[Aunche]

I'm guessing that Google is also unlikely to host a topic about black-on-black violence. I'm not saying that this is a fair comparison, but that's what many Indians how caste is used. If you're going to place high importance on people's subjective experiences, you can't only do so when it's politically convenient.

[jrsj]

Not only is it not a good comparison but there's not even a good thing to compare it to, which would be some other form of discrimination happening within the work place that can't be discussed. What you're saying sounds to me like this problem does exist and it's so bad that even talking about it should be off limits. That's fundamentally unfair to the people potentially being discriminated against.

[Aunche]

Fair enough. I probably could have chosen a better example like an Asian speaker speaking out against affirmative action.

[jrsj]

I suppose you could make the same comparison with whites as well, I get that there is somewhat of an issue there because it's so inflammatory to discuss whether these things are fair or even effective at helping people etc.

I think the discussion should be had anyways. There might be some value that comes out of it. Like in my own case, I'm on the losing end of these policies in theory despite having very serious disadvantages in my life that aren't on the list of things to account for. Broadening the definition of diversity could alleviate feelings people have that they're not being treated fairly. But because we aren't willing to have difficult conversations about this stuff we have a supreme court case about it instead.