[ntsplnkv3]

> going for it can get the rules thrown in your face while everyone accuses you of being an asshole who is trying to break the rules while,

I don't doubt discrimination exists, and if this has been your personal experience, I'm sorry.

It just seems foreign to me that someone would actually do this for a private role.

If you don't match the skill set the algorithm will filter you out before anyone even knows you exist. If you get by it clearly the reviewer saw something they liked anyway.

What recruiter is going to berate someone and call them an asshole for applying to a job they aren't qualified for? And if that was the case, I'd view it as a dodged bullet.

[Mz]

I was making a more general statement. I assume no recruiter would actually call you an asshole to your face, but that does not stop them from thinking you are an asshole who is trying to break the rules, while they fail to see that it works just fine that way for (insert whatever category it works for).

I have made other pertinent remarks in this same discussion that support the idea that what keeps women out is not straight up sexism in terms of "No girls allowed in the boys club." But that doesn't change the fact that women do, at times, get excluded due to their gender and it is maddening when people try to act like that simply isn't a thing at all.

The rules do get applied differently for different people. This is not just losers making excuses.