Minorities should play to win

Imagine a Fortune 500 company with an all-female board or a woman that's paid 30% more than her male peer.

If the black:white ratio is 13:78 in the general US population but 13:468 at Google, indicating there are 6x more white employees proportionally to black than there are in the population. What if we expected more and aimed for 6x more black Googlers than white ones?

Equal pay, 50% board seats, and all the "goals" out there for minorities don't really look like goals. As an individual, what are our goals? To be average, the median or as good as your peer? No, it's to be the best. So why aren't feminists advocating for 100% board seats and double the pay of men? What if we called it black supremacy instead of racial equality? *witch cackle - anarchy and chaos ensues*

It's unorthodox to ask for more than you "deserve". Especially as a minority. But aspirations aren't meant to be realistic today. They're about going after the biggest thing you want no matter how far you are from obtaining it. 

Sheryl Sandberg's campaign to eliminate "bossy" as a female adjective exemplifies how we play not to lose (avoid put-downs) rather than playing to win (associate positive terms with women). Yet in her personal life she's rocking the COO job at one of the biggest tech companies. Instead of imposing average goals on half of the population, let's aim to be the best.

As individuals - female, hispanic, low-income - we aspire to be the next CEO of a Fortune 500 company. Why shouldn't have the same goals for the larger groups we're a part of?