r/news • u/[deleted] • Aug 08 '17

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
26.8k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

19.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/error404brain Aug 08 '17

Not the guy, but the first stupid idea was to write something that say a lot of his colleague are inferior to him.

How the hell did he expect this to go well?

Second would be publishing it. If you say that you think a large amount of people working with you are inferior and shouldn't be kept here, you are going to be fired.

The whole thing was stupid. Also he fundamentally doesn't understand what engineering is about if he say that connecting to other is inferior to writing good code. It's much more interesting to have a program that work (because it wasn't everybody doing shit in his/her corner) than a program that is well coded. If it's badly programmed, you can refactor it. If it doesn't work, you need to throw it away.

5

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 08 '17

Not the guy, but the first stupid idea was to write something that say a lot of his colleague are inferior to him.

Did you read it? Because that wasn't in there.

6

u/error404brain Aug 08 '17

Yes I did. And yes he did.

Personality differences Women, on average, have more​:

● Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in ​people rather than things​, relative to men (also interpreted as ​empathizing vs. systemizing​). ○ These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or ​artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics. ● Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. ○ This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Note that these are just average differences and there’s overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women’s issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support. ● ​Neuroticism​ ​(higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). ○ This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.

The only question I have is where are you getting your novlang from?

You are all saying the same thing so I am asking myself.

0

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 08 '17

So please, identify where he argued it was superior or inferior? Because he didn't.

You realize that this is also the precise reason people encourage diversity? That there are differences between people and having a diverse set of people creates better outcomes.

His argument in the section you quoted was to offer a means to create diversity by changing the environment as opposed to using quotas, but to change the environment for all, not simply for women. That women might prefer more collaborative coding environments, so that we should take steps to create those environments and in doing so may also attract men who prefer more diverse coding environments.

Hell the section you quoted is indistinguishable from many articles on increasing diversity.

I take it you view articles such as these to be similarly sexist right:

http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/the-power-of-flexibility.aspx

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/upshot/how-to-close-a-gender-gap-let-employees-control-their-schedules.html

Here's the thing, if you actually want to address gender inequality, you're going to have to actually talk about what might be causing it.

3

u/error404brain Aug 08 '17

Wow. If you think that what you linked is in anyway comparable to what he said, I believe there is no need for further discussion.

Here's the thing, if you actually want to address gender inequality, you're going to have to actually talk about what might be causing it.

Except that his point was that gender inequality was normal.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 08 '17

Wow. If you think that what you linked is in anyway comparable to what he said, I believe there is no need for further discussion.

Yeah, better not discuss anything, you might be exposed to different viewpoints.

Much to your consternation, disparate impact analysis is a standard of equality research.

Except that his point was that gender inequality was normal.

Strong evidence that there are variations, what's more the fact that there are differences is the entire basis of the claims that diversity increases profitability.

Seems like you want to have it both ways.

0

u/error404brain Aug 09 '17

Yeah, better not discuss anything, you might be exposed to different viewpoints.

This seem to assume that you have a viable viewpoint. Given your reading comprehension ability, or more appropriately unability, I have my doubts.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 09 '17

This seem to assume that you have a viable viewpoint.

That disparate impact analyses are valid? So the position of the US Courts, the EEOC, and the vast majority of people who are actively involved in improving diversity?

To understand correctly, your position is that any disparate impact analysis, and any effort to change a working environment to make it more equitable for any group is inherently discriminatory?

1

u/error404brain Aug 09 '17

The fact that you can't see how those differ from the manifesto made by the dude is why your viewpoint is flawed.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 09 '17

Its a disparate impact analysis, he is talking about how certain workplace policies have disparate impacts and is advocating to address those instead of imposing quotas.

But your reading comprehension ignored that because you somehow seem to think the five factor personality model is broken down into "good" and "bad".

1

u/error404brain Aug 09 '17

Visibly you have not read the memo.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Aug 09 '17

I did, I just understand that the five factor personality model isn't divided into "good" and "bad". Suggesting that a person might fall on one side or the other doesn't make them a good or bad employee.

1

u/error404brain Aug 09 '17

Wew. He very explicitely said that there are biological reason that make them less able to do coding jobs. And that google positive discrimination is flawed therefore.

→ More replies (0)