In Response To Anti-diversity Memo, YouTube CEO Says Sexism in Tech is 'Pervasive' (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader writes: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has responded to the Google anti-diversity memo, writing in a column for Fortune that the questioning of women's abilities is "pervasive" in tech and that the memo is "yet another discouraging signal to young women who aspire to study computer science." Wojcicki opens by saying her daughter asked her, "Is it true that there are biological reasons why there are fewer women in tech and leadership?" Wojcicki says no, it's not true, but the question has still plagued her throughout her career. "I've had meetings with external leaders where they primarily addressed the more junior male colleagues. I've had my comments frequently interrupted and my ideas ignored until they were rephrased by men. No matter how often this all happened, it still hurt," she wrote. In the meanwhile, The Guardian reported on Wednesday that more than 60 current and former Google women employees are considering suing Google on the grounds of sexism and a pay gap.

Comments

her first problem

[ganjadude]

is calling it an "anti diversity" memo... .thats not what it was in the slightest.

Is that mutually exclusive with the memo?

[naubol]

As I read the memo, it acknowledge that sexism was an issue. Even in the first paragraph.

I think not rationally responding to someone's point is becoming rampant in tech.

emotional therapy

[Idisagree]

She says her feelings were hurt due to her experiences...

coincidentally this vaguely reminds me of a someone who once wrote up a memo about how men and woman can react differently due to biological differences.

I cant quite remember where or who said it, oh well, I'm sure someone can google it for me.

im just gonna leave this here....

[koreanbabykilla]

http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

Re:im just gonna leave this here....

[gweihir]

Psychology and Sociology are not "bunk", that is just an obvious attempt by you to derail the conversation. They have, however, "soft" and "hard" results. The gender-based statistical differences in the "big five" characteristics are in the "hard" class, i.e. there really is no sane reason to assume they are wrong. They are also _statistical_ differences, i.e. do not tell you much about individuals. And ignoring them is a really bad idea, because it makes all actions in that direction far less effective and may even be counter-productive.

I do have a nasty suspicion by now though: All those claims that women are prevented from going into IT by "toxic work environments" and other invalid claims may well have the effect of preventing countless women from going into that field. That would be the ultimate irony: Those claiming to be for equal outcome actually causing a major part of the issue. Would not surprise me one bit. (Of course, "equal outcome" is bunk as well, as you have to assume all people go in in the same state. The actual thing to be for is "equal opportunity" and let people decide what they want, because people _are_ different.)

Re:Well, not always sexism..

[w1tebear]

I (female) have been in the software industry since the 80's. My first job was with a small company that made custom printer interface cards. I constituted the entire tech support and software maintenance department (as I said, small company!).

I would sometimes get calls from customers having problems who would simply not accept what I was telling them. In cases like these I would go down the hall to a male coworker's office and tell him that I had a customer that "needed a deeper voice". He (manager - no technical knowledge) would take the call with me on the extension at the back of the room mouthing the answers to the customer's questions which he would then speak into the phone. The customer would then be quite satisfied with the answers and we would have a good laugh.

I suspect that things have improved some since then but still run into people who seem to "need a deeper voice".