TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Scientific journal apologizes amid backlash over Canadian professor's essay criticizing diversity hiring

funkynotorious

August 18, 2021
131 upvotes
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
https://nationalpost.com/news/canadian-professor-lambasted-for-diversity-article-german-journal-apologizes
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Scientific journal apologizes amid backlash over Canadian professor's essay criticizing diversity hiring
Author

funkynotorious

Upvotes 131
Comments 41
Date August 18, 2021 2:50 PM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/p6spfd/scientific_journal_apologizes_amid_backlash_over/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/scientific-journal-apologizes-amid-backlash-over.1060586
https://theredarchive.com/post/1060586
Top posts by funkynotorious

It's so good to hear a woman talk about reverse gender discrimination

550 upvotes
March 16, 2022
/r/AntiFeminists

Men can't cry women most effected.

349 upvotes
September 20, 2021
/r/AntiFeminists

Thos is what Feminism does to men. It makes them hate themselves.

331 upvotes
July 13, 2021
/r/AntiFeminists

Thanks to Feminism we have created a world hostile to men.

194 upvotes
August 30, 2021
/r/AntiFeminists

This is the true rape culture. She has admitted that she raped her clients. Has also admitted that she hits her husband. Yet she isn't in jail.

178 upvotes
July 26, 2021
/r/MensRights

Why aren't gender diversity quotas by companies sexist?

169 upvotes
May 31, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Virtue signalling at it's peak(As all the top stores have a good amount of NASA tank tops in girls section)

159 upvotes
September 26, 2021
/r/AntiFeminists

It lowkey hurts

90 upvotes
December 6, 2021
/r/AntiFeminists

Comments

[–]MathematicianNo4277 109 points110 points111 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The last part is reality defying. You cannot both have diversity hiring and be surprised that people will be suspected of being diversity hires. Discrimination only ever produces more discrimination, even with "good intent".

I am proud of having the career I have despite being gay. I would be ashamed to have it because I am gay.

Affirmative action is degrading to all involved and solves nothing.

[–]Yithar 27 points28 points29 points 4 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

That reminds me of a recent thread in /r/cscareerquestions :
https://np.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/p5ou9s/im_so_over_being_called_a_diversity_hire/
https://www.removeddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/p5ou9s/im_so_over_being_called_a_diversity_hire/

OP was obviously really upset about it but like the whole reason people get called out for diversity hires is because diversity hiring exists. This person said it really well:

what i mean is, because of the general cultural atmosphere this overzealous push for diversity has created, your average person who is not a sexist, not an asshole, but just regular working class person is now much more likely to view women & minority as diversity hires, whereas on the other hand, had this overzealous push for diversity never happened, a lot fewer people would be calling women diversity hires out of nowhere. Actual sexists would be calling you out regardless, but they are a very small portion of the society and no one takes them seriously.

In your case, those dudes from college would probably be leaving you alone if it weren't for the current culture we are in, which is why i said the real people to blame are the policy makers for creating this cultural atmosphere in the first place. Is it the right thing to do for those dudes to be calling you a diversity hire to your face at a personal level? obviously not, humans are imperfect and they do shitty things, BUT I'm giving you a reason for why they are more inclined to do so. You can't be angry at the world all the time because no matter how angry you get, or how "over it" you are, people are still going to be calling you a diversity hire because of our culture. It's better to understand why and then direct your anger at the actual people responsible and maybe reflect it the next time you vote.

[–]funkynotorious[S] 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

These are some really great points thanks for sharing.

[–]AutoModerator[M] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Reminder everyone - Don't brigade the crossposted sub. It's against Reddit rules.

To document instances of misandry, consider these options:

1) take screenshots and upload them to Imgur
2) archive the page using a site like https://archive.vn/
3) crosspost the link to a dedicated subreddit like /r/everydaymisandry

You can also report misandry directly to the admins here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]intex2 72 points73 points74 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In math I've seen extremely talented men completely abandon academic careers because less qualified women were given spots they applied for. This is what happens. Academia is not going to be the hub for premier intellectual activity in the near future.

[–]hehimCA 42 points43 points44 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would say that this has already happened. Academia has been largely dumbed down already. There are still a few gems but the trend is not good.

[–]bob-object 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree it's degrading, but I must admit that it has made a lot of positive social change for minorities. It is good in that way.

However, woman get affirmative action simply for having vaginas, and I think that is wrong. White woman DO NOT need affirmative action, and they never have.

[–]Metrack14 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ngl, I can't help but feel horrible to people who get into ads, just because they fit the diversity check list

[–]Deadlocked02 69 points70 points71 points 4 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

You know where I’d love to see some diversity? HR positions. In places like the US, women make up more than 70% of HR managers. Not that I think that more men in those positions would completely mitigate the issue, but there seems to be an ongoing problem with HR ladies with a “keen sense of justice” making some very biased decisions. There was a post about this on this sub these days. It wasn’t about HR per se, but about people being interviewed for scholarships and with obscene amounts of pro-female bias being displayed, as usual.

[–]73Scamper 45 points46 points47 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Scholarships are ridiculously biased against men anyway with dozens of very high dollar, some publicly funded, scholarships being exclusively available to women meanwhile just two of those are worth more than every single scholarship available to just men, some of which limited to specific locales and all of which are privately funded.

[–]SprinklesFancy5074 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Which is especially egregious when women already outnumber men as college students now.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And get better grades because of a consistently proven female-favoring grading bias.

[–]oggyb 29 points30 points31 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I just had a look at the HR organisation tree where I work to see if I could corroborate your assessment.

7:1 in the main HR department, and the man is in analytics and systems. The HR Services advisors are all women except for the admin assistant (I didn't go clicking through to check everyone's pronouns).

That's quite striking.

[–]Deadlocked02 22 points23 points24 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Shocking, right? And to make things worse, the few men in those positions seem to share the same biases as their female coworkers.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the few men in those positions seem to share the same biases as their female coworkers

That's why they landed there in the first place.

[–]Strikes001 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then I look forward to obtaining an HR position since that won't be the case for me.

[–]throwra_coolname209 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Huh, in my job it's way closer to equal.

I work in a really weird, government-adjacent STEM industry and our ratio of men to women is like 60:40, it's DEFINITELY not the STEM-ish average of 80:20. I'm pretty sure my company is doing some selection by gender, but they seem to be doing it across the board?

[–]dontpet 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women are either dominant or equal in most stem fields except engineering and computers. There are an awful lot of stem fields. In that case, it really depends on what area of stem you mean.

[–]throwra_coolname209 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Engineering haha

[–]SprinklesFancy5074 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

... and that's why I'm non-binary when I'm applying for shit.

[–]bleedingxskies 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Does it really matter though? HR typically projects that their job is to manage and protect the employees and handle issues to make the workplace more comfortable, welcoming, and ultimately functional for everyone, but the reality is their job is ultimately to protect the company, not the workers. It’s often the case that this is how it goes down when something really ugly happens. They’re practically defence lawyers in disguise.

That said, my sister is an HR rep at a Fortune 500 company, and I know it’s not all bad, but when it’s bad it’s disturbingly bad.

[–]funkynotorious[S] 62 points63 points64 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

”In a social equilibrium, preferential treatment of one group leads to disadvantages for another,” Hudlicky writes. “The rise and emphasis on hiring practices that suggest or even mandate equality in terms of absolute numbers of people in specific subgroups is counter-productive if it results in discrimination against the most meritorious candidates.”

The fact that this was even remotely controversial in regards to the highest levels of hard science academia is testament to the nutty extremes the “woke” movement is pushing towards.

Of course the most meritorious candidates should be hired, irrespective of whether they’re Jewish like Einstein, Indian like Bose, or women like Currie.

Imagining a world where the next Newton might not get appointed as the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics because of his, well, “Newtonian” ethnic or gender qualities is frightening.

[–]hehimCA 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Well put.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Does anyone have a link to the retracted article?

Edit – here it is: https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/chemdna/files/2020/06/10.1002anie.202006717.pdf

[–]magus678 30 points31 points32 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

“This is a hair’s breadth away from saying anyone who isn’t a white man is only there because they’re ‘diversity hires’.”

chad.jpg "Yes."

Really though, I'm not sure how anyone who supports diversity hiring can be blind to these downstream consequences. And to chastise someone for plucking this ever so low hanging fruit is very Emperor Has No Clothes.

If you worked somewhere and the boss's son just so happened to get a job above his experience/education level, you wouldn't waste one moment being confused about how that came to pass.

[–]dontpet 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I expect they know this is one of the outcome. But it's only the unenlightened that would hold a grudge about it so it doesn't matter.

I graduated in engineering in 86. Women got special scholarships, access to tutors, the best internships, and the best highest paying jobs on graduation. I expect this was common back then across universities in north America.

But most of you are younger and don't know this I expect. We guys just sucked it up and got on with our lives. To me gaps in knowledge like this are so revealing about how far men have to go in advocating for themselves.

[–]LokisDawn -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We guys just sucked it up and got on with our lives.

That's the problem, isn't it? Maybe if "you" had fought harder back then we would have an easier time today. It's not easy to convince men that other men's wellbeing is of relevance, unfortunately.

[–]dontpet 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol. I made that comment 3 months ago and you decide it's relevant to chastise me about it now? G'wan.

[–]boommicfucker 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are plenty of studies and trials that show anonymized interviewing/hiring to result in less "diversity". That alone should be concerning. But I guess the public discourse has been successfully steered away from equality towards equity so...

[–]vtj 26 points27 points28 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

One can make an argument on favor of increasing diversity, even at the price of hiring suboptimal candidates. And one can make an argument in favor of strict meritocracy, even at the price of less diversity.

The unfairness of the currently prevailing practice is that it insists on pro-diversity policies in male-dominated fields, but avoids them in female-dominated ones, basically choosing whichever approach is more "female-friendly" in a given situation. As a result, most traditionally male-dominated fields are becoming more diverse, while female-dominated ones stay the same (or actually become even more female-dominated), even when the heavily female-favoring gender ratio has clear negative consequences, e.g. in education, psychology, or gender studies.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

In my opinion, diversity of superficial attributes is not worth anything on its own, except for positions in which complete lack of representation of a demographic leads to suboptimal decisions (or where a specific demographic is required a priori); the extent to which "diversity hiring" can help here is subject to debate.

The assumption with these diversity hirings is that there are obstacles for "diverse" people to obtain the same qualifications, whether their actual qualifications are not represented on paper (1) or they were not able to obtain the same qualifications despite putting in the same or greater effort as a relatively "less diverse" person (2).

For both (1) and (2), it seems much more fruitful to actually look at where these differences arise. For example, looking at the statistics it becomes obvious that the average black person in the US really does have a harder time acquiring the qualifications to join a prestigious university if diversity hiring is not applied (and as far as I'm concerned, that can not be attributed to a lack of talent); but rather than preferential treatment, the focus should be on fixing those issues where they arise. At the time this "diversity hiring" is applied, it is too late, and won't help the most disadvantaged. I am firmly convinced that to help disadvantaged demographics out of relative poverty, the best way to do that is to help the boys of that demographic to success. Much of the violence we observe in demographics with a relatively higher proportion of poor people is misdirected male dominance seeking behavior; if we actually gave the men in these communities a realistic chance to succeed, the need for these misdirected displays of status would disappear.

And like you pointed out, this "diversity hiring principle" is applied unequally and it is also applied on a wrong factual basis (that is, the false assumption that women don't go into STEM because of discrimination or societal pressures).

Furthermore, it seems that if the principle behind this "diversity hiring" was actually faithfully applied, then men would be preferred, not women, given that boys of any race are doing worse than girls, and that there is a consistently shown grading bias in favor of girls.

[–]throwra_coolname209 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Diversity hiring is a panicked attempt at a solution to the actual problem at hand, which is often the lack of equal distribution of merited candidates across gender/racial lines.

Like, I understand why it's being pushed for now because we can't exactly go back 30 years and give equal access to education, but it seems like everyone is perfectly content with this as the only solution and I'm not seeing a push to fix things before it becomes an issue.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I don't like diversity hiring at all, and I wouldn't say I would "get behind it", but I would be content with some level of diversity hiring if it was actually applied to disadvantaged demographics (that is, minority men, men in general, and poor people of any demographic). Giving preferential treatment to women, who by any reasonable measure are advantaged, is really quite a punch in the face.

And the push to get women into STEM... we've known for a while that as societies get more "egalitarian" as measured by the GGGI (global gender gap index), women increasingly go into the humanities (and away from STEM).

[–]throwra_coolname209 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I would argue that it depends on the field. I'm in a competitive STEM field myself and there definitely needs to be a conversation around how people interpret it as a men's field and make it seem like women "just don't do that sort of thing". On the other hand, the utter inability of society to do the reverse for female-dominated fields is ridiculous. I hear story after story from men in those fields who feel Othered just because of their gender.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I would argue that it depends on the field. I'm in a competitive STEM field myself and there definitely needs to be a conversation around how people interpret it as a men's field and make it seem like women "just don't do that sort of thing".

It certainly does appear that on average, women are less interested in that sort of thing (that is, IT, engineering, the hard sciences, maybe pure math). That is to say, pick a random person of the male population and a random person of the female population and I would expect the male person to be more interested in these male-dominated fields.

That is not the same as saying that women are not welcome in these fields or any less competent, or that we shouldn't do anything to make women feel more welcome in these "male-dominated fields" (although as far as I know, that is already being done).

In the end, we want to maximize individual freedom, whether a person decides in concordance or in discordance with their group preference. But that does not mean that group preferences don't exist, and this must be taken into account when debating ideas such as "diversity hiring".

[–]SchalaZeal01 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It certainly does appear that on average, women are less interested in that sort of thing (that is, IT, engineering, the hard sciences, maybe pure math). That is to say, pick a random person of the male population and a random person of the female population and I would expect the male person to be more interested in these male-dominated fields.

There is also more incentive for men to go in those fields for the $. In poorer countries where money matters more to women (not marrying money, but earning themselves), they also go more into STEM, because it pays.

[–]lightning_palmleft-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is also more incentive for men to go in those fields for the $.

I would include that in "interest" (although I guess it can also be interpreted as societal pressure). But I agree, since wealth (the capability to provide) signals mating value in men to women (who are hypergamous, as evidenced by multiple studies). So men choosing these fields is in part just them maximizing their attractiveness to potential female mates, i.e. a dating strategy.

In poorer countries where money matters more to women (not marrying money, but earning themselves), they also go more into STEM, because it pays.

For example Romania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_STEM_fields#Europe

[–]Yithar 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It certainly does appear that on average, women are less interested in that sort of thing (that is, IT, engineering, the hard sciences, maybe pure math). That is to say, pick a random person of the male population and a random person of the female population and I would expect the male person to be more interested in these male-dominated fields.

The annoying thing is if you even mention that (especially on Twitter), everyone loses their minds. Like you can't even talk about a possible trend in the overall population.

[–]throwra_coolname209 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, I just don't want the conversation to be solely about saying "the number of women in STEM is largely influenced by interests" when I've met several people that debated dropping out because they felt unwelcome in the field. Sounds like we agree though 👍

[–]Yithar 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Giving preferential treatment to women, who by any reasonable measure are advantaged, is really quite a punch in the face.

I remember talking to Cher Scarlett over Twitter (she's a well-known World of Warcraft player, who's also autistic, and also a developer) about diversity, and she basically stated the same thing by the phrase privileged white girls.

[–]-Gruagach- 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is his response https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/the-case-of-tomas-hudlickywhere-now It's quite lengthy, but a really well put together response and outlines what he plans to do next.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter