Hacker News Reader

Comment by _3u10 | Hacker News Reader

I’ve never really understood the diversity thing. Why should it be more desirable to hire me because I was born in this place or that?

Is the native part of me more deserving of a contract than the Latin part?

If I was with a guy the night before instead of a woman am I more beneficial to a company? Am I even more valuable on the odd night I’m with a trans person?

Am I more beneficial with my Paraguayan passport instead of a Canadian passport?

Diversity should just be called what it is, bigotry.

View on HN

If diversity is valuable then:

  * in an organization filled with native (whatever that means) people, your Latin heritage would add value. In an organization filled with people with Latin heritage, the native part of you would add value.

  * in a company filled with cis-straight men, then diversity being valuable implies that anyone with a different experience would add value.

  * in Paraguay, your Canadian experience is more valuable in terms of whatever value diversity brings than it is in Canada. By contrast, in Canada, your Paraguayan experience would offer more value.

Of course, it is possible that it's not true that diverity is valuable. But there's solid anecdotal evidence that it is, and maybe even a bit of actual statistics.

Oh by native I mean indigenous, I’d just say Indian but I’m not allowed to call myself that anymore without issues from the PC people telling me how ashamed of myself I should feel. I always forget the acceptable term to refer to myself by.

I kind of get it but I just call that hiring people with experience.

Like I do get hired because I’ve done a whole bunch of different roles and have actual diversity I’m not just a Java programmer with 20 years of experience making login forms.

Also having done a lot of things I usually have an interesting non-work story to tell.

I find that kind of diversity hugely valuable. I find hiring people because they check a diversity box dumb and bigoted.

Well yeah, mostly.

The worst-case scenario is a bunch of people with different ethnicity, religious affiliation/experience, gender identity, age, etc. etc. ... who all like the same entertainment, food, clothing and vacation options. "Diversity" ... yes. But actual diversity, no.

However, I'm not sure that this actually a real-world problem.

I'm not going to defend diversity but the idea is having a Paraguayan and Chinese would be better than two Paraguayans because you get insight from two cultures vs one.

For some roles this might be important (sales) for others like accounting it's foolish.

What if the Paraguayan and Chinese cannot (hypothetically) effectively work together because of cultural differences?

That's the other side. Having all Chinese allows for easier communication, shared cultural experiences, similiar worldview.

Location is a factor.. in China everyone is Chinese. In the US you have a variety of people with different cultural backgrounds. What works in China couldn't work in the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com