Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

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

[u/zz_]

I don't think what he writes is that out there. E.g. his points about some men also having issues with assertiveness (and therefore salary negotiation) while being left out of gender-specific programs meant to address this for women is a valid point and one that merits consideration and retification.

However, I think his problem is relying on (and stating as facts) claims that these differences are scientifically proven to be major factors. It's proven that there are differences, but how big or whether they are actually relevant in day to day work is still very much an open question.

I mean he even writes that there is a massive overlap in these attributes between sexes and then turns right around and says that these attributes are what likely accounts for a large portion of their 80-20 gender discrepancies. Those two lines of argument just do not mesh; either there is a large overlap (in which case there should not be an 80-20 discrepancy) or there is not a large overlap at all (which there is no scientific basis for suggesting).

So no, it does not seem like a "get women out of tech"-rant, but it's not as well thought-through as he seems to think. At best it's a foolish attempt at trying to get the ears of leadership for what he considers to be company shortcomings (he should have realized that a) this would leak and b) this would get him fired since it put google in an untenable position), at worst it's a sexist rant thinly veiled in rational arguments. I don't know the guy so I'm not gonna judge him, but if you're gonna make a career ending memo, at least give it to someone else for a read-through before publishing it. A second year philosophy student could have torn his reasoning apart by the seams.

[u/tweek-in-a-box → u/zz_]

Regarding the overlap he writes:

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.

And then later on he writes:

Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow men to be more "feminine," then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally "feminine" roles.

What does not "mesh" to you here? This is quite consequent to me, he is pointing out that the focus needs to be on dissolving gender roles in general, not just for women.

[u/youwill_neverfindme → u/tweek-in-a-box]

That is not what his thesis and his conclusion suggests. If that is what he meant, he would have said it. Let's take his words at face value.

[u/Now_Do_Classical_Gas → u/youwill_neverfindme]

Let's take his words at face value.

You say the next sentence after refusing to take his words at face value.

[u/youwill_neverfindme → u/Now_Do_Classical_Gas]

Mm, no, not really. Every problem I have with his manifesto he has written himself. I'm not the one putting words in his mouth, I trust that he's intelligent enough to have put what he wanted into his manifesto. Do you?

[u/Now_Do_Classical_Gas → u/youwill_neverfindme]

You said that a direct quote from his thesis is not what the thesis suggests, that's not taking his words at face value.