> If success to them looks like an equal number of white/black/asian/women it's an unreachable goal
It's not the goal. You've created a strawman and wasted your own time fighting it.
> In my mind it's equality of opportunity. I don't care what color your skin is
That doesn't magically erase that they grew in up in a racist society that does care what color their skin is.
It's insulting to many people of color to hear "I don't care what color your skin is". An appropriate and honest response from a person of color might be "Must be nice. I wouldn't know what that's like because I never had the privilage of not caring what color my skin is". Probably not the great start you were hoping for.
It sounds like you want imagine the starting line was in the same place for every person who arrives to you as a candidate. When in fact some people got to you with a head start. Ignoring the starting line does the opposite of creating equality of opportunity. But ignoring the starting line is far simpler. And even useful for those who benefit from maintaining the status quo.
The best candidate for the work might just be the person who arrives less qualified and slightly behind the winner. Someone who started from far behind and almost caught up. If racism exists outside your interview, then equal opportunity at your interview must take into consideration that someone's race might have put up many obstacles on the long journey that got them to your interview.
Let's do a thought experiment. You're in a room with 57 white people and 12 black people. Those are the numbers you used. 10% of people in the room are racist. Every racist in the room gets to insult every person of the other race one time. Do the math. How many times is each white person insulted? How many times is each black person insulted? Is there "equality of opportunity" for everyone to leave that room and head to a job interview with the same level of self esteem? Multiple that by a lifetime.
If US demographics were in fact 50% white, 50% black, it would make things far easier to understand. Living in a society where race matters and you are hugely outnumbered is something the majority will always have great difficulting in relating to.
By not caring what someone's skin color is, you're passing over candidates who worked far harder to get where they are compared to someone who had fewer obstacles. Of course not every obstacle in life comes from race and some people of color may have even experienced a life of privilage.
So let's take a deaf candidate applying to your job. Like skin color, it's not something they chose nor something they can change. It very likey created obstacles for them in life that you never experienced. Would you treat them the same as non-deaf candidates? Speak to them with your back turned perhaps? Or would you adapt to who they really are?
When I say I don’t care what color a person is, I’m saying their skin color does not affect my decision. Are they the best candidate? I don’t care what got you here. My grandfather was a POW in a German camp in WW2, my grandparents walked over the alps for an opportunity for a better life in France. Nobody gave them a shot just because they had a rough early life. My parents didn’t speak English when they got to this country. Nobody gave them any special treatment. Get to work, show your value.
With regards to the numbers, they are what they are, what exactly is it that you want with respect to that situation? Do you want to get rid of 45 white people so it’s even? Truly - I don’t understand what you’re trying to point out. That life isn’t fair because you aren’t in the “majority?” Welcome to the club - we all have things that we think like is unfair about: I wasn’t born super-rich, I have a 9yo son with an incurable chronic illness that could kill him that we have to manage 24/7. There are something things you can change and others you can’t. I don’t expect the world to change their behavior for my son’s well-being just because he’s not in the majority. I also don’t view it as it as a slight against people with his disease. I wouldn’t want someone to hire him because he’s a type 1 diabetic. I want someone to hire him because he’s the best available candidate.
> When I say I don’t care what color a person is, I’m saying their skin color does not affect my decision.
Their skin color most likely affected their life in profound ways. Why would you want to willingly ignore their actual life experience? Any employer who did that would be missing the actual person and what they bring to the table. A person is not list of qualifications and specifications.
> My grandfather was a POW in a German camp in WW2, my grandparents walked over the alps for an opportunity for a better life in France. Nobody gave them a shot just because they had a rough early life.
You don't know that. You weren't at the job interviews when someone said "this guy crossed the alps just to get a better job, give him a job". I would feel really stupid as an employer if I didn't know the difference between the local lazy guy who has all the skills but wouldn't cross the road to get a job let alone cross the alps vs the guy who needs training but is willing to cross mountains to improve his life. When I interviewed for jobs in Italy some of the interviewers asked me to start at kindergarten. Tough interviews. But by the end they knew a hell of a lot about my life experiences. Why did they bother to spend so much time getting to know me when they could have just given me a simple test to see if I was qualified?
> With regards to the numbers, they are what they are, what exactly is it that you want with respect to that situation? Do you want to get rid of 45 white people so it’s even? Truly - I don’t understand what you’re trying to point out.
I'm trying to point out that minorities have a different life experience from the majority, and it's because of their skin color. It seems like you want to pretend those differences don't exist and that skin color doesn't or shouldn't matter to the people who it affects in negative ways.
> I have a 9yo son with an incurable chronic illness that could kill him that we have to manage 24/7.
It must be a lot of extra responsiblity and stress. I would definitely want to know that if I were your employer so I could make accomodations. Does your employer know this? If so, why did you tell your employer about your son? Why should your life experience and home situation matter at all if it's simply "best qualified"?
> I don’t expect the world to change their behavior for my son’s well-being just because he’s not in the majority.
They already have. It's against the law to not hire him because of his diabetes. Once upon a time it was not against the law. And without the law many employers would take a pass on the extra risk and just hire someone without diabetes. Hopefully you agree that the world changing in the case was an improved world?
> I wouldn’t want someone to hire him because he’s a type 1 diabetic.
I never suggested you should hire someone because of the color of their skin. I suggested that you should care about skin color because if you are hiring people of color, they most likely care about their skin color and how it affected them.
You care about your grandparents story and your son's story enough to tell both of them. Everyone cares about their story. Some people's stories are full of racism and how their skin color affected them.
> I want someone to hire him because he’s the best available candidate.
Your son will not be able to pilot large commercial planes. Or join the military. Even if he is the best candidate. He faces obstacles in life that other people do not face. Without laws, many employers would simply take a pass and avoid the extra cost and risk associated with an employee with a life threatening medical condition. But top employers of today would do the opposite. All else being equal I would hire the person with diabetes. Any time people cross the same finish line but someone had more obstacles to overcome they are very likely the better candidate. Your son's diabetes would affect my decision. And I would care that he has diabetes because he cares about it. "I don't care if you have diabetes" is mediocre interviewing. "Your diabetes won't affect my decision" is mediocre interviewing. If diabetes has affected your son's life, it should affect my decision. I'm sure he'll have stories he is proud of that directly involve diabetes. And other stories that have nothing to do with diabetes. Of course I would want what he's proud of to affect my hiring decision.
It's not the goal. You've created a strawman and wasted your own time fighting it.
> In my mind it's equality of opportunity. I don't care what color your skin is
That doesn't magically erase that they grew in up in a racist society that does care what color their skin is.
It's insulting to many people of color to hear "I don't care what color your skin is". An appropriate and honest response from a person of color might be "Must be nice. I wouldn't know what that's like because I never had the privilage of not caring what color my skin is". Probably not the great start you were hoping for.
It sounds like you want imagine the starting line was in the same place for every person who arrives to you as a candidate. When in fact some people got to you with a head start. Ignoring the starting line does the opposite of creating equality of opportunity. But ignoring the starting line is far simpler. And even useful for those who benefit from maintaining the status quo.
The best candidate for the work might just be the person who arrives less qualified and slightly behind the winner. Someone who started from far behind and almost caught up. If racism exists outside your interview, then equal opportunity at your interview must take into consideration that someone's race might have put up many obstacles on the long journey that got them to your interview.
Let's do a thought experiment. You're in a room with 57 white people and 12 black people. Those are the numbers you used. 10% of people in the room are racist. Every racist in the room gets to insult every person of the other race one time. Do the math. How many times is each white person insulted? How many times is each black person insulted? Is there "equality of opportunity" for everyone to leave that room and head to a job interview with the same level of self esteem? Multiple that by a lifetime.
If US demographics were in fact 50% white, 50% black, it would make things far easier to understand. Living in a society where race matters and you are hugely outnumbered is something the majority will always have great difficulting in relating to.
By not caring what someone's skin color is, you're passing over candidates who worked far harder to get where they are compared to someone who had fewer obstacles. Of course not every obstacle in life comes from race and some people of color may have even experienced a life of privilage.
So let's take a deaf candidate applying to your job. Like skin color, it's not something they chose nor something they can change. It very likey created obstacles for them in life that you never experienced. Would you treat them the same as non-deaf candidates? Speak to them with your back turned perhaps? Or would you adapt to who they really are?