Maybe the point then is that if we are aiming for diversity, then we aim for diversity: come out of your own comfort zone and get to know something or someone that feels uncomfortably foreign, try to appreciate this for what it is. It applies as much for "engineering-types" getting to know "sales-types" as it is for people of different racial heritages.
Why should we expect "diversity" to have an appended, "as long as I'm comfortable with that"? Why do we struggle so much with what's "normative"? Why not treat this as an adventure, something unexpected and unknown to explore?
Another aspect of this is that, I think people want to feel like they are part of the team, working together towards a common goal. If what bonds the team are the things they like or dislike, that's a pretty weak team. Shouldn't the common goal that binds the team together be the product or features the are working on? Isn't that the point of company culture -- not to homogenize everyone, but to gel the team? (See: http://the-programmers-stone.com/ )
How about no? If I'm in a group of sports fans, then no, I really don't give a shit about getting to know about how these stupid teams are doing this season. If you have an interest in something, great, but don't expect me to give two shits about it. If I have an interest, I'll let you know, if not, I'll just politely decline.
This doesn't mean that the minority person can't ask, "hey, does anyone follow XYZ?". He might be surprised. But if not, don't expect everyone to have or feign an interest.
And surely, in a team of technologists, they can find something that they're all interested in and can talk about. Maybe something to do with, oh, I don't know, maybe technology? I have conversations at work all the time like that (luckily I work with some really smart people at my current job), about future trends in tech, etc. But I've worked with some dullards in the past, and I didn't get butt-hurt that they didn't want to talk about sci-fi or whatever.
In my experience in scaling applications, I've noticed there is a very big difference between measuring actual performance in production and taking a look with an open mind, and making wild-ass guesses.
You don't have enough data on other people around you, or even how they view the world, or feel about the world. It's like taking a wild-ass guess, and being proud of it.
I don't really care much for following sports teams either. I used to turn my nose at it, as if I am somehow a superior person for not giving two shits about who is winning. One day, I read Michael Lewis's Moneyball and flipped through Blindside and realized I had been an idiot. I still might not care about which team is winning, yet there are a lot of hidden depths to sports. How many other things have I missed by not looking with an open mind?
Everyone prefers their favorite things over things they don't like. Anyone who doesn't is insane. The sports fans probably think they're superior people because they spend all their time and energy following sports, instead of being like me and following sci-fi or programming or whatever.
It really doesn't matter. My whole point, which you seem to have missed, is that people have preferences. I don't give a shit about sports. I don't care about its hidden depths. I have the right to my opinion, and to turn my nose up at sports, just like the sports fan has the right to turn his nose up at sci-fi. Are you going to chastise him for not being open-minded and spending a bunch of time watching sci-fi movies he has no interest in and then being able to discuss them intelligently with coworkers?
The simple fact is that different people have different tastes and interests. If someone wants to be curious and try learning about something different, then great. If they've already given that thing a chance, or taken a quick look and decided it's not for them, there is nothing wrong with that. If that means that they feel "left out" when talking to coworkers, too bad. That's a natural byproduct of people having different interests. It doesn't need to be "fixed".
Basically, what you're doing is telling minorities that they need to take an active interest in things that the majority (meaning white people here) are interested in so that they can fit in better. That sounds rather condescending to me honestly. I used sports here as an analogy to point out that this isn't a racial issue, we only see it here because different demographics tend to have different interests because of their different upbringings and environments. No one makes an issue out of white northeasterners not being interested in gun shooting and muddin'.
Why should we expect "diversity" to have an appended, "as long as I'm comfortable with that"? Why do we struggle so much with what's "normative"? Why not treat this as an adventure, something unexpected and unknown to explore?
Another aspect of this is that, I think people want to feel like they are part of the team, working together towards a common goal. If what bonds the team are the things they like or dislike, that's a pretty weak team. Shouldn't the common goal that binds the team together be the product or features the are working on? Isn't that the point of company culture -- not to homogenize everyone, but to gel the team? (See: http://the-programmers-stone.com/ )