Again, what you are saying can be summed up in 'get over it' and 'find a way around it for yourself'.
That's fine. I actually did.
But it seems really inappropriate to say this here.
We are discussing the insidiousness of discrimination with the hope of socially being more conscious and finding ways to improve this.
It's kinda like going into a place with victims of racism and saying 'get over' and 'use your white voice/dress more white' when talking about the issue of racism. It's out of place, even if the suggestion is coming from a good place of wanting the best for the other person.
P.S. I had a department with large numbers and strong growth on my side for leverage, that is why the CEO considered me in the first place. The numbers took a big hit after I left. If the board would have had more people in their 40s and less in their 70s-80s, I would likely have been accepted. Explaining to me that this is politics is a bit pedantic in assuming I don't understand politics.
"Again, what you are saying can be summed up in 'get over it' and 'find a way around it for yourself'."
That's not what I'm reading in the comment. They are telling you it's a different game, they focus on what kinds of value you bring that they actually care about, and you can have leverage in such situations if you are such a person. From there, you automatically know to be the person delivering on the metrics that matter to upper management. Maybe to see if you even can before getting a job in a specific organization. They're telling you how to be more effective in the event you want to win more at that level.
This whole thread is coming from an article discussing age bias.
Not ways to avoid getting biased against. Or justifications for biases. So it makes sense to keep the comments on topic.
Even if my case wasn't an ageist thing, which is a lot of assuming on your end, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
It takes a certain type of person though to go out and doubt someone when they say they have suffered from something and have nothing to gain from it.
The assumptions are very pedantic, explaining them only furthers the pedantry. It's not that I don't understand them. It's that I understand them too well.
That's fine. I actually did.
But it seems really inappropriate to say this here.
We are discussing the insidiousness of discrimination with the hope of socially being more conscious and finding ways to improve this.
It's kinda like going into a place with victims of racism and saying 'get over' and 'use your white voice/dress more white' when talking about the issue of racism. It's out of place, even if the suggestion is coming from a good place of wanting the best for the other person.
P.S. I had a department with large numbers and strong growth on my side for leverage, that is why the CEO considered me in the first place. The numbers took a big hit after I left. If the board would have had more people in their 40s and less in their 70s-80s, I would likely have been accepted. Explaining to me that this is politics is a bit pedantic in assuming I don't understand politics.