Thank you for sharing, I don't think you troll as some of my younger employees shared the same feeling of disenfranchisment in their 1:1's.
Even if the view of being othered by diversity programs etc. is a little bit skewed, it's definitely having an impact in their psychology, as it's an easy scapegoat for why a raise was not given, a talk got rejected, etc. etc.
The actual cases numbers of these things happening must be much much smaller, but that's beside the point, as it's the psychological aspect that's ruining their perception of themselves and what society expects from them.
Being othered is, as anyone in such a position, especially people with diverse backgrounds, can tell you, not "the notion that they're not the center of the world", but pretty much the feeling of being actively excluded in a "everyone BUT not (people like) me" sense.
Imagine you'd phrase the same statement directed towards people from a minority that are trying to express their feeling of being actively excluded in certain aspects of life, it would be rather vile.
Ok, maybe my experience is limiting my empathy. I’m a white man working for a big Silicon Valley company that has plenty of diversity programs, some mandatory training for all employees. The notion that these programs are seeking to actively exclude people like me seems so absurd that I can’t imagine believing such a thing unless I were essentially a white suprematist seeking victimhood.
When I don’t get a promotion, it’s because I didn’t do enough politics and went home every night to see my family rather than burn the midnight oil; not because diversity-brainwashed white men are somehow conspiring against me as a white man.
I'd encourage you to try to be less judgmental when it comes to the perceptions and feelings of other people, they may be less valid than your own, but they are just as real and their effects on the psychology of the people experiencing them is.
How about we talk about an example that's easier to empathize with:
Close to where I live (Germany) is a social worker center that offers a very special program for kids with severe behavior problems, kind of as a last resort to save them from a life of crime and unemployment. This program includes going rafting and doing lots of exciting outdoor activities in general, constructing a building together with a tradesmen company and even travelling abroad. This is paid for by the child protective services on a case-by-case basis as it's deemed cheaper than paying for years of possible incarceration, drug abuse treatment etc.
A hot topic among teens that hear about this is that a majority of the kids going to this program are from a migrant/minority backgrounds, as our CPS equivalent already often has their attention on these families and suggests the program when it deems it beneficial. Especially kids from poor families that can't afford holidays or most after school activities ask:"So I don't get to do X because I didn't rob a store and my dad is working as a cashier?" as a way of communicating their feelings of being filtered out.
Their feeling of course isn't valid, the kids being sent to this program aren't to be envied as their lot in life is a tough one, but it's easy to emphasize with the teens p.o.v. that all the helping hands are pointed to other people and theirs isn't arriving.
Sir I’m so touch by the psychology and the empathy you use to explain what I tumbled at explaining... I’ll never have those speaking skills as I’m slightly autistic and socially awkward, but when I make a two or three millions (depending on valuation) with my startups, but I’m less than no-one in a (nerd) company, I know people are using my weakness.
World is wild ok, but diversity is just a way to exclude people who can’t defend themselves.
> These same reactionary-minded young men are often repeating mantras like “facts don’t care about your feelings”. Why don’t they apply this sentiment to their own workplace grievances?
You're building up a strawman-stereotype and tearing it down.
Blanket affirmative-action policies are by-definition discrimination, but they are typically viewed as acceptable because they help a group that is statistically disadvantaged. Statistics, if broad enough, will mask details. If your argument starts and ends with "The group this person is a part of most likely has X feature" you will absolutely end up discriminating against some amount of that group. So someone can be a part of a group like "white men" that has, statistically, been the biggest, baddest group in the sandbox in Western society but simultaneously derive no benefit from that being a part of that class.
Whether or not the ends justify the means is subjective opinion.
Offering a resource to a supposed out-group overlooks the fact that members of that out-group could have come from a very privileged background. Would you rather be a wealthy minority from a well-functioning home or a white man from a poor, dysfunctional home?
If you answered the latter, I would love to know why.
Thank you for sharing, I don't think you troll as some of my younger employees shared the same feeling of disenfranchisment in their 1:1's.
Even if the view of being othered by diversity programs etc. is a little bit skewed, it's definitely having an impact in their psychology, as it's an easy scapegoat for why a raise was not given, a talk got rejected, etc. etc.
The actual cases numbers of these things happening must be much much smaller, but that's beside the point, as it's the psychological aspect that's ruining their perception of themselves and what society expects from them.