups of political extremists, and peddlers of left-wing conspiracy theories. Any well-adjusted individual should reject any attempts to have this imposed upon them in order to be a good "cultural-fit".

I think I basically understood this concept, but having it explained so succinctly made me pause and re-read it. Thank you for summing it up so well.

Slack = javascript-based IRC chat system

privileged = in posession of advantages, or lacking disadvantages, that some other people experience

"touch the third rail" = in this context, discuss a difficult topic which often blows up into hostility

diversity = the property of having people of different appearance and background in the same social context

inclusion = work done to bring in people to share the same social context.

Keeping up can be a problem. The US State Department has some off-line resources on political correctness for the use of people returning from a few years outside the US. After a few years in Djibouti or Bangkok, some readjustment is necessary. These are even offered for kids of foreign service officers. ("Transgender bathroom rights? Waat?")

In most tech contexts, diversity means racial and gender appearance-only diversity. There is very little to no thought put into background or cultural diversity.

The different groups (immigrants and 2nd generation children of immigrants) that offer the most cultural and background diversity are flagged as a monolithic group based on appearance, completely ignoring the cultural diversity that they bring.

That line is how people write when they're trying to signal something to a minority of people at the expense of the normal reader. What's really strange is the following "I'll thank them by not naming them".

It's an assumption that they're not comfortable discussing hot-button topics publicly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com