Comment by moralestapia | Hacker News Reader

Comment by moralestapia | Hacker News Reader

Phew, what a post.

I am at University of Toronto right now. I have only been here for some months but I have seen enough things to get a sense of the "politics" of the place. Also, I've been in many of the world's top universities (Caltech, Cornell, KAUST, Oxford, Stanford, UNAM, and some others with less pompous names); either studying, visiting, working, w/e. I've been doing this for close to 20 years now. I know a lot about what academia is and how it works behind the scenes.

With that said ... University of Toronto is, by far, the most amicable, egalitarian and open academic environment I've ever had the chance to be in. I have several Indian friends I've made during my stay, and not a single time has the issue of caste come up to relevance. Caste doesn't have anything to do, at all, with how this particular University chooses their faculty members.

I know OP is not directly (or is he?) accusing UofT of taking part on this, but someone reading this could easily get that impression since 1) he's using his academic page to publish this "opinion" and 2) he states:

>I had begun to mention references to my caste in Facebook/Twitter threads in the past two years. I was, however, not ready to publicly declare it until <I received tenure (in bold letters)> as it seemed too risky.

So, to all other readers, I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election/non-election as a faculty member and I really wanted to set the record straight on what actually is a really nice place that treats all of its members with dignity and respect.

I am faculty at University of Toronto. As part of the process of considering someone for tenure here, the university solicits six appraisals from relevant experts at other institutions. The candidate will not know who the referees are. Generally, the appraisals are positive; a negative appraisal may severely affect someone's tenure case.

I don't see the concern in this post as one of widespread caste discrimination at University of Toronto, but more that he's worried that a single prejudiced person might upset this, either an external referee, or someone internal involved in the decision-making process. In fact, that is exactly what he says.

https://www.aapm.utoronto.ca/academic-administrative-procedu...

Everyone carries some cultural/personal baggage, if that affects the outcome of some otherwise fair procedure it's a sad story but it's not the procedure's fault.

>the university solicits six appraisals from relevant experts at other institutions

If you think this could be improved, well, show us how.

It seems like you may be reading some things into my comment that I didn't write? I made no claims about the procedure being fair or unfair—I'm just describing what it is.

>Everyone carries some cultural/personal baggage, if that affects the outcome of some otherwise fair procedure it's a sad story but it's not the procedure's fault.

This is a neutral statement, though.

Pardon for reaching for personal traits, but it seems relevant in this case. You have a name of Hispanic origin. That gives me the impression that you are not the target audience of this article, or someone that would be likely to notice these very subtle biases that exist in a different culture.

Can you think of any very subtle racism/bias that exists in your culture, which foreigners may not be able to pick up on without extreme command of the culture + language? I sure can.

Not saying anything about UoT one way or another, just to take what people say seriously unless you have reason to doubt them. This isn't outrage on behalf of someone else, this is someone living the experience and telling their story.

>Pardon for reaching for personal traits, but it seems relevant in this case. You have a name of Hispanic origin.

Don't worry about that, I do well wherever I go.

That aside, I never wrote anything to discredit OPs personal story.

I just don't want readers to get the wrong impression from UofT.

> So, to readers here, I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election/non-election as a faculty member

That's a strong claim to make for someone who was not at all involved in the process.

Quite a shallow argument.

For starters, the guy did get his tenure, which implies that caste did not have a negative impact in the decision.

You're right, yours is a very shallow argument.

Unless you can reveal anything about the inner workings of the tenure board, you are taking your impression of a broad organisation and applying it to a specific department, a management structure and a board for which you are ignorant.

Please don't make sweeping generalisations and minimise the position of the author unless you have actual knowledge that might let you walk in his shoes.

If we are being pedantic, the burden of proof does not lie on me.

I didn't publish AND promote a blog post where I feared not getting my current job because of some social dynamic that happens to exist 12,500km from where I am right now.

You should ask OP to provide evidence of caste discrimination in Canada, at this particular University.

You:

> I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election/non-election

Also you:

> the burden of proof does not lie on me

You made very strong claims in your opening post. Asking you to provide some proof to support those claims is perfectly valid.

Read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law)

>In a legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct.

>(emphasis) while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct

>The burden of proof is usually on the person who brings a claim in a dispute.

In case it's not clear, I'm not OP, I did not write TFA.

But you are also making your own claim, by asserting with absolute confidence that caste-based discrimination doesn't exist. If you were just questioning the reasoning of the author, then sure, the burden of proof would be with them.

Also, this is not a courtroom.

>(emphasis) while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct

Posting this sentence for the third time. I am on the "presumably correct" side.

>Also, this is not a courtroom.

Why is that important?

You completely missed my point. You aren't "the other party" once you start making claims of your own.

"I can assure you that caste had absolutely nothing to do with OPs election..."

If your argument was just "there's not enough evidence to conclude that..." then I would agree with you.

> Why is that important?

Because you're trying to apply a convention from the context of legal disputes to something that isn't a legal dispute. Do you also ask HN commenters to go through a discovery process?

There's a lot to say but it can be summarized as: you cannot appeal to, and simultaneously ignore, the burden of proof.

Following your really weird strawman, if we are not in a courtroom, why is it important? X2

Make up your mind, man.

> I have several Indian friends I've made during my stay here, and not a single time has the issue of caste has come up to be discussed.

I'm guessing it's not discussed at great length and not discussed with non-Indian people at all unless you brimg it up.

If you're trying to hint at some "it happens all the time, it's just hidden from public view", it doesn't.

Non-Indians literally don't care, and very (very) few Indians actually do (at least in Canada).

> If you're trying to hint at some "it happens all the time, it's just hidden from public view", it doesn't.

> Non-Indians literally don't care

These are contradicting statements. We know non-Indians don't care ... because most of us don't even know about it, at least in any capacity to have a strong opinion. Maybe non-Indians "literally" not caring is why "it's just hidden from public view"

By "don't care", I didn't mean "they know but don't care"; I meant "non-Indians are completely oblivious of this".

You cannot accuse of someone behaving in a discriminatory way if those very concepts of discrimination don't even exist in their mind. Come on.

You are entirely missing my point. What I'm saying is the concept of caste discrimination doesn't exist in the minds of the vast majority of Westerners. Which would enable the exact scenario you pose:

> If you're trying to hint at some "it happens all the time, it's just hidden from public view", it doesn't.

How would anyone outside the caste system be aware of it occurring? And why would people benefiting from their caste talk about it?

If you live in Canada, you most likely have known some Indians and the caste system. It’s just we don’t care? It’s not a taboo topic of discussion either.

Obviously a much different topic if the caste system prevails itself within Indian communities itself. Unfortunately I can’t comment much on it, but I’ve heard that’s not extremely uncommon among recent immigrants.

No, I just don't think your statement supports your argument, because its a topic that might not be discussed in front of you.

I think the article is implying that the discrimination is by other Indians, non Indians don't care, thats assumed.

The regional differences (Gujaratis vs Punjabis vs Telegus) are more pronounced than any caste based differences that I have come across.

As a non-Indian in Canada, I think it's pretty hard not to notice when one department is full of people named Jain, just like the department head. While I wouldn't expect to notice in less obvious cases, I care, and it sure seems like that department head cares.

The issue is not with the non-Indians, at least not directly. And with the Indians, it's that a few do, have moved to positions of responsibility, and can influence opinion enough to make life difficult (at least that is my external view).

Google and Cisco's issues last year [1] [2] made a lot of folks aware that something was inside a lot of big tech because of all the H1B's, foreign hiring, outsourcing, ect... The behavior was being brought over from India and then existing in the corporate ladder. (avoiding the word "hide")

It's also subtle. It's not, "you're dalit, act like a dalit." It's leaving you out of meetings, getting assignments that don't matter, not listening when you talk. It's a bit like a dance. They don't sneer at you, they don't act openly racist, they just don't dance with you. "why are you touching me?"

[1] https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/googles-caste-bias-pr...

[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/big-techs-big-pro...

Curious what issues you are referring to with those 2 companies (be specific please)? I'm not sure if you know but the Cisco case was thrown out recently because there was zero evidence, in fact the alleged perpetrator of the discrimination had hired another Dalit (so called "lower" caste) into the same position. I'm not making this up, it's all public information.

As for Google, all I see is that they (rightfully) withdrew an invitation to a speaker who has made a bunch of troubling bigoted statements bashing Hindus as a whole. Again all this is public information you can look it up.

Can you please cite just one genuinely valid case of caste discrimination in the USA that has stood up to even cursory scrutiny?

Based on your comment of "Indian friends" never bringing it up, do you know what caste they were born into? I mean maybe they never bring it up because it wasn't a problem for their station by birth?

You didn't get the point of my comment.

"Caste" is meaningless here.

Edit: @cududa's comment was something like "care to share what caste you were born into?" to which I replied what you see here and then he altered his comment substantially. Sneaky.

Sorry, I reread the comment and realized the author wasn't from India, so I updated my comment. Should have deleted the original and posted a new comment

The updated post makes sense - you say caste has nothing to do with anything but you may not be in a position to judge.

Especially if all your Indian friends are of the same caste, even if that’s accidentally so.

I have followed this topic for some time out of curiosity. Every time I read an article I am left with the following impression: in America, caste issues are not explicitly mentioned to non-Indians, no matter how close their co-workers or friends are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com