Jordan Peterson's Rant in the National Post

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I have an anecdote that might contribute to this conversion ( I won't elaborate further in fear of doxing myself).

I'll put this first, I think that it is a good thing that for the moment there are structures in place meant to ensure diversity in academia. Multiple world views makes for better research where it is qualitative or quantitative, science or arts. In my discipline, Canadian history, it is dominated by white men and women. I would say in my experience, it is about 50/50 according to sex. That said, it is almost exclusively white.

A university that I have lectured for had a position opening for pre-confederation history, and had an over qualified candidate lined up. A woman whose research was both methodologically cutting edge, and rooted in most of the material expected to be taught in courses ( this being a teaching university). That said, she was euro Canadian. After the interview and agreeing informally this gets sent up the bureaucracy, at which point the Indigenous elders advisory board ( or whatever it is called) shoots the candidate down stating that an Indigenous person needs to be hired for this position or they create problems for the dean.

Again, this is great, Indigenous peoples should teach Canadian history and contribute to academic literature. Indeed, every Canadian university agrees and Indigenous PhD students often get hired right after passing their candidacy exams. That's right, they get hired to tenure track positions before finishing their PhD. and for very large sums of money, sums of money that very few History programs ( always broke with diminishing attendance) can afford.

So in response to this, the University chose to close this position because it was not practical for them to find a person, or afford them. Instead, they hired sessional instructors to spot cover ( which is basically free labor), consequently, I myself, grossly under qualified white rural Albertan was a sessional instructor.

Now does this mean that white men in academia are oppressed. No, infact in backwards way it helped a straight white man. But it does raise the question is diversity at every cost always a fruitful policy?

I don't doubt there is some degree of truth to this story, but I'm skeptical of a lot of the straight lines that get drawn like this. Did the Dean tell you this themself? Or did this come through the grapevine?

What happened to the over-qualified candidate? There just seem to be an awful lot of other possible reasons why that might not have worked out...

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's just again pigeonholing equality. But only one way.

Look at the accounting department in your company. It's probably majority non-white and that's OK. But if it were all white guys suddenly it's a problem and privileged.

And then there's the whole university degree status thing. If you are a woman for example and you don't have a university degree not in white collar jobs or you are a housewife or in child care, you are diminished, not contributing to the female quotas needed in society. I could tell you tonnes of such stories.

I could go on and on, why aren't there more male nurses? Why aren't there more women lawyers etc etc.

Is this a really a thing?

[PeteMoss]

My take on this is that it seems more unfair than it is in reality. I know people in academia that are white and they don't seem to have issues ever getting funding or finding places to work.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Is this a really a thing?

Not on purpose but more non-white people choose accounting for various reasons. My point is, does anyone ever say, "It's wrong that there aren't any white guys in accounting, we need to do something about that."

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Not on purpose but more non-white people choose accounting for various reasons. My point is, does anyone ever say, "It's wrong that there aren't any white guys in accounting, we need to do something about that."

I guess my question was more that I've never noticed a lack of white guys in finance departments. I suppose as a percentage it may be lower than other groups but not to the extent that its anything I've noticed.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Not on purpose but more non-white people choose accounting for various reasons. My point is, does anyone ever say, "It's wrong that there aren't any white guys in accounting, we need to do something about that."

Is the lack of white guys in accounting a result of a history of accounting positions being denied to them because they're white males?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Is the lack of white guys in accounting a result of a history of accounting positions being denied to them because they're white males?

Nope. But it should at least raise a question? What if they're being denied now? A new history being created.

Or we should not be raising questions either way, lack of any class of person in any profession. Just let it happen organically. Again, companies that don't adapt to changing demographics will lose out. Those demographics can be anything, race, gender, having kids, working from home etc...

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Nope. But it should at least raise a question? What if they're being denied now? A new history being created.

Sure. If we see a number of white males saying they've been denied jobs due to their whiteness, and have evidence of such, we should absolutely examine it.

Or we should not be raising questions either way, lack of any class of person in any profession. Just let it happen organically. Again, companies that don't adapt to changing demographics will lose out. Those demographics can be anything, race, gender, having kids, working from home etc...

Ah yes, private companies are notoriously great at self-regulating against discrimination. Good lord.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sure. If we see a number of white males saying they've been denied jobs due to their whiteness, and have evidence of such, we should absolutely examine it.

Ah yes, private companies are notoriously great at self-regulating against discrimination. Good lord.

I think they are, in my experience anyways. And if they're not, they suck and will go out of business.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I don't doubt there is some degree of truth to this story, but I'm skeptical of a lot of the straight lines that get drawn like this. Did the Dean tell you this themself? Or did this come through the grapevine?

What happened to the over-qualified candidate? There just seem to be an awful lot of other possible reasons why that might not have worked out...

No #### I heard it through the grapevine, you think a lowly session instructor gets to know any of this. I learned it in conversation with my friend who was on the hiring committee and another friend who has spoken to similar pressure in their own university.

The candidate is likely doing what most PhD Historians are doing, jumping from research contract to research contract, working as a sessional instructor and part time somewhere else, hoping their post doc funding doesnt run out, moving to butt #### nowhere because its the only open position in the continent, or hoping that they can marry someone with a position already so that they can be a spousal hire. lol

Anyways, you shouldn't read to much into this or anything you hear from strangers on the internet, I just thought it was interesting in light of the topic at hand.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sure. If we see a number of white males saying they've been denied jobs due to their whiteness, and have evidence of such, we should absolutely examine it.

I have applied for a lot of positions where they ask if you are white. It's always asked in a round about way.

"We are an equal opportunity employer. Please indicate if you identify with any of the following groups...". Or you can choose not to answer, but who else but a white person would do that when you know that part of the application process is to give points based on being non-white? As former business owner who used online application software, I know you can make it that if certain boxes are checked, the applications get put in a separate inbox will likely not be viewed. I used to use it for the check box asking how much experience you had. Less than 6 months, and the application would be sorted out and never seen.

Honestly, whenever I see that equal opportunity box, I wonder if it is even worth applying for. Some places put it at the end after you have spent considerable time filling everything out, so you might as well submit. If I see it at the beginning though, I would usually not bother.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I have applied for a lot of positions where they ask if you are white. It's always asked in a round about way.

"We are an equal opportunity employer. Please indicate if you identify with any of the following groups...". Or you can choose not to answer, but who else but a white person would do that when you know that part of the application process is to give points based on being non-white? As former business owner who used online application software, I know you can make it that if certain boxes are checked, the applications get put in a separate inbox will likely not be viewed. I used to use it for the check box asking how much experience you had. Less than 6 months, and the application would be sorted out and never seen.

Honestly, whenever I see that equal opportunity box, I wonder if it is even worth applying for. Some places put it at the end after you have spent considerable time filling everything out, so you might as well submit. If I see it at the beginning though, I would usually not bother.

Is that allowed? I don't believe it is in Ontario.

[TorqueDog]

I always laughed at those 'Do you identify as one of the following' questions. You can answer virtually whatever the hell you want, no one is going to confront you about it.
"Y'know James, you indicated you're of South Asian descent but Bill in HR mentioned you look sort of Irish with a tan; can you explain this discrepancy?"
"I'm half Pakistani."
"Do you have any documentation for this?"

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sure. If we see a number of white males saying they've been denied jobs due to their whiteness, and have evidence of such, we should absolutely examine it.

Even Vanilla Ice still has work these days, and if there's anything you can use to describe Vanilla Ice, it's 'whiteness'.

[activeStick]

The firm I work for definitely has targets for both African American and women to be partners and I'm completely okay and supportive of this. They aren't going to just put anyone in these spots and I'm sure it's a case of, 'all other things being equal'. And since they've been doing this, the firm has seen continued growth year over year including a strong year during the pandemic.

[Major Major]

Academia is not my world, so I don't really know what's what, but there are an increasing number of people ringing this bell. Sam Harris, John McWhorter, Glenn Loury amongst others. He is not on an island here.

I have never really been interested in Peterson... Just not really my style of ideas and communication. But this article is being written in some form by less radioactive people.

I think the academic/intellectual community sees themselves more like professional athletes than having a regular job. They compete in the idea space as heavyweights and so the idea that someone is entering that space without earning it is a slap in the face to those who have. And a much larger slap in the face to a minority who may have their accomplishments cheapened because they will be looked upon as a diversity hire.

That's the challenge to this line of thinking is that they assume it is pervading from the academic realm to the culture at large. Peterson clearly makes some leaps in this regard and doesn't really give it the unpacking to make it land.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Honestly, whenever I see that equal opportunity box, I wonder if it is even worth applying for. Some places put it at the end after you have spent considerable time filling everything out, so you might as well submit. If I see it at the beginning though, I would usually not bother.

As someone who works for an organization that has those types of questions on their applications, they matter very little in the screening process. From what I understand, much of it is for reporting metrics.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Is that allowed? I don't believe it is in Ontario.

I know I came across it a lot when I was in Ontario. I think the way they get around it is giving the option to not answer the question, so no one is being forced to self-identify.

But once someone is employed, employees are often asked to complete self-identification forms so that the data can be used if the company is audited under the federal Employment Equity Act.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

My take on this is that it seems more unfair than it is in reality. I know people in academia that are white and they don't seem to have issues ever getting funding or finding places to work.

yeah, Canadian History is 95% white people. In my experience working adjacently to academia, it has never been difficult to find a job, even in a discipline where work is not thick on the ground. The real issue is market saturation. There are more qualified people than ever before. Especially for tenured positions. I have been told at multiple levels by multiple people it is easier to find work as an M.A with work experience than as a PhD.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's a good anecdote of forcing things. Do people really care about development of say Indigenous. Are they grooming say an high school student in this role. Or do they want to just check off a box and virtue signal?

And you said, now the reverse of their intention is happening. More sessional instructors, white guys, are getting hired.

I'm all for fairness, it has to happen organically. (like if the Raiders and Chargers had tied organically haha). Companies that recognize fairness will get the best of both sides and the best of people in general. Companies like the ones who are just interviewing Firebot's wife based on tokenism or they thought she was white and were surprised that she wasn't, those companies will naturally just die off.


Edit: Yes, Fuzz, those law firms will just eventually die off. Again, are companies really investing in diversity or just checking boxes? And of course the other side, are minorities expecting promotions based just on race and not performance?

Are you an "ALL LIVES MATTER!" person? Because you're stripping all context and history in your replies.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

"We are an equal opportunity employer. Please indicate if you identify with any of the following groups...". Or you can choose not to answer..." Is that allowed? I don't believe it is in Ontario.

Is the Identity question legal? I'm not sure. Has it become standard, you bet!

Universities; Hospitals; Municipalities; Large charities; Recruiters.

All seem to have the Identity section - Do you Identify as a visible minority? Do you Identify as Indigenous? Do you have a disability? As which gender do you identify?

It's nothing but another weeding out process. There are so many people looking. I try not to take it personally.