[throwaway1584]

> The irony in all this hoopla is that literally every engineer who has been so bad that I wondered how the heck they made it past the interview stage has been......drumroll ... white or asian male.

I work with a lot of engineers of all backgrounds, and no group has been without bad apples.

> But this argument that there are floods of under qualified minorities and women engineers getting jobs is hilarious.

You are misrepresenting the argument. The argument is that there is explicit discrimination in the hiring and promotion process which comes at the cost of equal opportunity.

In addition to this the people that experience this or feel this is unfair say they have experienced illegal retaliation when bringing this up. I personally experienced such retaliation.

[southphillyman]

>I work with a lot of engineers of all backgrounds, and no group has been without bad apples.

Indeed. So it's only natural that the demographic that represents the vast majority of the candidate pool is also going to represent the vast majority of false positives. Where is all the outrage over white and asian males who can't code their way out of a wet paper bag yet some how keep getting jobs? Hiring managers literally need to employ silly openers like fizzbuzz because these unqualified candidates keep getting opportunities presented to them by recruiters!

>The argument is that there is explicit discrimination in the hiring and promotion process which comes at the cost of equal opportunity.

The numbers don't bear this out though. Companies don't purposely hire unqualified candidates for the sake of diversity. Is it equal opportunity when referrals get interviewed, how about the graduates who come from a handful of universities? Recruiting pipelines are just that, restricted channels to a specific segment of candidates.