Hiring Preferences (was "Programming partnership wanted")

Barry Roberts blr at robertsr.us
Thu Mar 31 11:51:35 MST 2005


On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 08:24:49AM -0700, Roberto Mello wrote:
> In a perfect world ...
>

That's always the sticking point isn't it?

Have you ever noticed how only women get hired to play women and men
get hired to play men on television and in movies?  I think if I put
an ad in the paper for a "Female Latino Programmer" I would get in big
trouble (not as much as if I advertised for a "White Male
Programmer").  If I auditioned for Trinity's character in "The Matrix
XIV" I bet they wouldn't hire me based on gender preferences.

I think it's great that Hollywood, ultra-PC defenders of tolerance of
everyone except for people who disagree with you, set such a shining
example of diversity.

But cities lose discrimination lawsuits if they require that you be
physically able to carry a person over your shoulder before you can
qualify to be a firefighter.  Fewer women qualify, so it must be
discrimination.

We're willing to overlook racial, gender, and any other hiring bias in
our entertainment, because, hey, that's important.  Lowering the
physical requirements for firefighters to allow more women only
affects safety of your family.  Compared to entertainment that's
practically nothing.

I think discrimination is wrong, but our current laws lead to some
rather amusing situations.  And they don't have any effect whatsoever
on things like:

> Statiscally, if you have a southern accent, you're considered dumber
> and will get a lower salary.
 
Being from Georgia, I have to say that's a bias that definitely
exists.  State of origin or regional dialect are not protected classes
(AFAIK, but IANAL, just a dumb hick that don't talk right), so that's
perfectly legal.

But I am 6'2", so statistically that brings me back up above average.
Ain't life grand?

Barry 



More information about the PLUG mailing list