“I feel quite strongly that people should stop trying to get women into coding and software engineering,” Claudia Hill writes for Stuff. “I am a woman who has been immersed in the tech sector for almost two decades. I have gone from a software engineer to running my own software development company. I am also a working mother of three kids. However, I have to agree with much of the sentiment in a memo from a Google executive which hit the headlines this week, and incited outrage in the US and around the world.”
“Titled Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber, it argued that women are under-represented in the tech industry not because they face discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between the genders,” Hill writes. “In many ways, I agree.”
“As a woman in tech I am not taking this stance lightly, but I believe the enormous effort put into recruiting females into software engineering is a waste of time,” Hill writes. “In my opinion it feels very much like ‘box checking’ and on the whole, it’s a fundamentally flawed approach. It also assumes the following: that women want to be software engineers. Here is an inconvenient truth: a lot of them actually don’t! How about instead we focus on roles that women are better at – nurturing talent, managing people and communication – that includes senior management and leadership roles in the tech sector.”
“I hope that people do not misunderstand my comments or find them hurtful or dispiriting,” Hill writes. “I am a big believer that there is a great place for females in tech and I hope to see more females entering the industry, but we need to change our tune and encourage females to play to their strengths.”
Much more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Former Google engineer James Damore’s original memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” can be read in full here.
As we wrote three years ago, back in July 2014:
Diversity is good, but getting the absolute best should remain the goal. Forced diversity carries its own set of problems. Would the group be comprised of the best-qualifed people possible or would it be designed to hit pre-defined quotas? Would some employees, consciously or unconsciously, consider certain employees, or even themselves, to be tokens meant to fill a quota? That would be a suboptimal result for all involved.
Truly looking at qualified people from a larger pool would result in delivering different viewpoints and new ways of looking at things and tackling problems than a more homogenized workforce would be capable of delivering.
Regardless and of course, someday it sure would be nice for everyone to just be able to evaluate a person’s potential, not measuring and tabulating superficial, meaningless things like skin color and gender.
SEE ALSO:
Apple CEO Tim Cook: ‘U.S. will lose its leadership in technology’ unless more women are hired – April 7, 2017
Apple’s board has urged shareholders to reject proposal to tie executive compensation to racial diversity quotas – February 27, 2017
Apple Inc. fights shareholders group demand for more diversity – February 15, 2017
Apple’s Board of Directors says a call for diversity is ‘unduly burdensome and not necessary’ – January 15, 2016
Apple leads Facebook, Intel, Cisco, Google on gender diversity among Bay Area companies – November 17, 2015
Apple’s latest diversity report shows progress – August 13, 2015
Tim Cook is ‘personally involved’ in improving diversity at Apple Inc. – July 14, 2015
Apple donates over $50 million to diversity efforts – March 10, 2015
Apple CEO Tim Cook met privately with Jesse Jackson regarding diversity – December 9, 2014
Apple adds Vice Presidents, more diversity to Executive Leadership Team – August 15, 2014
A message from Apple CEO Tim Cook on diversity – August 12, 2014
Jesse Jackson calls on Obama to scrutinize tech industry’s ‘lack of diversity’ – July 28, 2014
Tim Cook: Apple will release diversity data ‘at some point’ – July 9, 2014
Jesse Jackson targets tech’s lack of diversity; sends letter to Apple, Google, HP, others – March 19, 2014
Apple changes bylaws after facing criticism about lack of diversity on board – January 9, 2014
The whole Google thing shows the PC culture run amok. The engineer may have been stupid to distribute his feelings in the way he did, but the knee jerk response and snowflake behavior by Google employees is wrong.
I doubt anyone wants discrimination in hiring, promotions, training opportunities and access to professional development. The politically correct crowd that is always looking for a grievance and a tendency to blame it on white males needs a leash as they are ruining corporate America. Inclusion is one thing, repression of one group to artificially advance another is wrong.
Google, like many technology companies, is dominated by people with STEM training and work backgrounds. Those fields, by self selection, are overwhelmingly male and skew heavily to Caucasian and Asian ethnicities. There have been substantive and coordinated efforts for decades to increase the number of woman and African-Americans in the STEM fields and to date it has yielded marginal results. Take a walk around a College of Engineering Building and what you will see is a sausage fest of mostly White and Asian students, which predicts the trend will continue.
Someone needs to tell the snowflakes in the diversity offices that Technology companies do not need people with degrees in Sports Management or Middle Eastern Politics- they need people who take the hard courses avoided like the plague by many students. Hiring and advancement should be based upon merit alone- not your race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, faith or lack thereof, political views, etc.
On this issue I am closer to the viewpoint of the Conservatives than the snowflakes. This bullshit comes right out of the culture where every kid gets a trophy or certificate regardless of their performance. At some point adults should realize that there is no free lunch, that life is not fair, that he with the gold makes the rules, that hard work will always yield a reward and that ultimately you are the prime determinant of your own destiny. Companies are created to generate a profit- not do social engineering to make people feel good. If you do not like the atmosphere feel free to leave and start your own- this is America.
The guy was unwise to make the comments in the way he did, but his crime is stupidity- not sexism. Google should have addressed his concerns, admonished him regarding his method of expression and returned him to his job. The offended snowflakes should have been advised they are at will employees and can go any time they please.
That guy obviously put a lot of thought into his manifesto. The thesis that somehow women are just not as biologically suited to work in tech is what got him into trouble. I don’t think his crime was stupidity. “Crime” is a loaded word and fits your bias, that he got into trouble for going against the PC doctrine. What is the “truth” here? In my mind, that’s still an open question.
Well put, DavGreg, but I think it goes deeper than just PC snowflakes and has a lot to do with jumping on the bandwagon and pointing a finger to make one feel superior.
This also explains a lot of the issues with the current style of reporting (when it is not deliberate sabotage, just sloppy journalism).
Well said DavGreg. If only Google and snowflakes in general had the presence of mind to take everything into account and instead stop the knee jerk “offended” and “off with their head!” mentality. When they do they effectively lose more power and credibility, not gain.
I hope Google encounters backlash for their hasty toadying actions pacifying the vocally clueless.
DvGg: an previous post made me think we may be of a similar era, which make me wonder if age is a major factor influencing your opinion…maybe as much as political leaning? Support of snowflake-ism, as it’s known now, was rare in 60-70’s.
I am an Independent Progressive son of New Deal Democrats. Late Baby Boomer generation, product of integrated schools.
My protest is not defending the man’s thesis, but the reaction to it by Google and the women at Google. They demanded he be fired- this was reported widely.
I do not call myself a Liberal because this kind of thing is exactly what has undermined the term in the US. American Liberals in general are just as intolerant as Conservatives- just over different hot button things. When they act like this they make the vast middle of the country roll their eyes…
The guy should have been admonished for putting something out in the manner he did. That is not a termination offense- it is a teachable moment. Great organizations are learning organizations and that extends to every employee. Businesses that have great quality learn from mistakes- they do not burn those responsible at the stake.
I’m a classical liberal, leaning toward libertarian, pushed there from Reagan Democrat by the insanity that took over the party. Also late baby boomer, product of all black piece of shit public schools in Los Angeles, i.e. self educated for survival.
Who are you really and where is DavGreg?
“Liberals in general are just as intolerant as Conservatives- just over different hot button things. When they act like this they make the vast middle of the country roll their eyes…”
Great posts. Totally agree and again, awesome!
Sorry for the t, happy hour …
I am a female software engineer. I don’t care what jackass male programmers claim. Male or female, we all took our cue from Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, and Lynn Conway. Social theories fall before actual history. Gender fantasies fall before actual facts. We are not at war with one another, we are at war with a cruel cosmos! Life would be easier for all of us if we acknowledged that.
I’ll acknowledge you are an “exceptional” woman …😊
“There have been substantive and coordinated efforts for decades to increase the number of woman and African-Americans in the STEM fields and to date it has yielded marginal results.”
Uh, no. Women outnumber men in BS degrees in biology and are about par in chemistry. And as someone who has worked in multidisciplinary research at Research Tier I universities, I can vouch that the women in these fields are just as every bit capable as the men, and, in my personal experience they tackle their work with the same fervor and significantly less ego. Rates have climbed steadily over “the decades”; see for example, https://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/womenmajors.cfm and I have lived through them.
Engineering has not been as successful. There are multiple reasons for this, but I will point out just one. As a personal friend of a female EE who ranks at the top of her field, one dominated by men, I can tell you that the sexism in that field is disgustingly rampant. Disgustingly. Like chemistry used to be like in the 70’s still in this day and age. Crude, vulgar, unthinkable stuff.
And pile on to that the “imposter syndrome”; see for example https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/women-and-imposter-syndrome-astronomy That link is in the field of astronomy; for a clear-cut case of a woman being brushed aside by the old-boy network see the case of Jocelyn Bell Burnell, who was the first to observe and figure out pulsars (over her advisor’s objections and had to be convinced) and was snubbed for the Nobel prize for the discovery.
The keyword “snowflake” in your post indicates exactly what you are – a privileged white male (as am I, BTW) who (unlike me) likes to whine that someone else might actually get ahead in life because it is perceived to come at his expense. Much like our current president who sees himself a perpetual “victim” of the “fake media” instead of manning up and accepting that every time he opens his mouth to spout another falsehood or stroke his fragile ego or feed his narcissistic neuroticism he has brought all his criticisms upon himself.
The real question is how do we as a society get more, say, African American PhD’s in a particular field. The answer is that it starts in elementary school. As much as I disdain social science studies, the statistics are out there that having just one mentor/teacher who “looks like me” significantly increases the chances that a student will have an interest in that field. This effect is magnified up through high school (see, for example, https://clas-pages.uncc.edu/rootsofstem/wp-content/uploads/sites/529/2013/12/ROOTS_WP_103.pdf ) You are correct that we don’t solve equity issues with quotas etc, but there are proven ways to address these very real issues.
So let me ask you what YOU’VE done besides whine (because you are apparently very accomplished at it) to increase the representation of women, minorities etc. and other underrepresented groups so that they are proportionate to the general population. I suspect the answer is “nothing.” Because whining is so much easier than solving a problem, particularly one you don’t want to solve because you see it as a threat to your own pathetically small self-esteem.
Which is more important, in your opinion, to achieve: merit or diversity?
An excellent question.
During my career, which has spanned universities and colleges from the state to most elite levels, I have encountered perhaps one or two science faculty who probably got the job where their ethnicity/race/gender was a factor and the department could have done better had they chosen someone else. Then again, I have also had a couple somewhat incompetent white male colleagues along the way. Administrators, on the other hand, I have seen many who could have been quotas based on borderline performance, but in most of these cases the real story is patronage which is far more damaging..
So merit, yes, above all else. But it is important to work from the grade school level upward to get kids tracked into STEM to provide a talent pool that is more diversified.
As an example of the changes I’ve seen over the years, one of my colleagues was a first year grad student at MIT and she was talking to a professor about joining his research group, to which he answered “there are no women in my group.” In reply, she explained she understood the challenges of working in a male-dominated environment, was willing to deal with x, y, and z etc. At which point he looked at her and said “You don’t understand. There are NO WOMEN in MY GROUP.” Obviously, something like that gets you fired nowadays even with tenure. But the bigger point is that active discrimination has begun to fall away, particularly with the recognition that in my field, at least, that women and men are equally capable, perhaps each bringing different strengths and weaknesses to the research team.
Cultural diversity = happiness. Merit-based systems are cruel.
smoke some more krill. 😉
How may times do you have to be admonished for promoting logical fallacies in defense of your viewpoint? You throw out these fallacies to deflect the discussion away from the core issues.
If one pursues “merit” properly, then “diversity” will follow. If one pursues “diversity” properly, then “merit” will follow. For far too many decades many people with merit have been suppressed and marginalized due to gender, skin color, etc. Now, you, a well-to-do older white male has the balls to complain about a company taking action to reinforce its diversity efforts and support the people that this guy was attacking?
The main problem with retirement is that it provides people like you with far too much spare time to spew your thoughts onto this (and other) forums and the political proceed. Your impact outweighs your merit or value to society.
When diversity is forced by law, they most certainly are mutually exclusive. That’s the point, stupid.
Outside of the discussion as a whole, merit and quotas are exclusive.
I think there is more than just merit and diversity that need to be considered unless the position requires little interaction with co-workers. Compatibility with the businesses’ culture and current employees would play a significant part in a productive workplace IMO.
The problem, JimBob, is that it’s hard enough to get existing teachers to teach the actual material rather than indoctrinating students with liberalism. Most new teaching candidates tend to exhibit liberalism, and thus are likely to continue the cycle of indoctrination replacing actual education, meaning even the teacher who “looks like me” probably won’t be teaching what they need to succeed in any case.
The far right has loaded the term “liberalism” with all kinds of negative connotations, then used it to discredit anything that they oppose. Our “Founding Fathers” were very liberal, on the whole, compared to the standards of their time.
When people like you describe teachers “indoctrinating students with liberalism,” what you really mean is teaching evolution, climate change, and legitimate science and history in general.
Of course, you would prefer to indoctrinate the children with conservatism!
our “liberal” forefathers were libertarian, not socialist. Liberals are socialists, they are collectivists…the United States was founded on individualism, and the rights of the individual.
nice try.
…in fact, that is the function of a republic: to protect the rights of the individual as opposed to the mob rule of democracy.
Or the mob rule of socialists in the U.S. Present day brand of libtard intolerant PC snowflakes are the worst in history.
The 1960s free thinkers are probably aghast at what passes for liberalism in 2017 …
Oh BS: The far left has loaded the term “conservatism” with all kinds of negative….Of course you’d prefer to indoctrinate the children with liberalism!
Your position is very pedestrian…simple polemics. Please give me something where adding the exact opposing view doesn’t make sense.
Emmayche, there is no indoctrination or liberalism to be found in organic chemistry, quantum mechanics, differential equations, fluid dynamics, laboratory work and whatnot. Obviously, every instructor and students comes with their own personal political beliefs/ethics/codes from myriad viewpoints, but none of that affects the grade in courses like these.
If someone really believes that being a Trump or Obama supporter is the reason they failed organic chemistry that’s a sure sign of someone that is not ready to function as an adult.
I never said or implied that women lack anything in their ability to study or master the content. I said the problem is self selection.
The change in the Sciences is relatively new. It certainly was not the case in the 1970-80s when I attended. I applaud anyone of any background with the drive, talent and tenacity to achieve a terminal Degree in the Sciences or Engineering. We need all we can get.
The specific reason I used the term snowflake is that within Google, numerous women protested that he must be fired because they could not work with such a knuckle drawer in their midst. That is intolerant, unreasonable and unwise. That is the behavior fostered in our society where “everyone is a winner” when the inverse is true.
Google is a collaborative work environment by all accounts and monocultures produce rigid, orthodox and unimaginative thinking. Throwing out someone because they hold different beliefs is not in the interest of any company that values creativity, openness, fresh perspectives or innovation.
History shows us the Black Swans away from the fat band of the Bell Curve are the ones who change the universe. Thomas Edison, Benjamin Franklin and any number of other innovators were marked as troublemakers or dullards unworthy of an education. Sony, during it greatest performance under Akio Marietta, went out of it’s way to not hire the people from Tokyo U that made the top scores as they were rigid and unimaginative. Honda, during it’s meteoric rise, specified that Engineers would run the company- not professional managers.
I do not defend the thesis the guy put out, but think the firing of him reflects an intolerance and rigid culture that will in the long term hurt Google. I do not defend discrimination against anyone, but most diversity programs are just reverse discrimination.
I stand for a meritocracy based upon equity. There is no such thing as de facto equality.
“I stand for a meritocracy based upon equity.”
equity means fairness, life isn’t fair, nor can it be legislated to be.
Equity is not equality. Equity is a fair shot while equality is everyone is the same. We will never have equality- you will never be able to play Guitar like Eric Clapton, shoot hoops like Michael Jordan or swim like Michael Phelps.
What we want in an open democratic society is for each person to have a fair shot at achieving as much as their talent, drive, ambition, work and ingenuity will allow. That and your civil liberties. Otherwise, no stupid restrictions because you are or are not something.
Beyond that you are on your own. Enjoy your freedom.
Do you advocate laws to force individuals to your concept of “equality?”
I do not advocate equality except before the law (Civil Liberties- Habeas Corpus, protection from self incrimination, etc.). Private entities can do as they wish beyond our civil liberties until they impose on others.
In many ways I agree with the Libertarian philosophy, but draw the line on the role of government. Most who claim to be Libertarians are simply conservatives who do not want the baggage of the term.
I see the role of government as extending to extending education to all, healthcare to all, protection from commercial predation (consumer protection), public infrastructure. protection of the environment and a backstop for the disadvantaged. The rest is none of the government’s business.
Big Government is no person’s friend, but neither is the Economic Darwinism advocated by so many on the Conservative side. There is a happy balance, but it requires vigilance by a well informed and educated citizenry. Our country is screwed up in part because the citizens defaulted on their end of the bargain.
you didn’t answer the question….yes or no, do you advocate laws that force “equality” on private citizens?
Trying to force the issues into one brief question is pathetically stupid.
I am sure it is to a mealy-mouthed toady, such as yourself, Cocoa Miss. To those who have the courage of their convictions, a yes/no question is welcomed, even relished.
If a private citizen discriminates against another in commerce, the laws apply. Corporate Charters are instruments of government as is currency. When you accept either, you accept playing by their rules.
so, does that mean “yes” you do condone the force of law on private citizens to coerce them to hire according to mandated diversity instead of merit?
YES or fucking NO
what a cowardly worm you are.
What a Belligerent Asswipe you are, botvijerk. You are NOT the one and only prince of determining how the discussion will be framed.
He is trying to lay a semantic trap. A private citizen has certain rights different from a public company, but a private citizen who employs or contracts with another is bound by additional legal constraints and requirements.
I had and continue to have many conservative friends from my College Days and many are among the best educated, considerate, informed and well spoken people I know. Unfortunately, people like them are not running the Republican Party or the Conservative movement. The Bumper Sticker mentality of Conservative Radio has overwhelmed the conversation.
So many on the Left and Right are totally binary with multiple litmus tests. If you do not check every box off you are anathema to them.
I believe the thing that most people miss is that MOST MEN DON’T LIKE STEM EITHER!!!!! We the geeks who gravitate toward technology, the science fiction buffs, the kids no one likes in school, etc., tend to get lost in these fields as a means of escape.
I have been in Computer Science and Information Technology in no small part due to AVOIDING BLACK CULTURE, and love of Star Trek. I was an ODDBALL. A nerd. A nerd’s nerd and if you think it’s hard being a nerd in a white school, try it in a black school.
I have a client who makes me crazy. She’s an extremely intelligent woman. A lawyer. Each time she has an issue with her computer SHE (not me) makes some comment about the fact that she can’t deal with the technology because she’s a woman. She’s admonishes me for expecting her to solve her own issues.
Women and Men are different. Biology and computer science are different. Much less math when majoring in biology and this might cause not just women, but the science oriented men who hate math to gravitate that way.
Other scientific fields might have more people time. Women like to communicate. Computer geeks tend to be happiest locked up with their computers.
It’s not a big mystery and it’s not a conspiracy. I have a friend who teaches computer classes at Los Angeles City College. He says quarter after quarter he stares at a sea of male faces in his classroom.
I asked my lawyer friend about this, and her daughter and the daughter of another friend both who just entered college and major in Business said that a big reason is the guys in most STEM classes are geeks. Who wants to date a geek?
It never would have occurred to me in 1000 years to pick a class based on whether or not I thought the women in it would be attractive.
Well said! …
Your post rules! The reason and logic is unassailable.
JimBob, I have a bsee from UCI and have been in the silicon industry in Orange County CA since the mid 80s. I’ve only heard of this rampant sexism in one instance and the male who made the sexist comments was from India.
Are you a white male, or are you a (((white male)))?
If the post is accurate, what difference does it make?
Color blind society where only facts matter is the GOAL …
It sounds like it was written by a conservative snowflake. Any real conservative wouldn’t spend such a “liberal” amount of time going on and on and on about it. They would work to put themselves in the position to make the changes, then MAKE them.
Snowflakes, by contrast, complain to try to make others agree with them because they don’t have the strength of character or belief in their convictions to ever attain any real power.
I am a Progressive and worked on the Sanders Campaign, FYI.
The Conservatives have a real point over the way diversity programs are commonly enacted in the US. Instead of helping people get ahead they commonly hold others back, which is not the same thing.
I do not carry anyone’s water based upon labels. Business & Higher Education should always be a meritocracy. The sooner schools start telling kids that opting out of Trig and Calculus could well mean a job on the Garbage Truck the better off society will be. Instead of memorizing Rap lyrics they should start memorizing their homework assignments. It is just a matter of desire.
An education is they key to everything and we have universal public education in the US. Even the worst schools have the tools necessary for anyone who wants to badly enough to get ahead- we see too many who succeed despite disadvantaged backgrounds to believe otherwise.
you’re not “progressive,” you’re a socialist. Why are you afraid of being called what Sanders calls himself?
Nobody with any brains can be pidgeon-holed with a single word. Life is more complex than that. Stopping trying to force YOUR concepts and your desired loaded word on others.
Although sometimes, I admit, TWO words is enough – Belligerent Asswipe.
“pigeon” Cocoa Miss.
OH GOD!!!!!! MAY THE UNIVERSE FORGIVE ME FOR A TYPO!!!!!!
Your attempted diversion is pathetically stupid.
on behalf of the universe: no.
“Even the worst schools”
You have obviously never seen a lot of the all black public schools in Mississippi. I doubt what they have would be enough to get them a job on that Garbage Truck! The worst white school is still pretty good. However, as far as getting bad is concerned, there’s a PRETTY steep drop off from that.
Mississippi is a couple of miles from where I write this (Metro Memphis area).
A friend from College days grew up poor, Black and in rural Arkansas and grew up to be a Chemist via Harvard- among other places. Part of his schooling was at Jim Crow area schools and later the integrated schools.
Teaching is mostly about accountability beyond the very basics of early childhood. You teach yourself and can rise above poor circumstances. One can also have every advantage and turn out a completely uneducated buffoon. Dubya went to Yale and Harvard, Trump went to Penn- both Ivy League, just like Obama who went to Columbia and Harvard or Al Gore who went to Harvard and Vanderbilt.
They all went to great schools but they all did not turn out the same, did they.
“You teach yourself and can rise above poor circumstances.“
I.e. pull yourself up by your bootstraps, a core conservative belief! We’ll make a card carrying conservative out of you yet!
One has to have bootstraps in order to pull oneself by them. That is the primary difference between the Social Democrat ( not a party- a viewpoint ) and the conservative on social and economic mobility.
If your circumstances are that you are in Death Valley and have no water, no shoes and no map, it is hard to make your way out on your own. If the same person has access to water, shoes and a map they are without excuse.
I support helping disadvantaged people get to the starting line, but not pushing them over the finish line. This is why I use the term equity rather than equality. There will never be de facto equality, but we can strive for fairness so each can get a fair chance at success regardless of where they came from and what they inherited.
You’ve shown me the bias I have mentally carried about Bernie supporters since the election, namely that they were all drooling out-of-touch idiots. Very well laid and cogent reply.
Excuse me, they are still CLUELESS. Rhetoric does not match economic reality…
Wrong Again, your wrong again. To say there are no conservative snowflakes would be a lie, but to say that snowflake-ism was birthed by conservatism is naive at best. It sure wasn’t the conservatives that started “sensitivity training” as it was the left that decided conservatives that needed “training.” How about “safe-spaces?” Who is most frequently denying true liberal arts and free speech on today’s institutions of higher learning. Replace “liberals” in your last sentence and you’ve got the answer. There are a number of people on the left proclaiming this themselves.
I didn’t say it was birthed by conservatism. I’m saying that people who called themselves conservatives in the past that felt the way the writer did, DID SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Liberals, who generally didn’t want power anyway, would just pout and moan and complain about how the world isn’t like the way they want it to be.
Conservatives have the POWER and the ABILITY to make changes. If they complain that they need a “safe space” to work only with other conservatives or that people need to be more “sensitive” and not say bad things about President Trump, then they’re just acting like ConSJW snowflakes and they NEED to be called out for it. Be strong, grow a pair, and you won’t give a damn that the person next to you don’t have a pair.
Conservatives need or want a snowflake space to function? Ha! Full belly laugh …
From the story
“I am a moderately conservative Googler, and I am and have been scared to share my beliefs”
i.e. I need a place to feel safe
“What is leadership doing to ensure Googlers like me feel invited and accepted”
i.e. I’m such a special snowflake! Don’t let me melt!!
I say as I’ve said before, this needs to be called out for the weakness that it is. If a conservative doesn’t like where they work, FIND SOMEPLACE ELSE TO WORK or better yet, START YOUR OWN COMPANY! You don’t go whining to management like a liberal, you BECOME management.
OK, fine …
I’m guessing you are a guy, probably Caucasian and consider yourself reasonably enlightened, because how else could write your screed which includes…
“I doubt anyone wants discrimination in hiring, promotions, training opportunities and access to professional development. …..repression of one group to artificially advance another is wrong.”
…without recognizing that ‘repression of one group’ – many distinct groups actually, is and does happen at many levels all the way from pre-school to employment, in many forms.
My experience.
My pop is a software engineer and encouraged me to take up coding. At school, boys were agggressively keeping girls from computer time and I mean really aggressive. The school bumped me off a course, the only girl, because it was full of boys who graded well below me. The teacher reasoned it “was for my own protection” and suggested drawing as an alternative. So my pop payed for extra tuition, same problems with the geeky coward who ran the courses. Zero encouragement, dismissive comments about girls and tech, didn’t bother marking my work saying it was a waste of ‘his’ time because “everybody knows girls can’t code” which he regularly said in front of the class, to jeers and cheers.
I could have got him dismissed, but I didn’t. Found another small group tutor(ex Cisco) where the numbers were balanced and had a totally different experience. Took the same science and IT(home tutored option) exams as everybody else and came out top. Even then, you guys were saying “Yeah well, your dad probably helped you unfairly” “you obviously cheated” “I didn’t get the questions I expected so it was unfair” and ” well you’ll probably get pregnant so it’s a waste of time teaching girls”
…and much worse.
Won a scholarship to MIT and now in Cambridge UK doing a Natural Sciences PhD. Still the same negativity, I expect it to continue since there is a long queue of ‘you guys’ ready with all the same boring arrogant seemingly ‘reasonable’ nonsense that utterly fails because you can’t even recognize your own meanness, secure in your bubble that only guys can do real stuff.
Oh yeah…it makes me stronger alright, but why do girls have to jump higher, run faster and talk smarter….just to tread water while you guys are given a shoe in?
I’m sure you are a reasonable, well intentioned person, but there is more to this story than glib statements with no reality.
your story is bogus.
nice try.
No, yours is, blow me
yeah, right…I would suggest you were a women’s studies major instead.
…and a C women’s studies major at that.
First the use of the term screed is pejorative and facts are facts regardless of the source.
If you were pushed out of the way in class that is the fault of the teacher and you- claim your education. I am the son of an Electrical Engineer and work in a Licensed Healthcare profession. I have never seen anyone I know do anything but encourage anyone – regardless of who they are – to seek degrees in any field.
My Aunt in New Mexico earned her degree in Chemistry before World War II coming from the southern US. At that time only a sliver of men went to college and the few women who went into higher ed sought degrees in the Sciences. She worked on the Manhattan Project during World War II and Los Alamos Lab after- so I would imagine any pushback about her gender would be a countless number of times greater than anyone today might face.
Nobody is stopping anyone from taking the HS courses needed to prepare for STEM careers, just as nobody is stopping anyone from taking puff courses. The same is true at the University level.
In Healthcare, there are now more women than men going to Allopathic Medical School, Dental School, Pharmacy School, Podiatric Medical School, Osteopathic Medical School and Optometry School. The women seeking these seats had to take a similar path in Math and the Sciences as anyone wanting to be an Engineer.
I stand by the statement that the problem is self selection- not discrimination. Just as few women are choosing to be Infantrymen in the Army and Marines, few apparently want to be Engineers. That is not an institutional fault- it just is- in the same way few men take Home Economics.
What the snowflakes want is some quota system to enforce what the market has not to date supported. Apple is not going to hire some random person with a Business degree to be head of Macintosh Hardware Engineering because they are (fill in the blank) minority group.
If the girls want to play in the A league (Senior Management) they will have to learn how to take a punch and throw a few as well.
Here is a hint for you DavGrag – when you attempt to clothe a partisan social/political stance in logical/rational clothing, using the derogatory “snowflake” terminology completely undermines your argument.
My daughter took a computer science class and became highly interested in software development. She withdrew from college last August, just a few weeks before starting a different course of study with a plan to gain work experience and apply for acceptance into a leading computer science program. She made the decision and I am confident that she will excel in the field and reflect positively on her decision in the years to come.
Certainly the Google employee was unwise to release his comments to a wide audience. But, what you and others fail to understand is that his viewpoint and his approach are both flawed. He exemplifies the culture that has *discouraged* women from entering STEM fields for decades. If we are now erring a bit on the side of overly encouraging women to give STEM a chance, then that is a reasonable risk. Because far too many girls are diverted into different directions long before they have the maturity to fully realize their aptitudes and options.
If I were in charge of Google, then I would have fired the guy, too, because he publicly undermined the goals and objectives of the corporation. There is no right to free speech inside the corporation, and he used corporate assets to disseminate his manifesto. Furthermore, he likely negatively impacted morale for a number of Google employees for a long time to come. How would you feel as a female employee at Google knowing that your peer performance reviews included people who felt that you were less valuable just because you were female. Ridiculous and intolerable!
I am not going to argue that “political correctness” has not gone too far in some cases. It is certainly possible to find examples in which PC is taken to an extreme, and it is not good for anyone. I happen to believe in the right to offend. But this is not one of those cases, and the Google employee clearly chose poorly in terms of his method of protest.
Just as Trump’s campaign and Administration released the seedy underbelly of American society from its hidden niches, this Google employee has revealed long-held gender biases in STEM fields. The only good thing about these two situations is that revealing them is the first step towards fixing them.
Re Screw your “snowflake” commentary
First, why don’t you post under something consistent.
It is not anyone’s job to encourage anyone to pursue anything. Your Daughter left because she wanted to- she made a decision as she saw fit. That is nobody’s fault by anything you have detailed.
When I went to leadership school at Fort Benning, every student admitted had all the tools to graduate. Every one had the right preparation, was given the same instruction, was provided the same opportunity to apply the training, was tested the same and graded the same. Despite all of this, there was a definite class order with only one Honor Graduate and many who dropped out or failed.
Those that dropped out simply quit. Those that failed did not apply themselves or want it badly enough. Those who graduated earned it- it was not given to them. That is meritocracy. I made the Commandant’s List (top 2%, thank you).
Because of my service background prior to the school, I was pushed harder by the Cadre 24/7 for the duration of the program. I did not whine- I dug down and got the job done. I guess I could have quit and complained that the deck was stacked against me because I was not an Infantryman, but I did not.
The world does not have safe spaces or trigger warnings and that is exactly why I used the term Snowflake. This kind of nonsense is killing our country.
Polite applause.
” If we are now erring a bit on the side of overly encouraging women to give STEM a chance, then that is a reasonable risk. ”
a risk to whom?…another “justice by guilt” fallacy. The mark of the libtard jackass.
He may have been unwise, but he was not stupid and should not have been punished at all, he’s obviously one of the handful of sane people left at Google. You make some good points but your pretty naive to think you can simply “tell the snowflakes” that freedom of thought is ok. The SJWs running Google want to ruin the lives of ANYONE who doesn’t think like them, they did it in this case. Google is a converged company, you don’t roll this disease back without massive layoffs and a training program and culture that is totally opposite to the one they’ve been creating and promoting. It probably means the end of Google as we know it within a decade (they have plenty of money to burn on this idiocy but their ad revenue will dwindle eventually). Good riddance. /Users/Nick/Downloads/598b325dce16a.jpeg
Awesome!
MDM righties are eating cream pie all over this thread.
Claudia Hill’s comments are the inevitable thoughtless response to the manifesto written by James Damore. The lack of women in the tech sector is not genetics or gender. The problem is cultural, starting with Mom and Dad’s expectation of their sons and daughters at home.
At work, women have traditionally been given lower pay and lower respect and expectations, because of the potential that they could leave work at any time to raise a family.
A woman’s prime in her career typically reaches it’s peak after 50, when – wouldn’t you know – the children have left the nest. To some extent the treatment of women at work is retribution for this perceived inconsistency.
Men and women who demand fair and equal treatment in the workforce is not an act of “PC”ness. Frankly, what is PC to begin with? It’s a made up concept, penned by conservatives, to create an imagined boogie man – “Babayaga,” for fear of any real change. That’s right, the conservative “pussy.”
Men who standup for women’s rights, risk ridicule and that’s pretty brave.
Now back to the subject, Hill is the most disappointing response. She really is a sucker. She’s doing no one any favors – as much as any FoxNews anchor, seemingly a cheerleader for the old guard.
I believe Google didn’t have to fire Damore either, but they could have made an example of him in other ways, in which he might have resigned instead. However they probably had to fire him, not because of what he wrote, but because they didn’t take him seriously in the first place. Their reaction was no-existent at first, which prompted out side reaction. They had no choice. The reaction is precisely because there was no action in the first place.
The so called MD”N” righties are grounded in common sense.
“The lack of women in the tech sector is not genetics or gender. The problem is cultural, starting with Mom and Dad’s expectation of their sons and daughters at home.”
Wow! Anyone who believes that has just taken women’s rights back well over over 50 years and ugly stereotypes you froth on to say are no longer valid. Keep playing with your Barbie dolls.
The dirty little secret of Political Correctness: it is a form of Marxism. Political Correctness is in serious trouble because the average person has figured it out.
Absolutely not, it was in no way a machination of the right! Libtards often point to that untruth to cover their tracks and typically fooling no one. You’re an exception …
MDN “righties” are grounded in selective reasoning, ignoring the obvious and look to benefit personal gain at the expense of others. Not all mind you, but seemingly the most vocal.
In point Trump backers who ignore just how crazy he is and out of touch with reality. Trump is going to get millions of people killed, unnecessarily. Surely Kim is even worse – it takes two to tango. Give Kim a target and that’s what Trump is doing. Give Kim no target, and he’s muted and isolated.
Ignoring that our treatment of women and all minorities is routed in culture is either willful ignorance or an out right attempt to harm them.
Pointing out that culture starts at home is exactly what we are dealing with.
“MDN “righties” are grounded in selective reasoning, ignoring the obvious and look to benefit personal gain at the expense of others.”
democrat classic myth going back over 50 years. we are not talking about Trump or Kim. please learn to stay on topic and not drift into left field.
NP got it. In the past 75 years, when GOP had control over all branches of government, we end it in some form of Greatness (Depression and Recession.)
The ironic thing is he was fired on the recommendation of the Diversity Officer. Apparently diversity of thought does not count- especially if you are a Caucasian male as we are the fount of all evil according to the Social Justice Warriors who refuse to see their own hypocrisy.
Tolerance means tolerance- not just some select subset. As an agnostic I have to remind many evangelicals that the same right to worship as you see fit also covers my right to reject the concept. As a Progressive I commonly have to admonish Liberals (not the same thing, but somewhat similar) that Conservatism does not make one evil, stupid or willfully ignorant.
From many- one ( e pluribus unum ) means we can be different in many ways and still be in the family, but we are still one nation, one people with one shared destiny.
I am not a social or political conservative, but I understand their concerns and agree that many of their complaints have merit. Where I disagree is usually how to remedy the problem.
Agree with your sense of fair play …
Additional thoughts.
“The ironic thing is he was fired on the recommendation of the Diversity Officer. Apparently diversity of thought does not count- especially if you are a Caucasian male as we are the fount of all evil according to the Social Justice Warriors who refuse to see their own hypocrisy.”
The so called Diversity Officer should be fired immediately!
Your post should be required reading for every SJW. Social justice means EVERYONE including Caucasian males that in 2017 are the most discriminated against. Well, certainly by intolerant liberals and the SJW.
“Tolerance means tolerance- not just some select subset.”
You are on to the most important point relevant to the SJW movement. SJW’s are always talking about subsets. Dividing and favoring one tribe over another, never good. And in the process spreading the cancer of inequality over equality. Do these dogma dim bulbs realize the folly of their beliefs and actions?
Looking back on the 1960s it was Caucasian males who stopped other Caucasian males from racial discrimination championed by a civil rights Caucasian male President.
SJW’s have zero credibility and mean nothing more than hypocrisy GRANDE!
I think his problem was it put his thoughts to paper. The intent to do so, is to recruit others to his cause. This could be considered an assault, then to the premise that women should be treated equally (merit based) I would agree. Does he have a right to his thoughts? Sure he does. But did he write it on Google’s letterhead? It was a “memo” so presumably it was. Therefore he is subject to Google’s corporate belief system. I do think Google could have handled it better, but few companies do handle internal affairs well.
There are all kinds of conservatives. I prefer the level headed kind. I would tend to agree with them.
“This could be considered an assault, then to the premise that women should be treated equally (merit based) I would agree.”
assault??? only liberals are confused
No, his problem was instead of RISING to the rank of doing something about it, he took a page from the weak, weaselly liberal book and quite impotently whined for someone else to solve his problem for him. He has, as an educated conservative, the power and ability to CHANGE his conditions without begging for help.
There are a lot more conSJW’s like him out there that need to be removed from the idea of conservatism. It’s a failed conservative that parrots liberal ideas like “inclusion” and “diversity”… primarily because that shows they’ve given up on making their OWN way. They need someone else’s permission to exist.
I see some of that in this thread.
It is absolute stupidity to hire to fulfill quotas. The job should go to the most qualified regardless of gender or race of said person. Let the best person do the job. This age of humanism, where we all have to be equal is stupid. We are who we are, man, woman and child.
But, if they’re white and male, there’s a VERY good chance they’re like the teams you already have. They already have things in common, so will work together well. I think that’s even MORE important than how “qualified” they are. Because a qualified asshole will hurt the morale and productivity of my team. A qualified person who’s so different, they have little in common will hurt the cohesion of my team.
Some say SJ was an a-whole, but I guess we could agree in this example (there are many more) to say “excellence” rules and rules well. Feel-good collaboration is the name of today’s snow-flake game…often at the expense of excellence.
dead on.
Not be equal, but treated equal.
Equality – fair treatment impartial of judgement. When you pay someone for what are, that’s not fair. You pay them for what they do, and that is all anyone should be expected to do.
One way to increase women employed in tech is to expose girls at a younger age to STEM fields in school, and encourage those with an interest in one of those fields to follow their dream. When there are more females graduating with STEM degrees, and they compete on an equal playing field (which means no hiring bias towards men), then there will be more women in TECH.
Anyone who exposes STEM to young girls at school should be arrested.
Oh come on people! Where’s your sense of humor?
I made a sexist joke, I feel just terrible.
Diversity does not mean an equal distribution. A cake requires diverse elements, salt, flour, sugar, eggs and baking soda for example but not in the same amounts.
The ocean is a diverse ecosystem but the number of krill is quite different from the number of whales.
“The ocean is a diverse ecosystem but the number of krill is quite different from the number of whales.”
..that statement has changed my life… the sheer profundity, the exquisite insight has blossomed an epiphany deep within the bowels of my psyche. My heart is all a-flutter, my knees are buckling…like being face-to-face with all the great philosophers from the beginning of time and in a single instant, you know all that they knew.
Thank you, Road Warrior, and I mean that from the heart of my bottom.
Me too, Bot. I’ve decided to take the day off, smoke some weed and ponder krill’s place in my life. For too long, I’ve shut them out.
When the baker puts a certain percentage of flour in the mix, don’t you think that some eggs think it’s unfair? Some eggs think they should be better represented and we haven’t even discussed the salt’s feelings. Who does this baker think he/she/it is? He (pardon me) better keep his hand out of the ocean.
What if the baker is transgender? Does their victimhood prejudice their recipe? I would suggest that transgender bakers’ inherent celebration of all things feminine would promote the eggs role and diminish the salt. I am currently proposing to be awarded a federal grant to further my investigation of this blatant social injustice.
You’re on a roll. Rye, please …
My daughter is loves STEM and is working with a classmate (also a girl) to set up an overarching STEM club at their high school to consolidate the disparate math, physics, chem, etc clubs under a unified umbrella to get more kids engaged and organized.
We’ve discussed the so-called “Google Manifesto” and Google’s response. All I got from her was she doesn’t want a job where she simply fills a diversity spot.
Considering her aggressive personality, and take no crap attitude, (both of which are generally considered masculine traits) she’s either going to be wildly successful or get fired an awful lot.
If it’s any consolation, getting fired a lot and becoming widely successful aren’t mutually exclusive. It may be a necessity. I’ve read bios of many very successful people and they typically have held a lot of jobs before becoming successful.
I’ve also known alpha girls (agressive personalities and take no crap attitude), and, in general, they don’t need diversity programs/ victim’s advocates to enter/excel in their chosen fields.
I’ve been thinking about some of the reported differences between men and women in personality and temperament. Danmore’s thesis seems to imply that these differences mean that men are inherently better programmers, because somehow those differences fit better with being capable of writing good code. They may survive better in the culture at Google… or Apple. But being able to survive and flourish in a particular culture may not actually equate with being a superior programmer. Which personality traits, if any, lead to writing the best code is, as far as I know, never been determined.
I have worked in Corporate America since 1985, and can say with certainty that I have never seen anyone discriminated against for being a female or a minority.
I HAVE seen people get ahead who really weren’t all that qualified because of skin color, sex or surname. Even white women who take a Latin surname through marriage check the magic diversity box and move up the ladder.
Not to say there isn’t intentional discrimination out there. My jobs have intersected with two of the most segregated occupations I’ve ever seen – body shops and attorney offices. Ironic, since attorneys are the ones who bring the discrimination complaints.
Physiologically, men have a 15% larger frontal lobe than women. The frontal lobe is the seat of logic and higher mathematical functions.
You certainly are not evidence of that.
…said the Little Cocoa Miss.
It is amazing how throughout history ignorant people have tried to use science to hide their fears. African Americans can’t swim because of there bone density yet how did several make the US Swim team and win. Women can’t is a great myth that has been shattered since the beginning of time. Maybe your mother couldn’t but my daughters will. When your child needs
emergency medical services will you wait for a male Dr.?
The United States of America was built on diversity and will only grow greater with it.
Wrong, the United States was built on unfettered competition.
Of the many things it was built on, diversity, as understood by progressives, was NOT one of them. Mostly white, Christian, heterosexual, English, Protestants built the United States. Same goes for the people who built Silicon Valley and 99% of the significant inventions in history. I’m neither English nor Protestant, so I’m not going to try to take credit for what they did, but I’m certainly not going to lie about ethnic, sexual or gender diversity being a foundation of the U.S. or Western civilization as a whole.
And your point is what?
That how western civilization developed since the Greeks is how things should be now? With slavery? With women having the legal status of children? With the inquisitions? With the majority of people living like disease-ridden cattle?
And speaking of the US in particular — With Christian slaughter by Columbus of a kind and amount that would make ISIS blush? By the almost extermination by those fine white, Christian, English protestants of the people who were already living here?
Western civilization ended slavery (though it persists in India, Asia, Africa, etc.), women’s emancipation is another Western product, Western medicine eliminated numerous diseases and increased quality of life for EVERYONE in the world. Go back to your cultural Marxist textbooks you pathetic liar.
I pushed my way through the guy’s writing, which I found to be a painful read. Use of the first person and the stream of consciousness nature of the writing was off-putting. And the mixing of some very strong points in with arbitrary and unsubstantiated assertions watered down his overall message. It was rambling.
Having said that, I generally agreed with much of what he was attempting (rather poorly) to say. I also agree with others here that he was an idiot for publishing it in that form. It’s a tough lesson to learn but I hope he comes out of it stronger and more focused rather than despondent and bitter.
Google made a serious error in firing him rather than censuring him for the way in which chose to articulate and share his thoughts. Googles action strengthens his argument that Google has some serious problems with their internal culture and suppression of ideas. Google pays very well. But this action may drive some talent to leave sooner rather than later and may drive away potential future talent than many look elsewhere for employment.
I thought it was significant that Goolag & the MSM have dubbed it a “manifesto” instead of a paper or essay or thesis or even an opinion. The use of the word manifesto has a deliberate negative connotation, per “Communist Manifesto” or “The Unabomber’s Manifesto.”
Good tag bot. Right as usual.
It’s only a couple of lifetimes since women weren’t even “persons” under the law. Anyone what thinks that after that short time that everything is fair and equal now is simply not looking or thinking.
Sure, sometimes policies can be over-reaching. But that does NOT mean we shouldn’t have policies and education that open opportunities to women. They are still needed.
The challenge is to permit both (1) a common-sense recognition of general differences in tendencies between men and women and (2) the development of individuals toward their full potential as they themselves define it.
That said, it seems there’s a bit much jousting at the bell curves.
Q: Is the person qualified?
If not, and they want to be, enable a way for them to learn and qualify. Companies should ideally be investing in outra education. I don’t care who the people are.
If they people aren’t interested, don’t shove them.
Meanwhile, I’m finding these ‘women don’t belong in tech’ comments to be short-sited, ignorant, boxed in. They don’t take into account human personality diversity, culture, experience, interests, talents, skills, etc. They shove stereotypes of women (or whoever) into the conversation and the do NOT belong there. There is no stereotypical woman. There is no stereotypical man. There is no stereotypical white, black, red, yellow, up, down, sideways, or anything. The very age we’re living in makes that blatantly clear. Those who don’t notice are not paying attention.
So YES! Some women belong in the tech industry, in coding, in management, in entrepreneurship. And some do not. Attempting to keep anyone in a single box is idiotic in the extreme and is akin to totalitarian FAIL garbage.
Think in 3D. Escape the Keep It Stupid, Simple (KISS) Principle. 💡⚡👩🎓👨🎓👌
“women don’t belong in tech”
Remember the joke, not so many years ago, about the car crash… the dad dies and the kid is being prepped for an emergency operation. The surgeon comes in and says, “I can’t operate. This is my son.” (For those who don’t know, doctors are supposed to not treat family.) People were baffled by this scenario.
Yup, it’s not long since people said women don’t belong as doctors, judges, politicians, pilots and much more. There are probably plenty of knuckle-draggers who still say it.
I work in Silicon Valley. We’d love to hire more female coders and developers, but we get 20 resumes from men for every 1 from a woman.
In your opinion, to what do you attribute that?
Who doesn’t want more women in tech?
Very soon it wil be politically incorrect for women to have vaginas only and no penises.
Nonsense of PC, noted …
political correctness has nothing to do with thousands of years of biology
women have vaginas only and penises only by injection, whether real or rubber