Re:Push for Gender Equality in Tech? Some Men Say It’s Gone ...
by BerislavLopac on Saturday September 23, 2017 @05:27PM
(#15321833)
By definition, you can't have a meritocracy without having diversity. In a meritocracy, someone needs to determine the "merit", or at least define the rules which will determine it. And as long as that someone is human, the merit will be affected by their thoughts, emotions, beliefs and understanding of the world, which are in turn determined (or at the very least affected) by the world around them.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Push for Gender Equality in Tech? Some Men Say It’s Gone ...
by jules on Saturday September 23, 2017 @05:32PM
(#15321858)
You do not need diversity to have a meritocracy in 100m sprint. Diversity may help to get closer to meritocracy in other fields, but in some fields the criteria are so difficult to determine that even with diversity it may be virtually impossible within a single company. The good news is that the market corrects this: the industry misjudging opens an opportunity for other companies to hire more effectively by judging correctly. If you believe that the industry is undervaluing group X, then you can hire more effectively by hiring group X.
Re:Push for Gender Equality in Tech? Some Men Say It’s Gone ...
by BerislavLopac on Saturday September 23, 2017 @05:57PM
(#15321985)
> You do not need diversity to have a meritocracy in 100m sprint.
I'm not sure that Jesse Owens would agree with you.
The only reason why it seems that we don't is because there are rules which determine the winner, and those rules reflect the worldview of those who have set them. Even today the athletic sprint is not full "meritocracy", as women compete separate from men.
One more note: I've put the word meritocracy in quotes because 100m sprint has nothing to do with meritocracy. That term means that the most capable ones rule, while in athletics those with best results certainly don't rule, even if they reap other rewards.