[ebfe]

Everything you've said is equally true of any hiring system. It makes sense why employers are drawn to the one that provides them with the most value, while also carrying the added benefit of also being the one that isn't systematically sexist/racist.

[gruntmaster9000]

Meritocracy as an ideal may not be intrinsically sexist or racist, but declaring an organization a meritocracy doesn’t automatically eliminate existing sexism, racism, etc, and instead masks it. That’s the problem. It’s not unlike the “structureless organization”. It’s not really structureless — there are always informal social dynamics in play — and acting as if it is structureless results in avoiding problems instead of confronting them. Everything was all rainbows and unicorns at GitHub until the informal structure apparently resulted in an institutional inability to deal with certain issues. Valve has seen similar problems.

Organizing people is the fourth hard problem.

[ebfe]

Are you suggesting that hiring less qualified women for the sake of diversity would help to dispel the notion that women are less qualified, and hired for the sake of diversity?

[gruntmaster9000]

Of course not. But don’t use meritocracy as an excuse to not be proactive about diversity.