Discourse around minorities
I am staunchly against DEI. Yet I will never understand the discourse around minorities on this website. It seems many (prospective candidates?) hold genuine contempt for [women, black people, hispanics]. The argument seems to be that they should just work harder.
Which is odd, because I have never known any "non-diverse" or "over-represented" candidate who was not able to secure an excellent spot, assuming they were genuinely competitive. Perhaps these complainers should just work harder.
UBS has 0 black IB MDs, and yet these individuals genuinely believe if only they were a black female, maybe they would make MD?
Downvote all you want, but it's total delusion.
If you have such a huge preference towards working exclusively with straight white men, perhaps you should check your sexuality.
It’s an authentic mix of genuine racists/sexists, losers who need to blame someone else for their own shortcomings, culture warriors fighting for their cause, and bored engagement addicts posting rage bait to collect as many silver bananas and monkey shits as they can. It’s exhausting regardless.
I don’t know why this site needs weekly, and sometimes daily, discussions about “DEI” of all things, this thread included, but here we are. The off topic forum used to be for stories about picking up women, conversations about frivolous bonus spending, discussions about sports, and your odd tax rate debate. Now it’s near constant whining and complaining about getting dumped or passed over for a job by some sort of minority. I don’t get it, and it’s not the WSO I remember, but I guess that’s what people want to talk about these days.
Always such a smug boomer
what bonus?
anytime I see one of these threads I remember that scene from joe dirt where kid rock says "how about you get yourself a wahburger and some french cries"
It's crazy seeing those people complain about minorities' victimization techniques while doing the same thing themselves.
-
Imagine it getting handed to a guy who can't form a coherent sentence.
Based on your comment history, you couldn't even get into the Moelis Leadership Development Program: a 2-day, virtual program for students to learn more about investment banking
Dawg an Indian international student who is a 0% culture fit or a illegal Mexican immigrant isn't going to take your banking job lmfao
Indians aren’t even DEI. They’re considered over represented minorities, which like East Asians makes it harder to get into college and jobs(even more so than whites). Shows that all of what you’re saying is cope
I think Obama might know some geopolitics but that’s just a theory.
thats just a theory
A GAME THEORY
“Name one black”…did you grow up during Jim Crowe?
I've worked with enough bankers and I can tell ya the morons and incompetent come in all shapes and sizes. A few examples:
It's easy to point to DEI (i.e., the "other") as the exact reason why someone didn't get an offer. But they lost to every one of these schmucks I mentioned somehow, too.
If you think the rhetoric on here is bad, try spending four years on any college campus in America listening to the discourse about White Men...
Ah yes, four year college campus in America. I went to one before IB. I never got quite as much play as when I took an intersectional feminism class. Turns out, there isn't actually all that much hate for white men. Good times.
Sure you did pal
The only minorities that have benefited from DEI are women, blacks / Hispanics, and LGBTQ. Arab / Brown / Asian males have been excluded from this gravy train just like non-Nepo white men. S*rew DEI
White women have benefited.
Genuine question: Are Iranians and Chinese people 'minorities'?
Because I swear, both of those groups are insanely smart, from personal experience having worked with both in finance.
Minority doesn’t mean retarded
Underrepresented* minority does
Wow, it's scary that you probably saw nothing wrong with this comment.
They’re minority as in they’re a small part of the general population but like Chinese/iranian/Indian whatever are over represented relative to their population
This is the real world. Sad but true.
To the normal White and Asian men reading this thread, keep in mind that the people whining about the backlash against DEI are either radical leftists or diversity hires.
There is nothing wrong with you. It's perfectly fine to want merit-based recruitment processes to replace the race and gender-based recruitment processes which have discriminated against your demographics and have been pushed and implemented by the woke HR of the largest US corporations during the last 10-15 years.
Also, always remember that when these people call you losers, or even "incels" (even though there never was any logical link between your relationship status and your ability to break into IB), they are projecting their own insecurities and are resentful that you are better than them.
Never let them talk down to you. The tide is turning.
Well said!
💯 agree. As per banks policy, DEI hires are women, blacks / Hispanics, and LGBTQ. These DEI clowns play the minority card with Arabs / Asian / Brown males and seek to be allies while in reality robbing seats which would have likely gone to non-nepo males on merit alone. Don’t let them shame you. They are not your allies.
Letting diversity hires rule the discourse is like letting midgets play in the NBA. This is one last dying screech from diversity hires since they are being wrecked across the board as companies cancel DEI, AA is banned, and Trump is set to ban DEI federally on his 1st day of office via executive order. Gl hf
Asians have their own category though on job application forms. I don't see one for Armenians, Georgians, Iranians, Turks etc other than "white".
They aren't exactly discriminated against....they also are usually the biggest perpetrators of cheating at higher institutions.
I don't buy the Asian "plight". They railed against blacks and hispanics, but didn't say a word against nepo kids.
Turks/Armenians/Georgians are white. Most Turks are inseparable from Eastern Europeans, they dont need another group.
Thanks for the laugh
Thank you. Don't know why this has so many MS.
Sensible discourse is controversial these days.
The fact that the MD ranks have very view of the targeted groups (women, URMs or whoever else) isn't strong evidence of prejudicial promotion practices within the bank. It's strong evidence that the bank is lowering the bar so much in order to target those groups, that its fielding a class of targeted juniors that's a lot weaker than the rest of the class.
What? How is not having black MDs strong evidence of the latter?
Imagine if a bank wanted to hire more left-handed people. Only 10% of people in the world are left-handed, but the bank hires a class that's 40% left-handed. They do this for many years in a row. And years later only 0-10% of MDs are left handed. What does this suggest? I don't think it suggests that the bank has a prejudice against promoting southpaws. I think it suggests that the bank had to lower their standards to get so many southpaws to begin with, so naturally those folks didn't make it up the ranks over time because they were weaker hires on Day 1.
The broader impacts of those programs aside, hyperfocusing on stuff like that from an individual level is just not a good use of time. Finance is a loosely efficient meritocracy especially the more senior you get. Adversely competitive hiring policies are not the first or last stacked deck folks are going to encounter in their career and figuring out how to overcome those odds is only going to be a beneficial skill when the stakes are higher. LPs only care if the deal goes well not how fortunate or not fortunate the circumstances are. The most successful founders I've met seem to have this wiring to find ways to succeed in spite of uphill battles.
I'm old enough, every woman and race in finance pre 2010 absolutely earned their spot. There are performing and non performing employees across the board. Good positions should be hard to get. There may be more obstacles in the way for some, its life...its not fair. Some people have to work harder, at least at the beginning. There are so many different inputs that you can't just toggle 1 or 2 buttons like race to give someone a "leg" up.
I don't know where i was going with this.
But I think the more you climb the ladder and the socioeconomic ladder the less people care about race and gender, only if you can perform and are a good and conscience person. I think DEI throws a wrench into what women and black men fought hard for in the civil rights era.
If a black person goes to a HBCU or moves to a predominately black neighborhood because he prefers to be around other blacks, that is fine. If an Asian person prefers to be around other Asians, that's fine.
If a white person prefers to be around other whites, that's.... racist?
Every article I've seen that touts the benefits of DEI links back to the same Harvard study that compared DEI efforts at companies to their financial performance. No surprise that companies with excess money to spend on DEI departments also seemed to have *gasp* excess money. On the flip side, studies show that diversity decreases social cohesion and community trust. We don't even need studies to show this- basic biology and reason lead you to trust and care for your family most of all, your extended family next, your extended-extended family (your people) next, and all "others" after that.
Not one person is clamoring for Africa, China, or South America to become more diverse. You can't even say that some African country (like Zimbabwe) could use more white people without getting labeled racist.
My parents live in an area that has seen a huge influx of 3rd world immigrants. They brought the 3rd world with them- people just walk on the side of busy streets now, pack multiple families into homes, leave trash in their yards. Please give one compelling argument why this makes my parents lives better.
Leftists simultaneously claim that corporations are money grubbing, soulless entities who want nothing but money, but also willingly forgo all the monetary advantages of a vibrant diverse workforce. Which is it?
Quit whining dude, people don't hate groups benefitting from AA / DEI. They hate being disadvantaged for reasons outside of merit which any rational, sane, competent person would
Tide has shifted against DEI, I cannot wait for it to be killed off or at least degraded to the point where it's irrelevant. Have seen too many examples of people being screwed out of good colleges, promotions, good comp, or even a spot in the industry simply because they are white or Asian. Stfu, your virtue-signaling kind is a dying breed
I'm white, went to a great college, am happy with my spot, and have gotten promoted. If you feel "screwed out of a spot," I suggest working harder, instead of complaining about DEI. Like I said, I don't support DEI either. I just wonder what y'all losers will complain about next.
I actually cover all this in the post.
Keep the downvotes coming!
I greatly reduced my time on WSO because a lot of threads were basically Klan Rallies.
I mean... for the most part it is just venting frustrations. What you are seeing is not genuinely people's positions.
Which is not to say that there are literally 0 people who behave the way you say. Just that such behavior is more about venting then actually believing in it.
Completely against DEI myself, that being said, to answer this question: “I will never understand the discourse around minorities on this website. It seems many (prospective candidates?) hold genuine contempt for [women, black people, hispanics],” it’s an anonymous forum online, what do you expect? People with better things to do (s/o, friends, hobbies, work, etc.) won’t be wasting their time on this nonsense.
Over for all of you when the trumpet comes into office. I’m going to do my small part in making this industry harder for all as I climb up. Shit one day I might even give kids sa just to screw them over with no return or smth. No one cares you were so stupid that you still screwed up your hand outs lmao.
DEI is kind of dumb for a few reasons. I think the better alternative is training your initial screening better.
For example, a lot of people will look at a resume and think it's great someone held X role, but what's more important is how they got there and under what circumstances...but most recruiters are too dumb to see past this. Honestly even most capital allocators are too dumb to see past this lol.
Finally, it creates a ton of glass ceilings, which are very harmful.
My observation in finance / real estate the industry’s demographics tracks similarly to the sources of capital. Before it was a wealthy person’s capital, but more and more it is capital that comes from a wide swath of society (ie pension funds) or overseas. I’ve seen more diversity both in capital and workforce in the past 20 years, and I think it’s a great thing.
-
DEI was never good, but I wish people would keep the same energy for things like nepotism, legacies, and other biases and policies. Banking was never a meritocracy, but people tend to forget that when there's a Black or Spanish guy in the office.
Most people hate the truth that’s the problem. All these programs do not help blacks because if it did the numbers in the industry would be much much higher.
Bro, do you even math? A job can only be occupied by one person. For each individual added on factors not based on merit, you are excluding an individual who would have been included if solely based on merit. In addition, you're raising the threshold merit-based employees and increasing the average quality of merit-based employees (thereby further increasing the gap down to the average quality of non-merit based employees). You may not know them, but every DEI hire represents one person who could not get a job by working harder.
That's never been a problem for me, although I can see your point for more borderline, middle-of-the-road candidates. Overall, I suggest working harder.
I cover this in my post.
Nice humblebrag distancing yourself from the "borderline, middle-of-the-road candidates".
I guess you don't math then? So now they work harder. Great. That just makes another previously qualified candidate the new "borderline, middle-of-the-road candidate". So now that guy works harder. Great. That just makes another... And in the process, the gap between the average quality of merit-based employees and non-merit-based employees widens, which creates the feeling of animosity. You can see how working harder doesn't solve the problem, right? It just makes someone else the loser.
Laboriosam saepe nihil suscipit iste qui. Sed enim velit sed reiciendis. Tempore doloremque et reprehenderit unde consequuntur velit dicta.
Totam qui magni magnam aut illum sunt. Explicabo non sequi et nostrum eligendi qui officiis.
Quam blanditiis quam ab. Voluptatem laboriosam quos aperiam sint labore ratione facilis. Porro earum cumque et illum optio cum dolor ipsum. Ullam quis voluptatibus inventore culpa vero veniam sed. Quis facere aut beatae velit quod id nostrum vel.
Officia sit enim iusto debitis. Occaecati sunt culpa reiciendis quia veniam ut officia cum. Nihil dolorem omnis libero accusantium. Qui cupiditate eum aliquid itaque dolorum consequatur unde.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Non enim quaerat eos. Nemo vel earum voluptatem et qui quaerat. Molestias ut quos consequatur nesciunt cumque et velit. Dignissimos praesentium tempore odio consectetur.
Ut dicta ipsam sit error accusantium. Repellat eaque sunt dolor sed accusamus in sapiente numquam. Illo architecto et quibusdam debitis. Vel sit nam a non et incidunt in. Animi quo velit ut aperiam. Dolore est est nisi sunt.
Voluptatibus eius omnis minus unde sed vero nostrum possimus. Est ad voluptatem quis et harum debitis. Ut ducimus molestias atque eos. Laborum dolorem consequuntur dolores molestias. Animi animi saepe cum sint modi libero quo. Eius expedita fugiat dicta tempore praesentium. Officiis incidunt corrupti eos aut nisi sunt.
Maxime ea reprehenderit sunt aut. Ut nisi fuga voluptatum qui voluptatum ad aperiam et. Sint ratione accusantium id omnis sed aut.
Est doloremque ad quidem voluptatem quibusdam rerum et. Itaque ratione ut ut. Maiores doloribus minima unde atque provident a sunt.
Repellendus repudiandae repellat doloribus et nulla praesentium. Eius voluptatem eaque ex libero voluptatibus modi architecto.
Velit omnis doloribus fugit neque. Cupiditate sapiente officiis facilis sunt odio. Quam consectetur illum dicta facilis et ipsam. Tempora est quos beatae et.