Thoughts on…Non-binary Discrimination in Job Searches
Photo of Google logo with Pride colors
A recent article called out Google and its partners’ discriminatory job ad settings. The problem is that the ad settings blocked anyone who hadn’t defined their gender as “male” or “female” from seeing them. It didn’t simply apply to those who failed to fill out the field, it applied to anyone who did not select “male” or “female”. This has critical implications for non-binary and gender-nonconforming people seeking jobs. In effect, intentional or not, they were discriminated against by not even being shown the ads, effectively denying their application before they even made it onto the pile. Google has pledged to address the issue but it’s also another example of how attempts at inclusivity can’t stop at the surface. Furthermore, with Google’s recent history of firing Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell as well as the firing of employees it was allegedly surveilling for seeking to form a union it does give one pause as to whether we can trust their promise.
Screenshot of Google demographic selection UI for ads
For me, it further highlights why I look to be guided by Design Justice Principles as a company. Having these designs built and reviewed by people from the LGBTQ+ community whose feedback was not only notated but treated as a critical part of the process could have helped avoid this situation. Building more inclusive technology isn’t just about what we like or react to on social-media. It’s not just about which memes we share or retweet. It’s not even just about our ability to say “we tried”. It’s very much about our ability to hold ourselves accountable by doing the work upfront to amplify the voices of marginalized communities so that we don’t have to spend the time, money and emotional resources to apologize and fix it later.
This is also a perfect example of how something seemingly innocuous can become a digitized micro-aggression and propagation of oppression, not unlike those spoken about in Race After Technology and other books. Simply put, it’s how harm can be baked into technology, whether it is intentional or not. Giving bad actors the opportunity to exploit our mistakes is something we have to be ever vigilant against.
Read the article Google Has Been Allowing Advertisers to Exclude Nonbinary People from Seeing Job Ads and let me know your thoughts. How would you avoid this? What should they do now?
Thoughts On… Nike GO Flyease
Nike GO Flyease is the latest model in a line of adaptive footwear from Nike. It’s built with those with disabilities in mind but this version ups the ante on the design to align it with just about any other Nike sneaker you might see.
Personally, I like the idea. I know many people with disabilities who struggle to find everyday solutions that don’t kind of put a “flag” on them highlighting their disability. They want solutions that accommodate their needs without sacrificing style. They want to be empowered without also being “othered”.
However, there are some critiques to point out, such as the pricing ($125). Sure it is about the standard cost for Nike but there’s concern for disabled folks who often struggle to afford these kinds of items. Furthermore, there have been those who have taken issue with the lack of the word “disabled” in the marketing of a product supposedly built with and for the disabled community. While there is something to be said for broadening their appeal, it also can feel like erasure when even a disabled person at the heart of their creation isn’t mentioned in their marketing. Here’s a blog that discusses these critiques written by Nadya Osman on MODA.
The design itself is further proof that designing for marginalized communities can actually lead to improved designs for all, even if it also highlights the lack of awareness of able-bodied people who simply see these kinds of products as “lazy”. As Eliza Huber points out, there have been other brands who’ve created adaptive lines but having the top footwear brand dip its toe in can have big implications.
What are your thoughts? Would you wear these? Are there ways you’d make the design, branding, marketing, etc more equitable and/or inclusive?
For a full article on the topic, check out Eliza Huber’s article on Refinery29.