Affirmative Action For Gays

According to an interesting article in the Yale Herald, McKinsey and Company, the large consulting firm, is recruiting gays and lesbians so heavily that its “recruiting strategies raise questions about the ethics of affirmative action in hiring.”

McKinsey claims that it is practicing what I term the old-fashinoned affirmative action, not the current version built on preferential treatment. According to a McKinsey representative,

McKinsey’s approach does not put other students at a disadvantage: “There is no preferential treatment; applicants don’t get extra points for being gay,” he said. “There is the same bar for everyone.”

Even if that’s true, it’s still accurate to say that McKinsey is practicing affirmative action for gays, which is controversial enough even without preferences. It makes, of course, the conventional “diversity” argument for doing so.

“Consulting is an industry that brokers in knowledge and ideas,” [the McKinsey representative] said. “It is in our best interest to make sure that different perspectives and experiences are brought to the fore.”

But wait; there’s more.

Yale Law School Professor Kenji Yoshino, an expert in the field of gay rights, pointed out another reason McKinsey might be willing to risk controversy over their new modus operandi: namely, that companies may be discovering certain characteristics that make gays different from—and more desirable than—other potential employees. “There have been studies about gays as ‘model employees’ because we’re statistically less likely to have dependents,” he said. “If it’s a lack of dependents that sets gays apart, then that raises an interesting question: If social discrimination makes it harder to have kids, then how much should companies be seeking to take advantage of the consequences of that discrimination?”

Actually, a more interesting question is: if McKinsey, or any other company, hires gays even in part because they are less likely to have dependents, isn’t it engaging in sex discrimination against all non-gays, and especially against non-lesbian women since women still assume most of the responsibility for care of children?

Say What? (3)

  1. Shouting Thomas October 15, 2006 at 10:54 am | | Reply

    Whoa! A little glimmer of the truth slips through!

    Being gay is what the corporate world (and academic world) want us to be! It isn’t a hip rebellion, nor a rejection of middle class values, and certainly not an identity that is being punished with discrimination or moral censure.

    In fact, our high schools and colleges are actively encouraging our kids to be gay. And, they are succeeding! Call me crazy as a duck (and you will), but in NYC young men are commonly pretending to be gay, or engaging in gay sexual behavior for the social and economic perks. I see it. I believe my eyes.

    OK, so you’re going to tell me that nobody will knuckle under and play such serious games with their identity for the sake of public approval and material gain. Baloney. Take a walk through Berkeley or Woodstock and look carefully at the white men who are pretending to be black or Indian in order to escape the evil eye, and to attain status in the reverse pecking order of the left.

    The punishments for refusing to play this game are severe. I just went through 15 to 20 interviews with design firms and ad agencies in NYC, none of whom will employ me because I’m 56 years old and obviously straight. (Age discrimination is part and parcel of this package. Men over the age of 45 will not play the game of pretending to be gay. They are of a generation that still values masculine dignity.)

    This discrimination costs me somewhere between $20,000 and $50,000 annually in income. Tomorrow, I will start a new job at a pharmaceutical company. I am frozen out of the lucrative jobs at design firms and ad agencies because of my age and because I’m straight. Ultimately, only conservative, professional firms will hire me.

    And, yes, this is the result of age and sexual orientation discrimination. I specialize in a field that is desparate for bodies. During the period I was searching for jobs, I received 3 to 6 unsolicited calls from recruiters a day. Every one, including the employers, was excited about me until I arrived for the in-person interview.

    Conversation with one recruiter:

    “Ad agencies and design firms won’t hire me because I’m 56 and straight,” I say.

    “But, you have a tremendous resume.”

    “Well, I tend to agree with you, but I’ll be sitting across the table from a 35 year old gay man in the interview and he won’t hire me.”

    “That’s not right,” the recruiter answered.

    “No, it’s not,” I reply. “What do you suggest I do about it?”

    So, you see, the punishments for refusing to knucle under to the insistence that I at least pretend to be gay are very substantial. Do you doubt that young men, unsure of their identity, cave into this pressure?

    Welcome to the age of the closeted hetero.

  2. actus October 15, 2006 at 1:04 pm | | Reply

    “if McKinsey, or any other company, hires gays even in part because they are less likely to have dependents, isn’t it engaging in sex discrimination against all non-gays, and especially against non-lesbian women since women still assume most of the responsibility for care of children?”

    Its not sex discrimination (unless theyre preferring gay men to straight/gay women) Its sexual orienation discrimination. And lots of people don’t want sexual orientation discrimination banned.

  3. anonymous October 16, 2006 at 12:08 pm | | Reply

    I think it’s funny that Yoshino attributes gay’s low fertility to “social discrimination.” While it’s true that society makes it harder for gays to adopt, it’s nature that makes gays unable to have children the old-fashioned way.

    I’ve read some of Yoshino’s work and he seems to have a talent for expressing absurd ideas in language that seems reasonable at first glance.

Say What?