Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Tech Companies Post Men-Only Job Listings, Report Finds (theverge.com)
Major Chinese tech companies like Huawei, Alibaba, and Tencent discriminate against women in their online job listings, a new report from Human Rights Watch found today. Some job postings directly state they are for men only, while others specify that women must have attractive appearances and even be a certain height. The Verge reports: The Human Rights Watch report reveals gender discrimination amongst major tech companies, as in the rest of Chinese society, is common and widespread. Search engine Baidu listed a job for content reviewers in March 2017 stating that applicants had to be men with the "strong ability to work under pressure, able to work on weekends, holidays and night shifts." The conglomerate Tencent, which owns WeChat, the massive game Honor of Kings, and a majority stake in League of Legends, was found to have posted an ad for a sports content editor in March 2017, stating it was looking for "strong men who are able to work nightshifts."
And Alibaba, despite Jack Ma touting the company's inclusiveness, merited an entire case study from the Human Rights Watch report. The report noted the e-commerce giant came under fire in 2015 for posting a job ad on its site for a "computer programmer's motivator" seeking women applicants with physical characteristics like Japanese adult film star Sola Aoi. Alibaba removed the reference to Sola Aoi after media reported on it, but kept the ad on the site. As recently as January this year, Alibaba still mentioned "men preferred" in job listings for "restaurant operations support specialist" positions. Tech companies also often tout the attractive women they've hired as incentives for more men to come on board, according to the HRW report. Both Tencent and Baidu were noted to have posted to their social media accounts interviews with male employees who cited having beautiful women around them as an incentive for working there.
And Alibaba, despite Jack Ma touting the company's inclusiveness, merited an entire case study from the Human Rights Watch report. The report noted the e-commerce giant came under fire in 2015 for posting a job ad on its site for a "computer programmer's motivator" seeking women applicants with physical characteristics like Japanese adult film star Sola Aoi. Alibaba removed the reference to Sola Aoi after media reported on it, but kept the ad on the site. As recently as January this year, Alibaba still mentioned "men preferred" in job listings for "restaurant operations support specialist" positions. Tech companies also often tout the attractive women they've hired as incentives for more men to come on board, according to the HRW report. Both Tencent and Baidu were noted to have posted to their social media accounts interviews with male employees who cited having beautiful women around them as an incentive for working there.
Other cultures are actually different, Euro and Euro derived cultures are shocked to discover!
"This isn't the diversity we had in mind", activists quoted as saying ...
Both Tencent and Baidu were noted to have posted to their social media accounts interviews with male employees who cited having beautiful women around them as an incentive for working there.
That's crazy talk; no way do men like being surrounded by beautiful women!
What this point demonstrates that it is Liberalism, Freedom of Speech, and strong protections of Personal Rights that allow SJWs to exist.
You seem to imply that this is a bad thing. Those vary same things allow for all manner of other ideologies, advocacy groups, or people with other points of view to exist as well, many of which have little or no overlap with SJWs in terms of belifs. It's those same protections that allow you to post about it on the internet without anyone from the government kicking down your door and dragging you off to one of those reeducation camps. I would think that having to listen to some idiots whinge on the internet (where you're just as free to dispute them) is a tiny price to pay for those freedoms.
And yet, the US has Hooters. Hooters gets away with only hiring women as servers because of BFOQ. That's Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications. While they were sued many years ago, they only agreed to put men in other positions but they never agreed to hire men for server roles. How is this different?
That sheds an even worse light on chinese programmers than on chinese companies....
It's a sad life if the best thing about your job is the gorgeous.... whatever an software developer motivator is.
It's bad for men to want beautiful women around them?
They didn't say it was the best thing about their jobs (though so what if it were?)
interviews with male employees who cited having beautiful women around them as an incentive for working there
What this point demonstrates that it is Liberalism, Freedom of Speech, and strong protections of Personal Rights that allow SJWs to exist.
You seem to imply that this is a bad thing. Those vary same things allow for all manner of other ideologies, advocacy groups, or people with other points of view to exist as well, many of which have little or no overlap with SJWs in terms of belifs. It's those same protections that allow you to post about it on the internet without anyone from the government kicking down your door and dragging you off to one of those reeducation camps. I would think that having to listen to some idiots whinge on the internet (where you're just as free to dispute them) is a tiny price to pay for those freedoms.
You're the one who seems to be missing the point, the poster was talking about how so many SJWs are ironically ignorant in how they rage against some of the very rights and protections that allow them to exist in the first place.
Women are not aggressive and competitive? Are you kidding? They may be more subtle, but if you want to see backstabbing that could teach George R. R. Martin a few things even he didn't imagine possible, watch a few women try to outdo each other for a high level position.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What this point demonstrates that it is Liberalism, Freedom of Speech, and strong protections of Personal Rights that allow SJWs to exist.
You seem to imply that this is a bad thing.
You misunderstood my point. What I said is that SJW couldn't exist without certain set of values in the society, and SJWs are against some of these values.
That is, SJW when taken to a logical conclusion would change society in a way that would make SJW impossible.
Women are not aggressive and competitive? Are you kidding? They may be more subtle, but if you want to see backstabbing that could teach George R. R. Martin a few things even he didn't imagine possible, watch a few women try to outdo each other for a high level position.
And heaven forbid some woman ever gets added to an office that already has a queen bee.
hi, progressive feminist here. No I don't want gender segregation, and you're full of sit for claiming I do.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Case in point below. The founder eventually concluded that it was a bad idea from the standpoint of productivity, but it never seems to have occurred to her that her policy was deeply sexist.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem...
This isn't really news to anyone who has lived in China. Someone has found a tech angle to grab headlines, but a more accurate encapsulation would be, "Labor market discrimination is legal and open in China." I lived in China for four years; I'm white, my wife is Indian. There were all kinds of "hire-a-foreigner" jobs (mostly teaching English but a range of other things) that were open to me but not to her, and they were advertised as such. (As opposed to the West I guess where they just don't call you back -- but still, it's worse.) If you want to see some of these postings. go to thebeijinger.com and scroll through the help wanted ads. Some of these postings are for US-headquartered companies, which possibly makes them a violation of US labor law, if anyone wants to pursue that. In the Chinese-language job boards, things can be even weirder. Even the train system openly said that they were looking for women in their 20s as train attendants for the high-speed railway. And that's the government doing the hiring. There isn't any kind of social consensus that discrimination is a bad thing (though plenty of people think it is), so don't expect it to change soon.
They don't care about workplace sexual harassment or the wage gap in China. This is driven purely by old fashioned ideas about women. You know the sort of thing - meek, emotional, distracting, take a week off every month to menstruate, will probably get pregnant and drop out completely etc.
I know some Chinese women are turning to doing contract work over the internet, software development and that kind of thing, using fake male names. When it's time to get paid they just say "sent it to my wife" and give their real WePay account.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
A country with appalling child labor practices, and this is what you have a problem with? Get some god damn priorities, people.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Women are not aggressive and competitive? Are you kidding? They may be more subtle, but if you want to see backstabbing that could teach George R. R. Martin a few things even he didn't imagine possible, watch a few women try to outdo each other for a high level position.
While the fickle finger of blame has always been pointed at men and the patriarchy, my experience and my wife's experience have been very different. The rumor mills, the jealousy, and the general hatred of women toward other people has been breathtaking. Since I'd be accused of mansplaining for my own experiences, I'll talk for my wife.
She rose to the number two position in her company, and was the highest paid employee there. She had teams of mostly men working for her. There were of course women in her workplace. While there are always personnel issues, the only people that had a problem with her were the women. "Oh, she must be fucking the owner to have got her position. "I wonder if Doggy style is the position she used to get her position?" And on and on. Pleasant to her face, but active undermining the second they walked away. and an unhealthy obsession with sex. Outside of the sexual innuendo, she is tall and slender. So if people think fat shaming is bad, you ought to see the shit women sling at other women if they think a woman is not fat enough.
The men overwhelmingly just loved her.
Meanwhile, here was a place trying to get things done in the construction and home design industry, and had some troublesome employees that were not hard to identify. In a bit of irony, my wife became very reluctant to hire women because of all of the workplace drama.
Her view is that as long as every problem is considered to be the fault of men, the problem will never be fixed. Women need to take some responsibility. Because what they are doing now is a crab bucket. pulling each other down.
I saw this in my own workplace as well, but since I'm a guy, no one would listen to my description.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The news over the last few days has reported on a women-only co-working space in the Bay Area called "The Coven." Women-only and themed after witchcraft.
If men created a men-only workspace and called it "The Monastery," it would be hated on 24-7 by the self-appointed intelligentsia. Hypocrisy abounds.
So let me get this straight, the AC who promotes gender-segregation gets modded up and the progressive feminist who says nothing more than the non-controversial statement that doesn't want gender segregation gets modded down?
Doesn't seem so old-fashioned when Western countries are constantly adding new regulations requiring employers to pay absent pregnant women, and there are also proposals that women should get paid days off during menstruation. That's bleeding-edge feminism
Who gets to define what constitutes progress?
Wrong question, you're making an appeal to authority, an assumption that some *person* should be doing the deciding. That's a bad approach. Of course you're not really asking the question, you know it's a bad approach and you know that anyone reading it will know it's a bad approach, so you're asking the question rhetorically in an effort to discredit the notion that any decision is right. That's underhanded argumentation. Say what you mean.
The right question is what *principles* should be used to decide. Obviously, not everyone will agree on the principles, which is why we fall back on democratic ideals. To avoid tyrannies of the majority, we use democratic processes to decide broad, high-level principles rather than to answer specific questions. Then we apply reason and debate to those principles.
In this case, the core principle is that of freedom. Cultures are free to do what they want, but that freedom ends where it begins infringing on the freedom of individuals (of course, we make exceptions where to allow too much individual freedom causes bad outcomes for society as a whole -- there's a balance to be found. Yes, this is hard.). The notion that women are morally equal to men (which isn't saying they're the same as men) means that they should have the same opportunities to compete for the jobs based on their ability to do the job.
I argue that this freedom for women trumps the freedom of Chinese culture to restrict their role in society. Do you actually disagree? On what basis?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Outside of the sexual innuendo, she is tall and slender. So if people think fat shaming is bad, you ought to see the shit women sling at other women if they think a woman is not fat enough.
That is so true. My wife is short and slender (Asian) and women at her work and in her friend circle use mock "concern" for her weight and exercise habits. She's 5'2" and 110lbs, about 30lbs. north of anorexia and definitely not "skinny". But the fat women will make sure she's "okay", make sure that her husband isn't forcing her to exercise hard and eat less, etc. It's crazy how jealous they get and then pretend that they're really concerned for her.
Do you have ESP?
I'm pretty sure you could come up with data that shows that attractive people produce greater levels of customer satisfaction, higher sales, and so on, so why isn't being good looking a BOFQ for a lot of jobs?
It's funny, but in IT the majority of women sales people I encounter are way better looking than the male sales people. I had to sit through a sales meeting the other day and the 4 women there were all super attractive -- I don't just mean well dressed, or slim, etc, but were 5/5 on all the sub measures -- great figure, great hair, great outfits, it was like they could have gone out and gotten modeling jobs, but instead they sold IT stuff for major companies you have heard from and used.
I can't decide what drives this. It could just be the people who do the hiring had the pick of the litter and chose the best looking among otherwise equal candidates. It could be some kind of self-selection bias, where people who go into sales have high levels of self-esteem and this biases the pool towards attractive women who would tend to be more confident and outgoing among all women. It could be that they were merely average looking but above average in personal presentation, and being women, better at personal grooming on average than most men (especially men in IT, even sales), thus making them only appear to better looking.
Maybe I'm just stupid, but I can't help but think it's not just a coincidence, and that they were actually selected based on their appearance and they get sent in as eye candy or "closers" to motivate certain clients based on their appearance. I would think this would be a long-term problem/discrimination complaint risk or just ineffective (many IT buyers are working with budgets that don't move because the salesperson has a great ass, or insulted because they're into the technology and feel they're being manipulated).
I bet those dirty Chinese are absolutely shaking in their boots right now. Oh goodness, someone is telling them that they're not being fair! Quick, take to twatter oh ye warriors of feminism, shame those industrious bastards back to the rice fields! Oh, what's that, they don't care? Better call the wambulance.
I agree with you, but I think the problem is deeper. Capitalism (or really free-market) doesn't "think" anything. Its just a optimization engine for profits / economic output. Sometimes that is a really good thing - cars, pencils, and microwave ovens are surprisingly cheap. Other times, as you mention, pollution, and other externalities are not correctly costed.
Worse, maximizing profits is really not in the public interest. Executing everyone at retirement age would increase total economic output, but I'm really not in favor of it.
Separately free market isn't perfect. Discrimination is inefficient, but not so inefficient that it can't survive for a long time in the market.
> When has that ever been a good idea?
Most of the time.
Leave regulated non discrimination to governments and monopolies. Let normal people have freedom of association.
On the opposite extreme is gender quotas. Lowering requirements in hiring for one sex, yet still calling it equal opportunity while enforcing a double standard.
The issue with the physical requirements for NYC firemen is an example, with women failing the exam but still being given the job. So in theory, a person can burn to death in a house fire because of political correctness that put people unsuitable for job in a position to rescue them, due to some unwritten formula for the ideal combination of genitals among firemen.
That seems just as counterproductive and detrimental to the society as unfettered capitalism. If jobs exists that are unsuitable for the disabled, or women who lack the physical strength do a fireman carry, why should laws exist to enforce their participation?
... men with the "strong ability to work under pressure, able to work on weekends, holidays and night shifts."
Obviously, women are not idiot enough to apply for such a job.
At some point, to progress human rights, we must be willing to draw a line and say 'this cannot be tolerated'. Intolerance such as this lies on the far side of such a line, and most reasonable people would understand the important contradiction inherent in 'absolute tolerance'.
I think tolerance is better understood as a sort of a peace treaty, rather than a moral principle. That is, I'm not obligated to show you tolerance because I'm a moral person, rather, I'm obligated to show you tolerance if I'd like you to show me tolerance -- and to show it to others, too, because what goes around comes around. If someone breaches the tolerance peace treaty by deciding it's okay to be intolerant, then that person has lost any right to expect tolerance from others, at least with respect to things related to their intolerance.
So, for example, if a Nazi would like tolerance of their anti-semitic views, they must treat jews with respect and toleration, including not doing or saying anything anti-semitic. Clearly that's a contradiction, so there's no way within this model for Nazis to hold anti-semitic views while expecting others to tolerate those views. Note that this does not mean that it's okay to punch Nazis.
In this case, to the degree that Chinese culture is intolerant of women we have no responsibility to tolerate Chinese culture. That doesn't mean we denigrate all aspects of it, but it does mean that we have no obligation to respect the misogynistic bits.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Cultures compete. The winners set the rules. That's how it's always been.
Now, I strongly prefer when values change to what I consider more moral, but I don't have a whole heck of a lot of influence here.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes