The problem I have with this is approach that it’s all about about the superficial… what things look like, rather than what they are.
I (as a fan of Apple products and an Apple shareholder) would rather Apple worry about hiring the best and most qualified people to do their jobs, rather than caring about what their race, gender, religion or sexual preference is simply to make themselves appear ‘tolerant’ or ‘inclusive’.
It’s the same problem I have with Affirmative Action. AA emphasizes filling quotas based on race, gender, etc… which is exactly the OPPOSITE of what we are supposed to be paying attention to, isn’t it? Wasn’t the point to NOT hire based on these things? Discrimination is discrimination. And it’s bad. Quotas based on ‘metadata’ about a worker rather than their qualifications is bad. It’s counterproductive. And it does more to damage race/gender/orientation/religion relations than anything else.
When you point out that someone accomplishing something is even more monumental because they’re a particular ‘minority’, you’re basically insulting that group of people, as though they’re somehow less intelligent, less qualified, or less inclined as a group. I don’t believe that’s true at all.
Diversity is nice and all, but at the end of the day it’s really just window dressing.
People are people, folks. Get over it.
In the words of Morgan Freeman:
MIKE WALLACE: How are we going to get rid of racism until …?
MORGAN FREEMAN: Stop talking about it. I’m going to stop calling you a white man. And I’m going to ask you to stop calling me a black man. I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman. You’re not going to say, “I know this white guy named Mike Wallace.” Hear what I’m saying?