Are Straight White Males Not Part of Diversity? Forum

[Drake014]

I had grown up with the impression that environments could be diverse. A diverse working environment had people of many different races, religions, ethnicities, ideologies, sexualities, etc.

Now that I'm in law school, I've learned this isn't the case. Recently, I was informed by a recruiter from a law firm that of their 5 call-backs, 2 candidates were diverse. I've subsequently seen similar wording on law firms' websites (i.e. 9% of our assocates are diverse). This was shocking to me. I didn't realize an individual, alone, was categorized as being diverse or not being diverse. From the perspective of firms, an organization that was 100% asian would be considered 100% diverse (I know, it blew my mind too).

I recently joined a Streetlaw Pipeline program (pipeline meaning getting young people interested in being lawyers) that targets non-whites. My particular program targets a 75% hispanic, 20% black school and a 99% asian school. The program is composed of law school students and lawyers. I joined it because I was hoping I could network with some "diverse" lawyers. Every lawyer in the program is white, except 1 asian.

I'm depressed with the state of the world, someone comfort or argue with me.

[Mr. Pablo]

No, straight white males are not 'diverse' in the world of large law firms; they are the overwhelming majority. I can not believe that you do not already know this.

edit: Also, I do not know that Asians are considered 'diverse', but please find me a large American law firm that is comprised exclusively of people of Asian descent.

[burtonrideclub]

oh man, you are about to be eaten alive

[Drake014]

No, straight white males are not 'diverse' in the world of large law firms; they are the overwhelming majority. I can not believe that you do not already know this.

edit: Also, I do not know that Asians are considered 'diverse', but please find me a large law firm that is comprised exclusively of people of Asian descent.

Easy, there are numerous small law firms. I'd bet you a million dollars I could find one of them with all asians in it.

Edit: You're missing my point. Its both retarded and depressing to label a single candidate as diverse or not.

[Pearalegal]

From the perspective of firms, an organization that was 100% asian would be considered 100% diverse (I know, it blew my mind too).

The point being that such a legal organization would contribute to the legal world as a whole as being diverse.

I understand your frustration completely, but I can't say that I particularly agree with it. The fact is, most lawyers ARE straight, white males...and while the legal world's efforts to foster diversity certainly isn't holistic, from a practical standpoint, their interpretation is obviously an effort to create a diverse profession.

The fact of the matter is that everyone has "diversity," from an ideological and life experiences standpoint. No matter if you have a group made up of a bunch of different races and backgrounds, or a group made up of white privileged college kids...you'll have that inherent diversity as a given.

MORE diversity than that which is inherent between all individuals might be achieved by consciously going after applicants/lawyers from different races--contributing to the legal profession as a whole as being more diverse, not just one company.

[Drake014]

From the perspective of firms, an organization that was 100% asian would be considered 100% diverse (I know, it blew my mind too).

The point being that such a legal organization would contribute to the legal world as a whole as being diverse.

I understand your frustration completely, but I can't say that I particularly agree with it. The fact is, most lawyers ARE straight, white males...and while the legal world's efforts to foster diversity certainly isn't holistic, from a practical standpoint, their interpretation is obviously an effort to create a diverse profession.

The fact of the matter is that everyone has "diversity," from an ideological and life experiences standpoint. No matter if you have a group made up of a bunch of different races and backgrounds, or a group made up of white privileged college kids...you'll have that inherent diversity as a given.

MORE diversity than that which is inherent between all individuals might be achieved by consciously going after applicants/lawyers from different races--contributing to the legal profession as a whole as being more diverse, not just one company.

From a practical standpoint, firms view of diversity has and continues to produce a field that isn't very diverse.

From what I've seen so far, diversity is a popular buzzword. Firms consciously try to aim a little more at "diverse" candidates by being conscious about it. But that's it. Their recruiting techniques and criteria are the same as they've always been. The result? They'd rather say something like 9% diversity than actually spell things out. 9% seems abysmal, the truth of the matter is even worse. That 9% (or whatever ridiculously small percent they have) is mostly composed of whites, asians, and gays. I'm fine with whites, asians, and gays, but are they terribly underrepresented in the legal field or do they make it look that much more diverse?

The hiring mechanisms are all the same resulting in several hundred firms fighting over the same very small pool of "qualified" "diverse" candidates without anyone bothering to ask the question "What's wrong with our definition of whose qualified? Why can't we retain the qualified "diverse" candidates that we get?"

[Renzo]

You're missing my point. Its both retarded and depressing to label a single candidate as diverse or not.

You're asking a lot of old conservative white guys. Not only are you expecting them to hire people who aren't like them, you're telling them they can't refer to them as "the blacks" or "the Jews" AND you're taking away the politically correct euphamism the made up?

[Kohinoor]

oh man, you are about to be eaten alive

[Drake014]

You're missing my point. Its both retarded and depressing to label a single candidate as diverse or not.

You're asking a lot of old conservative white guys. Not only are you expecting them to hire people who aren't like them, you're telling them they can't refer to them as "the blacks" or "the Jews" AND you're taking away the politically correct euphamism the made up?

I don't have any problem with the NALP statistical breakdown where they say exactly how many are blacks, females, gays, etc. a firm has. Most firms choose not to do that because it makes their numbers look as bad as they actually are. When a firm says they're X% diverse, I have no fucking idea what that means. A firm could have 10% diversity and still be all white, its mind boggling.

Edit: Tried to edit before someone got in, wasn't successful.

[Grizz]

--ImageRemoved--

[Drake014]

--ImageRemoved--

150. I'd give it higher if it was a unique dog breed or one I liked.

Edit: Scratch that, I'd give it a higher number if it was a "diverse" dog breed.

[$1.99]

--ImageRemoved--

+1, no we are not diverse, obviously you didn't get the memo for your entire life

[nax425]

I know it sux, but you just have to deal. You know what it takes to get what you want, then just go for it and do it. If that means you have to get a higher LSAT, better GPA, etc. then that is what you'll have to do. Is it fair? No, but life isn't fair. We aren't all born with the same strengths and weaknesses mentally and physically, so any competitive process is inherently unfair. I wouldn't stress about it too much. It isn't going to change in the land of hope and change.

I, personally, think we need to diversify the rap music community. The amount of gays, asians, whites and american indians is abysmal. Where are all the gaysian rappers? That community has a history of racism and record labels should work to correct it now.

[Oblomov]

I think what they mean is that 9% have a personality, making them grotesquely different from the rest. This is exceedingly high for a law firm.

[ughOSU]

I have issues with the word diverse (I mean no two people in the world live the same life or learn the same things from their experiences), but the answer is no, straight white males are not diverse.

[Oblomov]

No, straight white males are not 'diverse' in the world of large law firms; they are the overwhelming majority.

This is just plain wrong.

[Oblomov]

but the answer is no, straight white males are not diverse.

Yeah, we're pretty much the borg. Sometimes when I see another straight white male, I am not sure that it is not me. Usually I feel like John Malkavich in Being John Malkavich.

[vanwinkle]

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.

[dp73816]

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....

[orphanarium]

...

[Jay-Electronica]

Tell someone who cares you ninny, This is 'merica. Go find a shoulder to cry on.

[vanwinkle]

And thats why it hurts them more than anyone...but shhhh...dont say anything, or you're racist....

I think it hurts them, sure, but a lot less than they were hurt 60 years ago by being barred from attending top law schools and totally denied consideration at most top law firms.

[dp73816]

Tell someone who cares you ninny, This is 'merica. Go find a shoulder to cry on.

And therein lies the problem...

[Kobe_Teeth]

I see nothing wrong with this post.

TLS is occasionally a place to vent about the LS cycle and legal employment cycle. Though this can be annoying, I see nothing wrong with it.

Also, the word "diverse" is quite annoying. It is especially annoying when we straight white males are coyly told that our "experiences" can make us "diverse." "Diversity" is a vague CYA (cover your ass) term that stands for "we hire black/hispanic/native american people at a standard that is different from our other hiring standards." I have absolutely no problem with that either but don't bullshit me and say I can add to my "diversity" through my experiences when you full well know I can't.

Its affirmative action and they don't want to call it that which is understandable but nonetheless frustrating.

OP has spent time trying to do the right thing by adding to the "diversity" of his experiences probably because a CSO or employer told him it would "help" his application. In all reality, he wasted his time by doing this somewhat noble act when he could have helped his employment prospects a helluva a lot more by finding out what local bars the partners at his desired firm got wasted at and hoped to randomly bump into and drink with and impress someone that way.

( i also feel the need to add that i am pro affirmative action )

[rayiner]

Homogeneity ftw.