tech

Google employee's anti-diversity memo prompts company rebuke

17 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

17 Comments
Login to comment

@TumbleDry

I still disagree those statements to justify women not being able to work in tech.

Where did the writer state this? You may have read the memo, but you didn't understand the message. Here are some of the writers suggestions:

Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity

Confront Google’s biases...

Stop restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races...

Have an open and honest discussion about the costs and benefits of our diversity programs...

Focus on psychological safety, not just race/gender diversity...

This guy got fired for suggesting to have an open and honest discussion. There seems to be a bias against conservatives. Just as he pointed out. Diversity apparently does not mean diversity of beliefs and/or opinions.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I still disagree those statements to justify women not being able to work in tech.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Recommended reading:

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Tumble

I have read it. I would again like to draw your attention to words such as "On average", and "Generally". Also,

*I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ "in part" due to biological causes*

As I said before, average population differences does not mean all members of the population show the characteristic differences. Nor does it speak about individual person's ability or traits.

If the difference between those 2 statements is not clear, I would recommend taking classes in logical reasoning and statistics.

On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:

A 100% scientifically correct fact. As I mentioned above, men and women are biologically different, as can be seen in physical differences.

The last two quotes you cite are from studies in peer-reviewed journal. The author is reported to have a PhD in Biology from Harvard.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

FullM3taL: but have you read it?

I guess not or we haven't read the same document.

bow is the link with some excerpt:

http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320

On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:

...

I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership

...

This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading.

...

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.

...

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I must say, it is amazing to watch that people on the left throw a fit when some right leaning person denies climate change or evolution. But then these same people on the left turn around and peddle junk science about the human nature and physical and psychological differences between genders observed in large populations (an equally corroborated scientific fact on par with climate science and evolution).

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Tumble

Did you read the document? I get that it is fashionable to be outraged in order to subvert discussion, but seriously, at least bother to read what the author wrote before making assumptions about the intent of the letter. Nowhere did it "state that women are not biologically fit to work in tech and the company should stop inclusion/diversity." The letter was very nuanced and did not make the gross over generalization that you accuse it of.

I wrote the above comment to help elucidate the intent of the letter that I understood. But in case it was not clear, let me restate it. I will highlight the important words for easier understanding.

When examining large populations, differences are observed in personalities/traits (although there is still significant overlap) between the 2 genders. Some of these are physical. For example, men overwhelmingly do the physical labor jobs such as coal mining, drilling, etc. As a result, majority of occupational deaths (93%) involve men. There are also mental and cognitive differences between the 2 genders on average. This means that if you take large groups of men and women, on average women tend to perform better on social tasks and men tend to perform better on system tasks. Note that this does not say anything about the ability of an individual man or woman, just that these differences are observed in large groups. Also note that these are well established opinions based on vast and replicated scientific studies by evolutionary psychologists and biologists.

These findings have implications in understanding why there are fewer women on average in tech and leadership positions. If we are to define equality as equality of outcome (as opposed to equality of opportunity), then ignoring the biological part of the equation is the only way to make the assertion that anything less 50% representation is solely an outcome of systemic oppression and discrimination. An attempt to approach the problem of under representation as purely one borne out of biases and discrimination as opposed to being partly biological nature is bound to fail in finding a solution, and will breed further resentment and implicit discrimination.

It is again important to stress that average differences do not say anything about the ability of the individual. On individual level, a woman may out perform all the men in her organization. But when the population is large enough, the differences are observed and may help explain the gap in representation. So for you to say that the doc said women are biologically unfit to work in tech is a gross misrepresentation and over generalization that the doc absolutely did not make. I would really recommend reading the letter again with all its nuances before throwing a social justice fit.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

FullM3taL: in the doc, it is stated women are not biologically fit to work in tech and the company should stop inclusion/diversity.

So, I guess you agree, correct? Should they just be serving tea or bring you what you printed from the copy machine?

Just stay at home and cook?

I mean, pretty sure many would agree if it was the 19th century.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I fail to understand why news articles insist on calling the letter an anti-diversity memo. I think it would be helpful if people actually curbed the outrage and bothered reading the document for themselves first.

The employee wrote what I thought was reasoned and respectful letter outlining his point of view. I have read the whole document, and I think it is very mild in its tone and tenor. The author makes several assertions for which there seems to be good scientific evidence. But his larger point is not that steps to diversify the workforce, especially in tech, have gone too far. His point is that Google has created an ideological echo chamber where even discussing or debating the underlying reasons for gaps in representation as well as the effectiveness of the current policy measures to remedy the situation is forbidden. Due to the overwhelming left-leaning culture of Google, extremists have been emboldened to the point that they can shut down any discussion with accusations of sexism (which the news outlets then promptly illustrated). As a result, people don't feel safe expressing an opinion or discussing in a reasoned and calm manner topics that really should not be outside the realms of discussion for the fear of witch hunts by frenzied mobs.

The underlying reasons for population differences in job preferences and representations and their solutions can and should be fact-driven. To that extent, the author suggests removing at some level the sentimental morality attached to the issue in order to get a rational, factual, data-driven understanding of the matter.

What part of this is anti-diversity, I fail to see.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

In a weird way, it kind of shows the hypocrisy of the executives who were critical of this memo. I mean, they have the power to hire more women, don't they?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, hardcore conservative at Google is like a vegeterian working a butcher shop.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@albaleo

Special exemption for you lot...I've a very soft spot for Hibs... ; )

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Down with equability!

How dare you say that! :-)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This equability and diversity clap trap has gone too far.

Yeah! Down with equability!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Women and good at some stuff, men at other stuff so they are not and will never be equal

That's not exactly what the person said. ("distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ"). So more like more women than men are good at some stuff and vice versa. I think the difference is important. Not employing women (or men) for certain jobs because of their gender means those that are good at that stuff lose out, and consequently so do the rest of us. I work with a team where two out of ten IT staff are women. Those two are certainly as good as the rest of us, and we'd all be worse off if they hadn't been employed.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

He's right. This equability and diversity clap trap has gone too far. Women and good at some stuff, men at other stuff so they are not and will never be equal.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The very thought of equality makes some people shudder. This anonymous engineer should live in a country where women have little if any rights, if he is so terrified by them.

Maybe men are inherently wired to feel threatened by women?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites