dp73816 wrote:vanwinkle wrote:Drake014 wrote:Edit: You're missing my point. Its both retarded and depressing to label a single candidate as diverse or not.
Diverse in this context actually means "increasing diversity" which in turn means "getting someone unlike who we usually get". Since law firms typically hire straight white males and have a pretty large supply of them, then yes, "diverse" typically means hiring people who are not straight white males.
It is kind of depressing though, because such a system means that minority candidates are assumed by folks to be hired because they're "diverse" and not because, you know, they're right for the job.
And thats why it hurts them more than anyone...but shhhh...dont say anything, or you're racist....
How does giving a "diverse" candidate a job that pays astronomical wages as opposed to not having a job hurting them? And why is it always the assumption that the firm is always, only hiring said candidate because of diversity and not both diversity and him being "right for the job"?