White and male, Google releases diversity data

[Correction]

To be fair, the idea that the racial/gender mix of a certain field should be roughly equal to the racial/gender mix of the population at large is entirely flawed to begin with. Different people are different, and the more different people are, the more different their choices will likely be. There are fewer differences between people of the same gender/race, and so it's unsurprising when people who are less different make similar choices to each other.

Race is a social construct. The differences I'm pointing out are a product of centuries of racial inequality reinforced at every level of American society from the government, to big business to individual land owners, and handwaving it as 'different people are different' is like saying black people segregate themselves because they want it that way. Google is trying to open up clearer paths for minorities to make it into the tech sector, but the other half of the equation is making a commitment to combat the effects of slavery, Jim Crow and the war on drugs whose most toxic effects are still extremely relevant in 2014.

[Edelweiss]

It's more fundamental than that. Stabilize the living situation of black/hispanic households by undoing the racist justice system, doing something (anything) to combat increasing structural segregation, improve the social safety net, and maybe, just maybe they can stop worrying about getting killed/starving to death/arrested by racist cops long enough to enjoy things like the free time required at home to study and use technology in a manner conducive to a STEM educational track.

My high school was one of the rare ones where we had a pretty good STEM series of programs and the like in the early 2000s; a good number of non-white students in there were really at a disadvantage due to conditions at home that were, frankly, not conducive with their interest in STEM fields. Which is a damn shame, since there were some really promising kids there who were disadvantaged by the above stuff and the access to labs and the like was not probably nearly as good as it needed to be due to dumbfuck budgetary battles.

I think (and someone can please step in and contribute / correct me respectfully if they feel I'm wrong), that in some advising, when someone sees a Latino/Latina/Black or other underserved minority in college, they may steer them towards other majors that they feel are "easier", not out of malice or overt racism, but because they feel that completion rates in those majors already tend to be low, and they don't want to see some kid fail out of college when they already have the cards stacked against them.

It's very hard to explain succinctly, but the best way I can frame it is that if you're in that population and say to an adviser "hey, I want to major in computer science, engineering, or something else", the person doing counseling might say something like "That major can be very tough" (I'm broadly generalizing here) or 'it tends to take longer' etc. here.

This has been my experience, in part; a number of non-white men and women at my undergrad universit who were "undecided" and wound up majoring in political science (and being happy with it) found the competitiveness/demanding coursework (among the other shit you mentioned) as a deterrent, compounded by their indecisiveness about what to major it. That said, a number of them went onto graduate school for law and stuff too.... so /shrug.

[BerenTebogo]

From what I've seen in CS departments as well and math and physics departments at a number of different schools these percentages are right in line with the percentage of the graduating classes of people with degrees in these fields.

So one (intelligent person) might argue that, as others have said, the problem begins much earlier than the workforce or even college. Google can't just be hanging <insert minority here> on the wall like pictures to get their numbers up if they aren't qualified.

[Correction]

From what I've seen in CS departments as well and math and physics departments at a number of different schools these percentages are right in line with the percentage of the graduating classes of people with degrees in these fields.

So one (intelligent person) might argue that, as others have said, the problem begins much earlier than the workforce or even college. Google can't just be hanging <insert minority here> on the wall like pictures to get their numbers up if they aren't qualified.

The lack of correlation between the ratio of non-tech degrees earned by minorities and the non-tech demographic makeup of Google's workforce kind of fails to prop up this idea in aggregate.

[Blubbartron]

Race is a social construct. The differences I'm pointing out are a product of centuries of racial inequality reinforced at every level of American society from the government, to big business to individual land owners, and handwaving it as 'different people are different' is like saying black people segregate themselves because they want it that way. Google is trying to open up clearer paths for minorities to make it into the tech sector, but the other half of the equation is making a commitment to combat the effects of slavery, Jim Crow and the war on drugs whose most toxic effects are still extremely relevant in 2014.

Where we draw the lines to define one race from another is a social construct, but race in and of itself is a real, biological thing. There are genetic differences between different groups of people (termed races). They aren't large differences, but there also isn't a large difference genetically between humans and apes. Would you prefer the term breed to race? Pitbulls and chihuahuas are both dogs, but they are very clearly different.

Also, there is at least some portion of segregation that is self-imposed. Almost all minority groups do it, and it's most clearly seen in larger cities where there are "mini countries" for each ethnic group. People want to be around people like them; that's where they feel safe and comfortable. It's an unfortunate side effect of the tribalistic tendencies of humans. Doesn't matter if you define your tribe by religion, race, career, education, or politics - at the end of the day, people seek out others that are like themselves.

Lastly, yes, the war on drugs is retarded. A massive waste of money, with lots of laws that "conveniently" targeted minorities over whites (see crack vs. cocaine). However, I'm kind of confused where you think Jim Crow is still having any effects today, except perhaps in the deep south that is sliding backwards despite the rest of the country's attempts to drag them forward.

[Edelweiss]

Jim Crow

The most prevalent example might be voter ID laws and maybe "stand your ground" laws; both of which African-Americans disproportionately get the short end of the stick on, like universally.

[ronin sparthos]

The most prevalent example might be voter ID laws and maybe "stand your ground" laws; both of which African-Americans disproportionately get the short end of the stick on, like universally.

Why stop at Jim Crow when the entire system is at its core corrupt and racist? It may be quaint to pool all evil into the disgusting racism of the South but our country as a whole has been pretty racist. We might want to try income, earning potential, pooled family capital, segregated communities designed by urban planners, inadequate public resources, poor health, racism in the workplace, discrimination regarding home loans, ability to start a business or get hired in comparison to white peers when discussing the imbalance that leads to embarrassing numbers like Google. High tech jobs demand a specialized skillset you aren't going to acquire when you can't even get up to date textbooks and teachers who give a fuck because your municipality has decided to divest. Why divest? Cause brown people are expendable.

(Initiatives have been taken to address these issues and number charter schools are busy pumping out STEM ready minorities so we'll probably see these folk affect the numbers in the coming decades. I often wonder if they'll even be enough jobs for them or if we'll be here in 20 years with angry people saying these engineering/tech degrees ain't worth shit because the market has again shifted and these jobs have been outsourced.)

All of these factors lead to a marked disadvantage which perpetuates the idea that minorities don't want to work in tech or appreciate these coveted positions. How can you when the social deck is being stacked against you? Colleges fawn over the few blacks/hispanics that manage to make it far enough (without falling into povety, jail or drugs) precisely because of the rarity of a minority being able to have the skills/resources/opportunities needed to compete at the collegiate level and beyond. If you're a woman well shit, the stars are motherfucking aligned here.

And despite that you're still at a disadvantage regarding pooled family resources and connections. The roots are rotten and what we're seeing are the bad fruit blossoming. Then again we still have people alive today who remember an era where Blacks/Hispanics didn't even have basic rights and that alone says so much.

[Correction]

Also, there is at least some portion of segregation that is self-imposed. Almost all minority groups do it, and it's most clearly seen in larger cities where there are "mini countries" for each ethnic group. People want to be around people like them; that's where they feel safe and comfortable. It's an unfortunate side effect of the tribalistic tendencies of humans. Doesn't matter if you define your tribe by religion, race, career, education, or politics - at the end of the day, people seek out others that are like themselves.

No. The government literally carved out neighborhoods for blacks, latinos, whites, etc.

However, I'm kind of confused where you think Jim Crow is still having any effects today, except perhaps in the deep south that is sliding backwards despite the rest of the country's attempts to drag them forward.

Jim Crow laws were segregation laws. Segregation wasn't exclusive to the South, and still isn't. I suggest you start doing some reading on the subject rather than continuing to go with your gut feelings and beliefs on the matter.

[Blubbartron]

The most prevalent example might be voter ID laws and maybe "stand your ground" laws; both of which African-Americans disproportionately get the short end of the stick on, like universally.

I'm failing to see how those laws are institutionalized segregation. They're arguably racist. In reality the voter ID laws weren't specifically targeting any one minority group; they were created because the old conservative folks who predominantly vote Republican would almost certainly meet the criteria, and the younger/minority folks who predominantly vote Democrat were less likely to. As far as "stand your ground" laws, this is, again, a chicken and egg argument. If more young black males commit violent crimes than any other group, and you create a law that lets people legally kill people committing a violent crime against them, then it stands to reason that more young black males will be legally killed under that law. Whether or not it was intended to result in more young black males getting killed (i.e. had racist intent) is pretty much impossible to know.

[Blubbartron]

No. The government literally carved out neighborhoods for blacks, latinos, whites, etc.

Jim Crow laws were segregation laws. Segregation wasn't exclusive to the South, and still isn't. I suggest you start doing some reading on the subject rather than continuing to go with your gut feelings and beliefs on the matter.

Um, what I'm reading there about redlining is that it was a capitalistic decision that was probably unintentionally racist, and at worst only partially motivated by racism. Of course banks don't want to lend to high risk people. Of course businesses will charge more for their services to offset the increased risk of losses due to robbery/vandalism. While it may have had racist motivations, that's very difficult to prove (even though it's incredibly easy to assert). Also, I don't see anything about the government in that wiki page.

I'm not horrifying ignorant when it comes to history or laws, so do me a solid and try not to be a dick. I'm sure I can find plenty of people claiming, as you claim, that segregation and racism is rampant, but I need evidence. There's plenty of people still claiming that women actually do get paid less than a man with the same education/experience, even though there's zero evidence backing it up, and tons of evidence showing it's blatantly false. Give me any evidence at all man.

[Correction]

"Black people self-select to live near each other."

*is provided link showing government-reinforced racial segregation*

"Don't make assertions without evidence, they probably didn't do that on purpose!"

[Blubbartron]

"Black people self-select to live near each other."

*is provided link showing government-reinforced racial segregation*

"Don't make assertions without evidence, they probably didn't do that on purpose!"

Once again, the government was not involved in redlining according to that wiki link. It's a business practice, not a governmental one. It also doesn't seem to have any direct effect on where black people choose to live. It seems to have an effect on how much they pay for things (and what services they can get) after they have an address established in a redlined area.

[Cantih]

It's a business practice, not a governmental one.

*headdesk*

[Correction]

Once again, the government was not involved in redlining according to that wiki link. It's a business practice, not a governmental one. It also doesn't seem to have any direct effect on where black people choose to live. It seems to have an effect on how much they pay for things (and what services they can get) after they have an address established in a redlined area.

It feels like we're getting further and further away from the central point the more you get hung up on whether or not I'm convincing you of the motive underpinning the status quo. The policies of our fine society have stacked the deck heavily against minorities, whether or not they intended it, it has happened. So it must be combated. It's as simple as that.

[ronin sparthos]

Voter ID laws drafted that most negatively affect blacks/hispanics who often lack drivers licenses/state ID due to income, location.
Probably not institutionalized racism.

Banks less likely to give out loans to blacks/hispanics due to lagging collateral, generational capital and fears the business will fail in comparison to white peers caused by racist government policy put into practice?
Probably not institutionalized racism.

Shitty neighborhoods carved out for blacks/hispanics or white flight effect in conjunction with marked decreases in public services including safety and general divestment in community?
Probably not institutionalized racism.

Even shittier subprime home loans floated to mostly blacks/hispanics alongside using churches as a means to spread this contagion which hit hard when the housing market went to shit setting black/hispanic homeowners back decades?
Probably not institutionalized racism.

Public services that magically return to black/hispanic neighborhoods once the hooks of gentrification take effect and said blacks/hispanics are priced out?
Probably not institutionalized racism.

Rockefeller Drug Laws, Reagan-era war on drugs?
Probably not institutionalized racism.

[notorious bum]

Shit, there was an article I just read that debunked the little immigrant towns being "voluntary segregation" or whatever revisionist history calls it. Not to mention the trove of information available now about the re-surge of segregation in the school system. America finds a way to take us time-traveling without even needing a DeLorean. Great Scott!

[Azull]

Voter ID laws drafted that most negatively affect blacks/hispanics who often lack drivers licenses/state ID due to income, location.

A little off topic I guess...but I never understood why this is an issue. Unless I am missing something according to this ( http://dmvanswers.com/questions/419/...-ID-cards-cost ) every state lets you get an ID for under $30 bucks except Oregon. Most let you get one for far less then that.

[quannum]

that's a $30 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_(United_States)

[Tricen]

A little off topic I guess...but I never understood why this is an issue. Unless I am missing something according to this ( http://dmvanswers.com/questions/419/...-ID-cards-cost ) every state lets you get an ID for under $30 bucks except Oregon. Most let you get one for far less then that.

I don't think you understand what being poor means. It means you don't have money. Or you only have enough money to survive. People are saying that voting is a right to US citizens and should not cost any money. As far as the actual topic the thread is about, I'm just glad to see a big business coming out and saying, "Hey btw, look at this, isn't it kind of interesting?" Hopefully it gets people talking, even though it was already painfully obvious.

[Meresgi]

The kind of thinking that is prevalent in Hispanic culture. It's the mindset that says "I should stick to the construction and manufacturing industry because that is where everybody I know works and I have the most support there". I have personal experience here that says people can be quite hard on themselves and believe that they are worthless regardless of their skills.

They should stick with the construction/carpentry/plumbing jobs because they can make a shit load more and be more satisfied then writing code for 12hrs a day lol.

A little off topic I guess...but I never understood why this is an issue. Unless I am missing something according to this ( http://dmvanswers.com/questions/419/...-ID-cards-cost ) every state lets you get an ID for under $30 bucks except Oregon. Most let you get one for far less then that.

Like Tricen said, shouldn't HAVE to pay to fucking vote, especially when we tout ourselves as a bastion of democracy yet other countries including India are bitch slapping us on that front.