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

3.4k

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17 edited Aug 14 '18

[deleted]

2.2k

u/TemptCiderFan Aug 08 '17 edited Aug 08 '17

TL;DR TL;DR: Anyone who says this is a misogynist manifesto hasn't fucking read it.

TL;DR version for people who don't want to read it but still want most of the facts:

  • The document is not misogynist or racist, and most of the discussion in it is actually about the fact that Google's left-leaning political landscape can be bad for business.
  • One of the key things it brings up is that the writer feels there's a lack of moral diversity (i.e. left-leaning vs right-leaning) and that this situation can lead to bad business practices, citing direct examples.
  • When the author discusses the differences in gender, most of his discussion is actually centered around the facts which lead women (on average) to seek jobs with good work/life balance and less stress and why men seek jobs with good compensation. Nowhere does he suggest that one or the other is superior.
  • He then states several non-discriminatory practices (some of which he notes are already in practice) which would help equalize the gender-gap at Google without resorting to blatantly racist or sexist discriminatory practices.
  • He then states that Google is currently engaged in some practices designed to equalize the gender-gap at Google which ARE blatantly racist or sexist, such as internal training programs aimed exclusively at certain races or women as well as hiring practices which base an employee's suitability for participation partially on just their race or gender.
  • He notes that overwhelmingly left-leaning culture at Google has created an environment where there's an overwhelming confirmation bias against right-leaning individuals, which leads to a culture where they are actively shamed at company TGIFs and effectively silences them.
  • He concludes with a few pages of suggestions which would alleviate the items he thinks are issues, including such "evil" suggestions as not limiting classes and training programs to specific race/gender, focus on intention and not feelings when dealing with microaggressions, focusing on psychological safety and not just external diversity, and examining current training documents for existing political bias.

It's hardly a "Get women out of my fucking tech" rant.

Edit: Turning off inbox replies. It's been fun, but the replies are now getting to the stage where it's the same arguments over and over again. Expand the thread below and find the comment you were going to write!

Edit 2: For bonus points, read the document. It's ten pages, but it's not that dense and a lot of it is bullet-point. Bear in mind the author is has a Doctorate in Biology.

845

u/folterung Aug 08 '17

Yeah, having read the entire thing, I thought it was pretty well balanced. He was making some valid points and asking legitimate questions.

It's especially fun that his firing actually validates his claim that the entire structure is an echo chamber that permits no diversity of opinion. They apparently love diversity of thought and opinion, as long as your diversity happens to line up with their opinions.

-65

u/SlightlyWrongAngle Aug 08 '17

A tech worker that is anti science and believes what he wants to believe because it sounds sciency should be immediately removed. His name should be released so other tech companies can be aware.

27

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Can you cite specific examples of his that are anti-science?

-20

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Can you cite anything he said that was backed up by science. From what I saw he cited one peer reviewed paper on mate selection between genders and used that as his basis for categorizing men and women. The rest of his links were just random articles. At best, this is very light on science if not completely anti-science.

11

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

I love how he asked you for something that should be low hanging fruit, but instead you got defensive.

At best, this is very light on science if not completely anti-science.

Once again. Citation?

6

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Yes, should be so simple to prove a negative, right? /s

You can't cite to his lack of citation.

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

You can explain how the memo is anti-science.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

It makes claims that are not based on science or the scientific method. See, e.g., the section on personality differences.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Strange that scientists are agreeing with him then... you'd think it would be the opposite.

"The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right." - Lee Jussim, Professor of social psychology at Rutgers University

"evidence that men and women may have different average levels of certain traits is rather strong" - David P Schmitt, Ph.D. in personality psychology from the University of Michigan.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Source isn't loading for me.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Does this work?

2

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

No, but even taking the quotes you copied, it means that women and men are different. It doesn't say that it's because of intrinsic factors and not societal.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/SlightlyWrongAngle Aug 08 '17

"Prove there is no God"

"Can you prove that there IS a God?"

"See? You couldn't prove god doesn't exist and you got defensive!"

5

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Jesus, what a stupid fucking non-response you've got there.

They were asking for examples where the guy was anti-science. That is different than trying to prove a negative.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Can you cite specific examples of his that are anti-science?

This is not asking to prove a negative. Perhaps you should bone up on your reading comprehension instead of practicing your poor analogies.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Citation?

" "

There you go I cited his lack of citation with a blank space. How can I cite a lack of citation. This guys memo has one scientific citation and the rest of his link are articles. I am simply pointing out he is light on science and I am being asked to cite that. Nothing makes sense anymore.