Jim Henson Company Auditions

[Beorhtnoth]

LA headquartered The Jim Henson Company is seeking “top talent and new creative voices” to “train as puppeteers in the Jim Henson technique”. Attendance at the three week workshop will be by invitation only and dependent on audition.

Applicants for audition considered:

Members of the LGBTQ+ community
People of Color
Women of all cultural backgrounds

The only group which does not meet any of the criteria is straight, white men. Jim Henson would be barred from applying...

[Alatar]

Presumably they already have enough straight white men and are looking for diversity.

[Inanna]

And have turned away enough non-white-men in the past that they need to make up for it. Targeting resources and training to underrepresented groups is one of the best ways to make up for lack of diversity.

[Beorhtnoth]

I care little for discrimination. When a single minority demographic is excluded from a selection process, alarm bells ring for me.

What other minority group except straight, white males would it be acceptable to discriminate against?

ETA

And have turned away enough non-white-men in the past that they need to make up for it. Targeting resources and training to underrepresented groups is one of the best ways to make up for lack of diversity.

I agree, but I believe there is a notable difference between selecting for inclusion and selection for exclusion. The groups targeted are specifically chosen because of who they aren't, not who they are. Any one of three negative criteria accords inclusion. Not straight. Not white. Not male. It is exclusionist.
And discriminatory on three counts (race, gender, sexuality).

[Inanna]

But this is not a job. Its a training offer. And I believe that when you have limited resources to provide free training it is okay to target groups that have been denied a living in your field.

[Beorhtnoth]

But this is not a job. Its a training offer. And I believe that when you have limited resources to provide free training it is okay to target groups that have been denied a living in your field.

Again, I agree, if this was a workshop for a or b or c, but this is a workshop for "all except z". And I find that distinction troublesome.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

But this is not a job. Its a training offer. And I believe that when you have limited resources to provide free training it is okay to target groups that have been denied a living in your field.

Again, I agree, if this was a workshop for a or b or c, but this is a workshop for "all except z". And I find that distinction troublesome.

I don't know the details of the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices, but assuming for the sake of discussion that it has traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, would you find that troublesome as well?

Setting aside the question of whether this action is appropriate, do believe that if it is true that the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices have traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, that it would be appropriate for them to take some action to rectify that?

[Beorhtnoth]

But this is not a job. Its a training offer. And I believe that when you have limited resources to provide free training it is okay to target groups that have been denied a living in your field.

Again, I agree, if this was a workshop for a or b or c, but this is a workshop for "all except z". And I find that distinction troublesome.

I don't know the details of the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices, but assuming for the sake of discussion that it has traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, would you find that troublesome as well?

No.

Setting aside the question of whether this action is appropriate, do believe that if it is true that the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices have traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, that it would be appropriate for them to take some action to rectify that?

I don't think the Los Angeles Lakers should hold workshops that exclude black kids because of "over representation", I don't think Goldman Sachs should hold workshops that exclude Jews because of "over representation", and I don't think Jim Henson should hold workshops that exclude straight white men because of "over representation".

In short, if discrimination is not acceptable if "straight, white male" is replaced by any other demographic, then it is not acceptable for "straight, white male".

[N.E. Brigand]

Again, I agree, if this was a workshop for a or b or c, but this is a workshop for "all except z". And I find that distinction troublesome.

I don't know the details of the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices, but assuming for the sake of discussion that it has traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, would you find that troublesome as well?

No.

Setting aside the question of whether this action is appropriate, do believe that if it is true that the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices have traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, that it would be appropriate for them to take some action to rectify that?

I don't think the Los Angeles Lakers should hold workshops that exclude black kids because of "over representation", I don't think Goldman Sachs should hold workshops that exclude Jews because of "over representation", and I don't think Jim Henson should hold workshops that exclude straight white men because of "over representation".

In short, if discrimination is not acceptable if "straight, white male" is replaced by any other demographic, then it is not acceptable for "straight, white male."

I guarantee you that there are fields in which there has been systematic discrimination in favor of straight white males. If a company in such a position comes to recognize that problem, how would you recommend they go about addressing it so that the problem is fixed now rather than in a few decades?

By the way, here are the Los Angeles Lakers in 1954:

[Beorhtnoth]

I don't know the details of the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices, but assuming for the sake of discussion that it has traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, would you find that troublesome as well?

No.

Setting aside the question of whether this action is appropriate, do believe that if it is true that the Jim Henson Company's hiring practices have traditionally been unproportionally slanted towards straight white males, that it would be appropriate for them to take some action to rectify that?

I don't think the Los Angeles Lakers should hold workshops that exclude black kids because of "over representation", I don't think Goldman Sachs should hold workshops that exclude Jews because of "over representation", and I don't think Jim Henson should hold workshops that exclude straight white men because of "over representation".

In short, if discrimination is not acceptable if "straight, white male" is replaced by any other demographic, then it is not acceptable for "straight, white male."

I guarantee you that there are fields in which there has been systematic discrimination in favor of straight white males. If a company in such a position comes to recognize that problem, how would you recommend they go about addressing it so that the problem is fixed now rather than in a few decades?

By the way, here are the Los Angeles Lakers in 1954:

You seem to think having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. I don't.

Furthermore, I cannot see why a workshop cannot be open to all, rather than choosing to discriminate against a minority.

Lastly, I think it is horrendous to entertain the notion that to gain entry to this workshop, a white man would have to declare his sexuality.

ETA Did it take basketball workshops excluding white boys to consign an all white Lakers team to history?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

You seem to think having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. I don't.

Please don't put words in my mouth . You'll notice that I did not do that to you. Instead I asked you questions to get a better idea of what it was that you believed.

To be clear, I do not think that having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. What I think is problematic is the systemic racism, sexism and homophobia that has granted privilege to straight white males such as me.

Moreover, I have not stated that I believe that these workshops are an appropriate method of addressing this issue. In point of fact, I do not believe that they are.

[Beorhtnoth]

You seem to think having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. I don't.

Please don't put words in my mouth . You'll notice that I did not do that to you. Instead I asked you questions to get a better idea of what it was that you believed.

To be clear, I do not think that having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. What I think is problematic is the systemic racism, sexism and homophobia that has granted privilege to straight white males such as me.

Moreover, I have not stated that I believe that these workshops are an appropriate method of addressing this issue. In point of fact, I do not believe that they are.

Er... that specific reply was to N.E. Brigand,

[Voronwë the Faithful]

So it was.

My apologies.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think it is horrendous to entertain the notion that to gain entry to this workshop, a white man would have to declare his sexuality.

I agree, which is one of the reasons why I think this workshop is not a good idea.

ETA Did it take basketball workshops excluding white boys to consign an all white Lakers team to history?

No, but it took incredible fortitude on the part of black athletes like Bill Russell, and affirmative acts in the face of great pressure on the part of white coaches like Red Auerbach to move in that direction. I remember the first time there was an all-black starting line-up in the NBA. Yes, I am that old, but yes, it wasn't all that long ago.

[N.E. Brigand]

You seem to think having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. I don't.

I would note that I didn't ask you specifically about puppeteering. This was what I wrote:

I guarantee you that there are fields in which there has been systematic discrimination in favor of straight white males. If a company in such a position comes to recognize that problem, how would you recommend they go about addressing it so that the problem is fixed now rather than in a few decades?

Now, do I think having only straight white male puppeteers is likely an indication of systematic racism? Yes I do.

More importantly, the Jim Henson company thinks it's problematic. The company apparently believes the people working in their field aren't a fair representation of the community, and they seem to feel that lack of diversity isn't just some random fluke.

Similarly, it wasn't just due to chance that professional basketball teams in the era of that photograph had few Black players, or for that matter, that many of the best players of the time and before were Jewish. It's not because Black Americans lacked inherent athletic talents that Jewish Americans possessed.

[Beorhtnoth]

You seem to think having straight white male puppeteers is problematic. I don't.

I would note that I didn't ask you specifically about puppeteering. This was what I wrote:

I guarantee you that there are fields in which there has been systematic discrimination in favor of straight white males. If a company in such a position comes to recognize that problem, how would you recommend they go about addressing it so that the problem is fixed now rather than in a few decades?

Now, do I think having only straight white male puppeteers is likely an indication of systematic racism? Yes I do.

More importantly, the Jim Henson company thinks it's problematic. The company apparently believes the people working in their field aren't a fair representation of the community, and they seem to feel that lack of diversity isn't just some random fluke.

Similarly, it wasn't just due to chance that professional basketball teams in the era of that photograph had few Black players, or for that matter, that many of the best players of the time and before were Jewish. It's not because Black Americans lacked inherent athletic talents that Jewish Americans possessed.

Did basketball teams open up to black players by denying white (or Jewish) players opportunities, or was it a more organic process, that didn't require the deliberate racist, sexist exclusion of a singular, identified demographic?

Because that is my objection here. It is racist, sexist and heterophobic to invite everyone EXCEPT straight, white males. I find such exclusionary behaviour antithetical to my ideological egalitarianism. It doesn't suddenly become acceptable to enact prejudice because the targets for that prejudice are straight, white men. Does it?

[Beorhtnoth]

I think a little analogy may be helpful to understanding why I find the actions of The Jim Henson Company problematic.

When the Boy Scouts of America opened membership to girls, it didn't decide to address gender imbalance in the organisation by restricting new membership solely to girls, even though that would have had an effect. Why? Because that would be stupid, and unfairly affect boys.

No person should carry guilt over the actions of others. That includes straight, white men. An individual is responsible for their own actions; children are not culpable for the sins of their parents, and most of all, no person is guilty based on their race, their sex, or their sexual orientation. To think otherwise is, to me, ludicrous.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think a little analogy may be helpful to understanding why I find the actions of The Jim Henson Company problematic.

When the Boy Scouts of America opened membership to girls, it didn't decide to address gender imbalance in the organisation by restricting new membership solely to girls, even though that would have had an effect. Why? Because that would be stupid, and unfairly affect boys.

No person should carry guilt over the actions of others. That includes straight, white men. An individual is responsible for their own actions; children are not culpable for the sins of their parents, and most of all, no person is guilty based on their race, their sex, or their sexual orientation. To think otherwise is, to me, ludicrous.

I've already indicated that I am don't believe that this ad is a good idea. My sense, which may be unfair, is that it is more about demonstrating how "woke" they are than actually effecting real positive change. That having been said, there is a huge difference between this ad, even looking at in the worst possible sense , and the Boy Scouts "restricting new membership solely to girls." There is nothing in the ad that indicates that the company is restricting new hiring to people who are not white straight males. Though I will say that if a qualified white male candidate was denied a position at the Jim Henson Company, it is quite possible that they would be able to use this ad as evidence in a case alleging unlawful employment discrimination.*

* For the record, yes I have represented individuals alleging racial discrimination on the grounds that they were discriminated against because they are white.

[Beorhtnoth]

I think a little analogy may be helpful to understanding why I find the actions of The Jim Henson Company problematic.

When the Boy Scouts of America opened membership to girls, it didn't decide to address gender imbalance in the organisation by restricting new membership solely to girls, even though that would have had an effect. Why? Because that would be stupid, and unfairly affect boys.

No person should carry guilt over the actions of others. That includes straight, white men. An individual is responsible for their own actions; children are not culpable for the sins of their parents, and most of all, no person is guilty based on their race, their sex, or their sexual orientation. To think otherwise is, to me, ludicrous.

I've already indicated that I am don't believe that this ad is a good idea. My sense, which may be unfair, is that it is more about demonstrating how "woke" they are than actually effecting real positive change. That having been said, there is a huge difference between this ad, even looking at in the worst possible sense , and the Boy Scouts "restricting new membership solely to girls." There is nothing in the ad that indicates that the company is restricting new hiring to people who are not white straight males. Though I will say that if a qualified white male candidate was denied a position at the Jim Henson Company, it is quite possible that they would be able to use this ad as evidence in a case alleging unlawful employment discrimination.*

* For the record, yes I have represented individuals alleging racial discrimination on the grounds that they were discriminated against because they are white.

I am shaken! I find myself in almost total agreement with Voronwë...
However, one point of clarity. I make an analogy between BSA and TJHC, in that both are addressing under-representation. The difference is that BSA have embarked on opening up recruitment to all, erasing discrimination. TJHC is performing the opposite, introducing overt discrimination.
I support the former, and condemn the latter.

[N.E. Brigand]

Did basketball teams open up to black players by denying white (or Jewish) players opportunities, or was it a more organic process, that didn't require the deliberate racist, sexist exclusion of a singular, identified demographic?

The problematic status quo wasn't organic, so why should the solution be?