Slashdot Mirror
Google Cancels Town Hall To Discuss Diversity In Its Ranks (nbcnews.com)
NBC News originally reported: Google employees will gather for a town hall meeting Thursday afternoon to discuss the tensions ignited by a memo circulated inside the company that claimed to explain why more women are not engineers. Town hall meetings are nothing new at Google, but this one will likely be different after the so-called "Google Manifesto" went viral over the weekend, adding fresh fuel to the debate around gender bias in Silicon Valley. Google CEO Sundar Pichai told employees in an email earlier this week that he would cut his family vacation short in order to facilitate the forum. "The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree -- while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct," he wrote. "I'd encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own. I will be doing the same." The town hall comes amid a report from The Guardian that as many as 60 women are considering filing a class action lawsuit against Google, alleging sexism and wage disparity.
UPDATE: NBC News now reports the event has been cancelled, with Google CEO Sundar Pichai saying "Googlers are writing in, concerned about their safety and worried they may be 'outed' publicly for asking a question in the Town Hall... we need to step back and create a better set of conditions for us to have the discussion." Instead of the company-wide format, Google will now hold several smaller forums "to gather and engage with Googlers, where people can feel comfortable to speak freely," Pichai wrote.
UPDATE: NBC News now reports the event has been cancelled, with Google CEO Sundar Pichai saying "Googlers are writing in, concerned about their safety and worried they may be 'outed' publicly for asking a question in the Town Hall... we need to step back and create a better set of conditions for us to have the discussion." Instead of the company-wide format, Google will now hold several smaller forums "to gather and engage with Googlers, where people can feel comfortable to speak freely," Pichai wrote.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
You want to measure diversity at google? Count the political bumper stickers on the cars that park there. You'll have no problem finding Hillary and Sanders stickers, but Trump stickers are rarer than hen's teeth.
They built this absolutely toxic environment for conservatives under the cover of "diversity". Why should anyone believe they are going to do anything except continue to make conservatives feel like pariahs?
Who ever knew that they might be able to bring down Google? Then again, they had no effect on Trump, so, like, whatever... When will they recognize that their singular biological function is reproduction of the species? Why do they insist on being *one of the guys*? That's so gay!
Did they cancel it because there was too much diversity in thought and they needed to fire more people?
Females are programmed with a general set of behaviours, as are males. As well as the different human races, and all other animals. These are facts that cannot be denied by any non-retarded person.
If you are just going to continually *threaten* to file a lawsuit that just means you are trying to negotiate via politics, when maybe you should have negotiated when the other party was at the table.
After making an example of James Damore, how many Google employees have the courage to stand on the non-PC side of the debate? I fully expect this will be a public event for everyone to signal their virtues and whine in front of an audience, with little or no audible dissent.
The purpose of this town hall is to help Google PR and to show they are acting responsibly to address any allegations of a hostile work environment.
If you have important data on Google (emails, photos, etc.), you should start copying them over to other places, preferably storage under your own control. No hurry, but I wouldn't give them more than a couple of years.
we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree
Without letting the people who disagree with me talk.
How exactly do you plan to do that, Mr. Pichai? You've made it obvious that having a different perspective is grounds for termination from the hivemind.
When does it end? An employee can get fired for speaking ideas that offend some people's sensibilities. Public forums to discuss the issues raised get canceled based on more people's fears and sensibilities. Does corporate backbone and spine exist where you finally have to say, enough - we're going to discuss the issues we want to discuss? Rather than bow to the fear and sensibility of the day?
"I'd encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own. I will be doing the same."
Watching the google execs dance and do dog tricks at the command of this completely intolerant ideology that poses as this loving progressive way of thinking has been really amusing. They are all trying so hard and falling all over themselves to offend the least amount of people as possible. It kinda proves one of the points of that former employee's memo.
What is the point of making sure everybody looks different, when you require them all to be the same person?
Yes. And women were thought be be incapable of being nurses or teachers. Now, those are women's jobs. These are facts that cannot be denied by any non-retarded person.
The only reason woman are unsuitable to IT work is the men in IT, same as all other "men's" professions women have entered.
Learn to love Alaska
Fun Fact, I'm at one of the world's best universities, filled with highly educated professional women who are in STEM. Advanced Math, Statistics, Genetics, Biochem, Bioengineering, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, AI, you name it.
Half of our students. Half of our faculty. We create more practical science in a day than you see in most countries. And tons of patents.
This reminds me of when the Canadian Army was resistant to women in combat. We did studies. We found that women made better fighter pilots than men did (who do you think fly those A-10 Warthogs?), I've trained and served with highly decorated women of all ranks. Our main resistance was the senior NCOs, with similar attitudes to the ones I hear coming from Google engineers. They were wrong then - back in the 1980s. They're wrong now, here at Google, in the 2100s.
It's 2017. Not 1957.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
RUSH: They can’t be open about what they think. They have to follow the Google groupthink or they’re going to be canned. They’re not allowed to dissent. And yet these are people claiming to be the greatest defenders of First Amendment free speech.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
I'm sure people will feel free to speak out now that someone was fired after speaking out.
Given that the original manifesto was originally published to a supposedly anonymous internal forum, I think being "outed" publicly is a valid concern for someone who dares to have a different perspective.
From what I have read this guy sounded more like a moderate and provided long term solutions to the problem, but pointed out short term it isn't really helping things.
Pushing education and activities to get women interested, while at the same time helping employees organize so that more feminine or sociable guys work with more sociable women, while taking note that some people will not be assertive about desiring raises, and thus putting more burden on managers to offer raises/promotions to their employees as they reach skill/veterancy related milestores at their jobs.
Places like google are no more 'right' for Conservatives than say a Church based organization, the police, or the military is for atheist Liberals. If either individual wants to join the 'other side's' organizations, they go into it understanding it will not be a welcoming environment for their views. Sort of like some touristy American going to a Muslim country, China, or North Korea, and wondering why they don't respect his/her freedoms there.
To Get Fired!
"I'd encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own"
Translation: If you know of a work colleague who doesn't already march lock-step with Google's peecee agenda, then now's the time to warn them to get with the program.
Look, they already shot the messenger. Wasn't he fired Monday after posting on Friday? I'm sure anyone that asked any question that wasn't part of the standard group think would be fired for creating a hostile work environment. I could just see the whole scene going something like this:
Town Hall is in session. Blah Blah Blah. Does anyone have any questions? You'll get PC questions to affirm we're still PC and have no interest in "wrong" view points. Anyone with even the slightly bit of question that doesn't go along with this would be best to stay quiet or already have your next job lined up.
It's not right. It's not fair. Then again, life isn't fair. Money to survive on sometimes has to trump your personal beliefs.
P.S. It's the one reason I really wish there was actually a Hell for these people after they've done their best to ruin this world.
I have a really hard time believing that anyone truly feared about their safety or about "speaking out" at the meeting. What's more likely is lawyers who are going to have to defend Google against the "manifesto" writer's NLRB suit got wind of it and told the executive staff that there were out of their f**king minds for opening up a company wide forum where anything presented or said could used against Google in the lawsuit.
What kind of dialogue do they expect to have when people are afraid to speak their mind for fear of being fired or blacklisted? Sorry but this is nothing more than lip service to the gullible. Only a fool would dare to ask any question that doesn't toe the politically correct party line. Google jumped the shark on this and has no credibility at all.
When Google starts to fire managers that blacklist employees and backs their policies that espouse diversity with action they will start to regain credibility.
Gotta have those safe spaces for special snowflakes! Can't be victim to differing opinions!
If it's a mandatory meeting, I'd attend and unless I had another confirmed and accepted job offer elsewhere, I'd keep out of any "discussion" with regards to this topic.
Whenever you're asked for "open and honest" discussion, it's like when someone asks if you're stopped beating your children, a no-win scenario.
All this seems to be a complete distraction from what a job is supposed to be. Somewhere you go to work and make money.
I've been in IT and tech for twenty years now and I'm sorry to tell you I've never worked with any women that could be considered outstanding or "rockstars" which is the trendy term.
A lot of them have been smart for sure but their skills are always inferior to the skills of the top performing males *by far*
Sorry to tell you that's not anyone's fault but their own.
Is there a union that can help? This is what unions are for.
when he stated his beliefs that women are biologically unsuitable for certain roles in tech.
How could ANY female google employee trust this guy to assess them fairly? They would wonder, " Am I being judged / assessed on merit, or because I'm female, when I know this person views my gender as not-suitable or biologically inferior to an equally qualified male worker."
Although it will take a while to get rid of my Gmail account since I have so many accounts registered with it, though I did find a host that will do 30 emails and 2 domains for 6 bucks a month. I will click on every ad that Bing has.
If I was a conservative employee at Google, after the last week, I'd keep my mouth shut and look for another job as quickly as possible.
They've shown EXACTLY what they REALLY think about someone asking an honest question.
And no pronouncements or showmanship or promises of safety are going to convince anyone otherwise.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I find it interesting that there is so much fear here. People are both afraid of what can be said as well as saying anything that might be offensive. We need to bring back the flame wars and asbestos suits. It hardens you.
Back when I went to CDI in the mid-70's, in a class of 28, there was ONE woman and zero blacks. Was it because CDI was racist/sexist? Hell, no! At the time, DG, DEC, etc., with whom I interviewed, all made me an offer and each also said "If only you were a black woman, you'd be perfect!" At that time, these companies were trying - on their own - to hire more women and minorities. Sadly, due 100% IMO to cultural factors, the pool was shallow as hell. Fast forward and more women and blacks are participating more today, but nowhere near where they need to be to make up for the decades lost. It'll all shake it out in time, but women and blacks need to get onto the damned field!
the fact you think Canada has fought air wars this century proves how deep your delusion is
Well, if you're restricting "air war" to JUST plane-on-plane combat in this century (2000-onwards), I don't think Canada HAS been involved in any. If you're using the definition of "air war" to include other, military aircraft combat missions, well, let's see...
Hey look, 1 minute of Googling and Wikipedia:
Operation Mobile (Libya):
Task Force Libeccio was the air detachment participating in the enforcement of the no-fly zone in Libya authorized by Resolution 1973, adopted by the U.N. Security Council on 17 March. The task force was named for the strong southwesterly wind that blows all year in the Mediterranean Sea. Task Force Libeccio comprised six CF-18 Hornet fighter aircraft, two Boeing CC-177 Globemasters, two CP-140 Auroras and about 200 Canadian Forces personnel, including aircrews and ground technicians from 425 Tactical Fighter Squadron at 3 Wing CFB Bagotville and 409 Tactical Fighter Squadron at 4 Wing CFB Cold Lake and other locations across Canada. The force also included two CC-150 Polaris air-to-air refuelling detachment from 437 Transport Squadron at 8 Wing Trenton, Ontario.[2] Task Force Libeccio reached the region on 18 March.[8]
Sorties:
CF-188 Hornet fighters 946
CC-150 Polaris tankers 250
CP-140 Aurora long-range patrol aircraft 181
CC-130J Hercules airlifters 23
CC-130 Hercules tankers 139
Actions included interdiction, bombing and ground support.
Operation Mobile (Syria/ISIL):
On 3 October 2014, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that he would put forth a motion to send Canadian forces to participate in the coalition for military intervention against ISIL by deploying combat aircraft. On 7 October 2014, the Canadian Parliament approved of sending nine Canadian aircraft to join coalition airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq along with 69 special forces advisors to train the Iraqi government's military. The Canadian Armed Forces’ contribution to the coalition against ISIL was later dubbed Operation Impact. On 30 March 2015, the Canadian Parliament voted to extend the mission to targets in Syria. No additional forces were announced.
No action summaries for the total action. Many for individual actions or years involved. Actions included escort, bombing and ground support.
That's just in the 2000's. Feel free to educate yourself in looking up the activities in the 1900's. Hint: A fair amount.
Two words you need to learn: statistical dispersion.
For the sake of argument let's take "manliness" and "womanliness" as givens, and not some kind of social construct. Not all men are equally manly; some are very manly and some are sissies. Likewise for women -- not all women are equally "womanly".
So you have two population bell-curves, and the curves overlap. That is to say some women are more manly than some men. Everybody knows this, and yet somehow they talk as if all men were identically masculine and all women were identically feminine.
What does this has to do with engineering? Not much. Different types of engineering have different requirements. Women as a population tend to have slightly better verbal reasoning skills and men as a population tend to have slightly better spatial reasoning. So you'd expect women to do better, say, as software engineers; and men to do better as mechanical engineers.
However the small population differences in ability are dwarfed by individual variability. There are men with extremely formidable verbal reasoning skills, and women with astonishing spatial reasoning skills. Case in point: when I was at MIT I knew a woman who got her PhD in EE and was the first person to figure out how to fold a stellated icosahedron in origami. I don't care if you are a man, even a manly man, it's a safe bet that her right brain could kick your right brain's ass.
And that's OK. It doesn't make you less of a man; it means you have to judge people as individuals.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Just remember, my right to be offended by anything you think or say is more important than your right to hold a core belief, value, or nuanced conversation.
Welcome to the snowflake generation!
I'd stay and discuss this further, but a millenifail was reading this post over my shoulder and just headed for their safe space.
> The only reason woman are unsuitable to IT work
I think you're imagining things. That isn't a conclusion that anyone has made some well known forum visitors (https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10976189&cid=54987377). You part of the problem that exists, but not in the way you can understand.
And I've been in IT and tech for 25+ years and I've worked with women who were outstanding and "rockstars" and it would be my pleasure to work with (or for, or manage) any of them again. They were smart and their skills matched or even exceeded the top performing males. So, sorry to say Mr. Anonymous, but your anecdotal world is small.
a haven for anti-Science Inquisitors.
Anyone supporting libertarians, conservatives, classical liberals, or scientific gender differences will be fired, humiliated publicly, excoriated on twitter, made a target in the Mass Media, then lied about repeatedly.
Wecome to the #Goolag
Chinese Goolag https://www.flickr.com/photos/...
SJW Goolag https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG...
I was hoping to see a libertarian burned at the Stake, or being drawn and quartered.
Those Googal Commissars take no prisoners!
Such an interesting point.
As many who read past the headlines would later observe, its author, who was later fired, began, “I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
and
“Philosophically, I don’t think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. For each of these changes, we need principled reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google—with Google’s diversity being a component of that.” Someone who believes diversity is one component of many for “optimizing” a company is not anti-diversity, even if he places a lesser value on achieving gender parity in staff, vis-a-vis other goods, than those who argue that Google should make whatever tradeoffs are necessary to achieve equal gender representation."
This is radical, racist, sexist, bigoted, and privileged.
Seriously, do you see the names he called people in this memo?
Do you see he is not willing to find common ground and look for a solution?
This is truly a fire-able offense. Check the DO NOT REHIRE, box on this guy.
Google needs to get over themselves, sheesh.
Someone should go in there and ask the Question
Googler: "Sundar, Have you stopped abusing your children"
Sundar: "I have never abused my children"
Googler: Thats not the Question i asked. Have you Stopped?
Sundar: I never started
Googler: So you are saying you havn't Stopped?
Sundar: Speechless
Googler : And thats how your Diversity training is run. They assume that the White Male is biased. Well this particular White Male is not biased and feels no need to atone for the sins of others.
Sundar: Has a moment of absolute clarity, resigns from Alphabet and moves to Tibet to study Buddhism. (I wish)
**Life is too short to be serious**
So is the:
Water torture
The bamboo under the fingernails
Long monotonous speeches
The forced donation of organs
Hostile working environments
The killing of political undesirables
Repression of Democracy
Supporting the Great Firewall Am I talking about Googal in China, or Googal in the US, with their own Workfarce?
You decide
Did I really just read that Google employees are worried about the backlash they might get from their publicly stated thoughts, opinions, etc. being freely available all over the web? Cry me a river.
We burn Teabaggers & libretardians alive, on the stake - kinda like witches.
Think of us as the Puritans, only snarkier.
When you fire someone for voicing an opinion, and then turn around and say that people should feel safe speaking out, don't be surprised when nobody believes you.
You are so far gone that I'm just speechless. This is meaningless. Reality is reality, no matter how much it sucks.
Diversity is always sold as being about getting different points of view and a broader spectrum of backgrounds... but they for you if you actually have a different point of view lol.
What he said - "Googlers are writing in, concerned about their safety and worried they may be 'outed' publicly for asking a question in the Town Hall... we need to step back and create a better set of conditions for us to have the discussion."
What he meant - "Libertarian & Teabagger Googlers are writing in, concerned about their safety and worried they may be 'outed' publicly for asking a question in the Town Hall... we need to step back and make sure we have a firing squad ready. We are going to hit them harder than we hit Yahoo!"
The liberal/social bias and involvement in politics has been on public display by Google's founders over the last couple years. Seems like many of the employees at Google have lost sight of the firm's purpose.
Ah yes, another way the abusive keep the abuse a standard thing is accuse anyone trying to stop it as perpetuating it. You'd explain it, but nobody but you can understand your logic. That's proof it's not logic.
Learn to love Alaska
Lets talk about the Indian elephant in the room. There is a lot of crying about diversity but when one minority does well - Indians in IT- its considered bad instead of being a win for diversity. All these SJW need a cause not a solution. They dont want to fix the problem, only protest it for if the problem was fixed their free meal win come to an end and they would need to get a real job. ,have also come in with cultural/economic disadvantages and made it by blending with the White population. Blacks however have found it difficult to blend.
Lets look at why Blacks and Latinos are under-represented.
Blacks have had generations of Dysfunctional families starting under slavery which broke the family structure. They also were not given any free land under Homestead act like most whites so they have cultural and economic disadvantages but the biggest one is racial.
However other immigrants from Europe and middle east, after WW2
Latinos - most recent latino immigration has been illegal or chain immigration of family members of poorly educated folks. It will take them a generation or two to catch up to the kind of social capital Whites and Asians have but they will as it is easy for them to blend with Whites (Just speak English)
Now lets look at Indian immigration. Most of it has been through the H1B-GC legal route. This is a self selected group of highly educated and risk taking individuals so its no surprise their children also succeed (the illegal latino immigrants are also risk taking so they will catch up in a generation. The Blacks were not self selected immigrants rather forced ones so the risk taking and drive to success may not be there and whatever was there was beaten out during slavery)
To get more blacks and Latinos into tech will take a couple of generations of fixing the basic problems of disadvantage. Affirmative action will not fix it as the few Quota slots will be taken up by the Blacks and Latinos who already have societal advantages basically those who are already white on the inside.
There is no quick fix to this problem and we shouldn't expect one.
Spare me 'rockstars', competent and responsible is tough to find.
Competent and responsible females have been some of the worst job hoppers I've ever worked with. They know they can get away with murder and still get a fat raise, then leverage that for another with the next job hop.
I've never had an female pass the 'tell me about your first real programmable computer?' interview question. It's supposed to be an opportunity to explain where your love for computers comes from. Works, even if the honest answer is 'games', doesn't work if you hate computers, but love the checks. I know one I know would pass it, but I never interviewed her.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Almost 300 people join class-action lawsuit for age discrimination at Google. They already settled their first age discrimination lawsuit when Larry Paged fired Brian Reid 9 days before IPO costing Reid 45+ million dollars in stock options. They admitted age discrimination and plants to change it. Yet Google still has an average age of 29.
Then there is the leaked news some googlers and google managers use black lists to block conservatives from joining some teams and promotions.
I wonder if it's because some older engineers might be conservatives.
I _READ_ the memo, and nowhere did it claim to explain why more women are not engineers. It did suggest that a number of possible reasons, including inherent gender differences, had not been ruled out by any scholarly study. Not quite the same thing.
Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
I think it is six or seven by now, but I could be way off.
This is as rich as the affair with Eich, Zimmerman, the elections or O.J. Simpson. For the advertisers.
Let's all go to the lobby and buy ourselves some snacks.
How do they think that 'smaller meetings' will 'make people feel safe'? Seriously ANYONE attempting to express an opinion in an open forum that is not 100% in line with their 'Code of Conduct' will have outed themselves. Seems to me like Google needs an 'anonymous forum' (TOTALLY anonymous given how they can track everything)...seems to me an AWESOME opportunity for Google to build such a technology such that not even Google themselves can figure out who you are. And hey, that becomes an awesome result for the world (presuming they released it) of a 'bad situation'.
Google will now hold several smaller forums "to gather and engage with Googlers, where people can feel comfortable to speak freely,"
has left the station as soon as they fired the last person who tried to do what they claim they need to do in low-key, respectful and detached academic manner. This has been a failure of leadership. Given their inability to expand the cloud business (their technology has gotten better, but its adaptation has not) and their failure to grow the Android platform, one has to wonder how will they fuck up next? Fail to produce accurate search results? How about this for a rubicon: fire the CEO for failure.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Please, pull your childish ass out of the middle school playground and use some decent language.
I worked with plenty of female rockstars. The computer club in high school was half male, half female. Then, as progressing through the years, the women had to spend more time with CYA and such. But the ability to do the job never seemed to correlate with gender.
The experienced rock stars are generally men because the women have been excluded from the industry by that time.
Learn to love Alaska
Has all the appeal and sincerity of a North Korean democratic election.
I've been in systems (enterprise server mostly) software development for almost 40 years. My experience is rather different than yours. In this world, mediocrity is not tolerated for long, but the work can seem quite tedious to some (when you're trying to track down a newly introduced timing bug that is seen under max stress on any given node once every two years and the company can't ship the product because of it, one needs to focus on details for weeks on end and has to love solving puzzles that have no known solution).
I've run across few females in this world that had been in it more than a couple years, but those that lasted ten years were all very good and the best were as good as the best of the males. However, there were a lot of less competent males. It seemed to me the women who were not good at the job (perhaps because they just found it uninspiring) tended to go on to other roles (testing, performance analysis, marketing, field technical work etc) where the less capable males (but still just capable enough they were kept around as second tier players) just hung around. In general these males were sufficiently unaware and defensive that they just couldn't accept that they were not particularly good at their jobs and therefore should pursue other interests where the women were more self-aware. Some of this may have also been influenced by the fact that the males were more likely to be a sole breadwinner for their family so taking any sort of pay cut or something that would reduce their near term (five year) earnings was more of a problem for them.
your anecdotal world is small.
That's the whole fucking point of this diversity thing: there's not a lot of women in IT, which means that your world is as anecdotal as the AC's.
lucm, indeed.
The firings will continue until morale improves.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
So, then why are we all talking about this? If it's all so simple in your world, none of this would matter.
But it does, because there is still discrimination going on, and it's not what you think.
Diversity and multicultural programs don't work, they discriminate against people, and they should be ended immediately.
As you said, you've worked with rockstars. How about we just let them work and stop trying to program people to meet some arbitrary outcome. Or - are you still in the mode of thinking you can control the outcome here? Because you can't, and you shouldn't. The best at their job should win and be promoted, those who can't cut it should lose their jobs. No matter their external characteristics that you find so important.
And so your point is that we should not have programs that discriminate FOR 1 group based on statistics since its about INDIVIDUALS. In which case I totally agree.
Now, if you are really trying to claim that the huge statistical disparity in many professions (nursing, teaching, software engineering, sciences....though only 'some sciences') is due to 'cultural factors' because there is in your opinion a 'small population difference dwarfed by individual ability' than I'll call bullshit since you clearly didn't understand how to use 'statistics'.
Of COURSE there are individuals within any group that don't match the 'average' expectations of the measured observable of that group that's why you treat humans as individuals. But if you look at a subset of society as a group, e.g. 'software engineers' and you find a statistically significant difference in genders in that population trying to claim it is 'cultural' rather than 'biological' is on you to provide significant proof especially if you are trying to set up clearly discriminatory programs to 'correct' this.
There is NO doubt that 'men on average are stronger than women', I have NO doubt that there are many women stronger than me, that doesn't mean that in a random large pool of people pulled equally from the genders that you wouldn't find a VERY large difference in 'male strength' vs 'female strength'. If this wasn't true then what's the point of having different 'gendered events' in the Olympics for instance? Why have "Men's swimming events" and "Female Swimming Events", why not just 'swimming events' and whomever is the best athletes go to the Olympics...if this were indeed the case would it be at ALL surprising if you found the population of athletes in most events at the Olympics '90% men vs 10% women'? Would you then claim this is because of 'discrimination'?
So obviously no man should feel 'less of a man' because an individual woman (or many individual women) is stronger or smarter than them. I don't feel less of a man because I'm not as smart as Einstein, Schrodinger etc. any more than I feel less of a man because I'm not as strong as Schwarzenegger. If your self-worth depends on you being better than EVERYONE else at everything than you have serious psychological problems.
So Google is a cesspool of intolerant groupthink that does not tolerate dissent. Big deal. Many companies are like that.
However, Google 'controls' big chunk of the Internet. If this start spilling out, they quite likely could poison a lot. This particular boil is too close to jugular to be safe.
You can't fix the genetically stupid.
> The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company
Okay, full force snowflake blizzard at Google. You don't work at Google and claim your life is "very difficult".
Your example doesn't prove what you think it proves. In fact, its easily arguable it proves the exact OPPOSITE of what you think it proves.
Women were kept out of the workforce in the past in general for many reasons that today we'd find 'old fashioned' or even 'discriminatory' but women have had freedom of choice to select any professional, educational opportunity etc. that they have wanted for 40 years (give or take), that they selected 'nursing and teaching' by and large should tell you more about "women's biases" than 'societies discrimination'.
So, is there discrimination against women in IT....maybe but your example doesn't prove it & can easily be demonstrated to prove the opposite..e.g. that men & women have biases for interests & professions based on biological differences not cultural ones and we are at a point where disparities in population of genders in those professions is more about those differences than 'cultural reasons'.
Continuing further, if its the 'men in IT' keeping women out of IT, than presumably its the 'women in nursing & teaching keeping men out of nursing and teaching', not you know 'individual choice'...so are you stumping around for women in those professions to change their behavior? To make those professions more 'inviting' to men? If not why not?
For crying out loud, people act like were in the '50s not 2017...I was born in 1963, grew up in a 'traditional family' where the 'men were men/bread winners' and 'women were women/house wives' and yet I can't think of a single child of that era in my immediate as well as VERY large 'extended family' that grew up thinking any given woman could do whatever they damned well wanted to and could be as good at it or better than any given man (who also presumably had 'free choice' to do whatever HE damn well wanted to do)!
But crazy values. Only the Pope can please all the people all the time. But only sometimes... What a bunch of wankers.
Don't buy it. They may say "you are safe" at the "smaller meetings", but it will still be a witch hunt. At the end of the day, they are still looking to behead you, not to hear you. Talk is cheap.
Get it in writing that they aren't going to fire you for speaking an opinion. When they, surprisingly have a layoff in the next 3 months, get together with the other folks who have it in writing and make a class-action lawsuit.
They are not interested in what you think or believe. They are interested in what they believe. They will retaliate, and you will lose either a job or a career.
I don't see anything in TFA about route diversity.
When Google starts to fire managers that blacklist employees and backs their policies that espouse diversity with action they will start to regain credibility.
This.
Since I can't mod you up I'll quote you for visibility.
Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
Better ask the right questions or else.
And I've worked for 25 years as a software/firmware engineer and have worked with many stellar female engineers. I've worked with a few mediocre ones, but I've worked with far more and far worse male engineers than female engineers, and the female engineers don't get stuck up on ego trips like some of their male counterparts.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
That jibes with my experience as well. I have been working in the embedded area for 18 years and device drivers before then. Most of the female engineers I work with are quite competent and are generally very good without all the drama and ego of some of the male engineers. The percentage of poor female engineers I've worked with is lower than the percentage of poor male engineers.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Something that is often overlooked is: LOTS OF WOMEN ARE IN ENGINEERING. JUST NOT THE COMPUTER/ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING FIELDS.
I took a programming class around 15 years ago. At least a third of that class was women. You know what they were taking it for? A prerequisite for their transfer credits for CIVIL ENGINEERING DEGREES.
There was exactly three women in that class who was in tech/going into tech. Two middle-aged Koreans and a white woman (herself an outlier having gone into retraining from law enforcement due to PTSD related to her former work.) The rest of the class was a mixture of Ukrainian and Middle Eastern women all going into civil engineering, which was apparently considered a prestigious career path 'back home' and they were going into it either to get a good career here, or for many to return home as a civil engineer working on construction projects.
The point being: None of them considered tech careers prestigious, most preferred a stable career path over the uncertainty that tech brought (bubble 1 having just burst). Additionally none of them wanted to be seen as a 'nerd', whether by their husbands or by prospective spouses.
I agree with the guy's assessment about the reasons for the lack of women in certain fields, and despite a certain group of women making a lot of noise around it, I can vouch from personal experience that even with mentoring many women simply have no interest in the field for a variety of reasons. The ones that do find a way into it regardless, but they are like 1 in 60 or worse odds, based on classes I have taken.
Another reason I had forgotten: Many women wanted a stable 9-5 job, or flexible hours for work-life balance, something that the tech field often does not have, but which many other engineering fields *DO*.
Keep in mind this was a *LIBERAL* employee.
So basically they are alienating *INTELLECTUAL* liberals, moderates, and conservatives and saying that groupthink is more important than google's previously cavalier work on your own projects time, which I believe an article was mentioning in the past year or two they have cut back extensively on as well.
Really Google is just being an Inverse Uber. Whereas it was being a misogynist workplace anti-intellectual workplace, Google is instead being a misandrist anti-intellectual workplace.
I hope this really cuts into the quality of employees they can retain. If this is the catalyst for a brain drain from google it can only be a good thing for us all (although there are some far more dangerous companies applying tech against the populace from outside of the limelight...)
women have had freedom of choice to select any professional, educational opportunity etc. that they have wanted for 40 years (give or take)
No, they haven't been free to choose. That's the point. When you assume there is no discrimination, then the conclusion is there is no discrimination. When you assume nothing, there's an obvious gender gap. It could be discrimination, or something else.
Only when you are a sexist bigot and assume no sexism is it obviously not sexism. I don't make that assumption, so I don't come to the same conclusion as you.
are you stumping around for women in those professions to change their behavior? To make those professions more 'inviting' to men? If not why not?
Yes. There's sexism on both sides. And, ironically, the sexism in nursing is from men. I have man-nurse friends. They are made fun of by other men. It's societal pressure, not just professional pressure, to keep men out of nursing. But you've lived in a little bubble all your life, with your eyes closed, you don't know how the real world works.
Learn to love Alaska
It's easy to know the right answer 99% of the time. Our whole speech system is based on this -- that when I say a word, people know what it means, and when they say a word, I know what it means. The problem is there's one specific area of knowledge that very few people ever know: what it's like to be the opposite sex.
No one's really wrong here. I just think that that's how you get lots of men who feel like they should know the right answer trying to explain what they think women are all going through. They share their ideas about why they think women are probably having trouble getting in the door at computer programming jobs -- based on their own personal experiences as men seeking those same jobs. And since it's so rare -- to suddenly discover one small domain of knowledge which they can never, ever fully experience -- I think people end up taking shortcuts.
I think it boils down to whether we can discuss biology, even incorrectly and mistakenly, without people being offended and thus cutting off debate.
Maybe the answer is the biology isn't important at all, but make it taboo to discuss and we aren't going to find out.
So reducing to the absurd... what if turning on the computer required pissing in a urinal to turn on the computer (or make it something equally physical and gender non-neutral like making computers 6 feet tall and putting the on switch on top)... cause that was just convenient or funny for the first guy who made the PC, so sure women would be biologically inferior to performing that critical procedure.
If instead of dealing with this real issue of biological inferiority (on average) and actually adjusted the preconceived notion about what it took to turn on a computer and then actually made computers with accessible on/off buttons and instead just making people piss in a urinal (or go get a ladder) and continuing to offer women "assistance" turning on their computers and overlooked discussing the resulting performance deficiencies (as women chose to code on paper) for the sake of diversity we would merely be perpetuating the root cause of the problem because it touched on a social taboo.
In reality there are probably many equally absurd yet more familiar customs and ways of doing things that are for whatever reason keeping women from computer science, software engineering and so on. Most of the issues are probably not directly biological at all, but some could be somewhat related not because of any "inferiority" but just because.
Maybe the ultimate answer is we do need to create incentives or aides to overcome the hurdles that women face, but if we can't look at women as a group and look in detail for potential common hurdles that prevent all people from excelling (even if they are biological) then how can we have an adult conversation about what to do to make our companies, our schools and society better.
Unfortunately much of society is about putting arbitrary hurdles in front of people in order to keep them from sharing in some perceived scarce resource... like jobs. If we are to make a better society we need to stop putting arbitrary hurdles in front of people. Arbitrary and unnecessary hurdles that include ones that target gender, race, differing biology, background or free expression.
I am sure that Google considers human biology in the design of their products... average hand sizes of men versus women in the design of smartphones could be an example... it would be helpful if an open discussion could lead to a better design of society, IT, computer science education, etc that wasn't afraid to take into account any real biological difference that they might come across.
And yes I am posting this anonymously.
The best quote I heard on this phenomenon was Wired's interview with someone who was actually good friends with James Damore when he was still a college student -- and who had a surprisingly balanced response when he read about all the angry attacks on Damore.
This classmate says he did not view Damore as “some sort of raving sexist or bigot.” But, this classmate adds, “When you’re really smart you’re prone to thinking that you can solve these big issues if you just think real hard on them, and if you don’t have the social skills to navigate a dicey issue, it can go wildly awry."
Well, there are a lot more such categories.
Race, Birth nationality, Childhood religion vs Convert to religion, Age (Young people don't know what it is like to be old, but still have many nasty opinions about their elders) Many disabilities, genetic conditions, on and on and on.
The real problem is that some of these are recognized and taken into account. Others aren't.
Being an old, poor, jobless, white male is far from a position of privilege in the current political and economic environment. However few if any of those in other categories hesitate for a second to apply their misandrist, white-hating, male-hating stereotypes to that group.
Fortunately (for now) white votes still matter.
My precious safe space isn't safe enough! It's so safe that we wont' even let someone with some actual evidenced points to make INITIATE A DISCUSSION about it without destroying his life and career, but I'm still terrified about having a company gathering with all my fellow like-minded fascists, because I AM TERRIFIED that someone might come along and join us who HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION ABOUT THINGS THAN I DO!
HELP ME MOMMY! HELP!
Google used the data they slurped about their employees to predict the outcome of the meeting and decided to rather cancel it.
You have a company full of wealthy, straight, privileged white males screaming at the top of their lungs how wealthy, straight, privileged white males have too much power, and then exercising that power in order to hurt, blacklist, and oppress people they disagree with, and to make patronizing statements about women and minorities.
If you dare to express an opinion different than the current definition of "politically correct" you are out and blacklisted.
the CEO is gone. It is literally the only way.
The smartest move Google had to take is to ignore the "manifesto" from the beginning and point out that this is a single opinion from an employee and that it doesn't represent the company blah. blah. But since Google's executives are mostly idiots nowadays, they took a stand and they're now in the eye of the feminist-storm. As the situation is now, they will loose whichever way the choose to follow. Nicely done...
Liberal left wing Hypocrisy!
So you'd expect women to do better, say, as software engineers; and men to do better as mechanical engineers.
4 out of 5 people on the autism spectrum are male. 1 out of 5 is female.
I would expect that people on the autism spectrum are more likely to be engineers, not because they're better engineers, but because they didn't develop their skills for other professions.
At least, that's just one more hypothesis, I'm sure you and I could come up with more equally plausible ones. That is why we need to more science on these issues.
grab them by the pussy, problem solved lol...
We all know these liberal companies are hypocrites on diversity. Google lacks not only woman, but they also been accused of not hiring older individuals and their whole premise is young males with no personal life who are willing to work ridiculous hours which is why Google provides all the perks. Its to keep you there not at home. I would ask woman, why would you even want to work at Google? Maybe the woman are smarter, and realize life is not at Google.
Everyone is leaving, don't be the last one !!
Just a quick tip - the opinion that diversity should be opposed is not diversity. It is the exact opposite of freedom.
They already made it clear despite saying, 'we want to debate this' and 'be sensitive to those who don't agree with you'. But what's clear is YOU WILL GET FIRED IF YOU DON'T DRINK THE LEMONADE. That's unjust.
It's times like this that people don't understand we're being forced into thinking with one group, and if you don't buy in, you will get bullied.
People just don't get it. It's like a room full of 50 dogs, and there's 10 cats. And then people complain "we need more cats to go to this side of the room!!" Not even taking into consideration the fact, there's ONLY 10 CATS.
"Do no evil" my ass.
Welcome to the new improved "fully evil" google.
People ere afraid to ask questions....
Google peoples re one more time look oppressed, here is your freedom of speech, liberalism, democracy at it's best. Scare everyone so they do not ask any questions, then cancel the meeting.... shame on Google
He literally holds the bloody head of Dr Damore in his hands, and tells to the crowd:
- Now, if any of you sons of bitches got anything else to say, now's the ... time!
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
And I've been in IT and tech for 25+ years and I've worked with women who were outstanding and "rockstars" and it would be my pleasure to work with (or for, or manage) any of them again. They were smart and their skills matched or even exceeded the top performing males. So, sorry to say Mr. Anonymous, but your anecdotal world is small.
And your anecdotal world is obviouly much larger, but in the end - it is not proof of any sort.
There are a lot of men at Google, Apple, all tech firms due to H-1B. H-1B are 98% men, and those are 90% Indian in SV. Indians are misogynistic, and will not work with women. Plus the supply of "talent" (an odd word for Indian IT) is all men. So, to get more women, dump the H-1B and L-1 and J-1 and B-1 and F-1/OPT and so forth.
This Damore fellow seems naive. You don't have free speech at work. Anyone who has been around the block a few times should know that.
I hold some controversial views about politics and society. I don't talk about them at work. I keep conversation with my colleagues limited to the work we are doing and maybe the weather and what I did over the weekend. Even then, they get a sanitized version of my weekend. Management is going to do what they're going to do, and likely don't give a fuck what I think. Sure, I'll make suggestions in the proper setting if I think something can be done better. But as a Systems Admin I'm not going to weigh in, uninvited, on the company's hiring policies; especially about something as contentious and politically charged as women's aptitude for engineering.
I'm not sure this guy should have been fired. But the fact is he stuck his head up and it got lopped off. Companies have cultures. Not everyone if a fit for every culture, and the culture is likely not going to change just for you. Don't like it? Don't work for Google. I have refused job offers because the people at the company seemed like dicks. Damore should just move on. He won't have free speech ant his next job either.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
This is anecdotal and my perspective.
I've worked with people considered rockstars, both male and females, but to be honest. They weren't and were in my opinion really mediocre.
People seem to hyper specialize in work like c# programming webservices, database administration (but no idea how to do clustering etc), angular with nodejs etc. They're all presented as the pinnacle of experts in their fields and I have to constantly fix their mess.
As far as my general experience with women goes in the industry. I found most of them were frequently out of the door the moment the official working hours ended. The colleagues that some of them used to get upset about getting higher pay were people that worked extra hours consistently, every day, through the weekend etc.
What I found generally is the people I work best with are those that have a passion for not only the work we do, but the type of work. I have never worked with a female doing IT work (like development, testing, administration). I have though worked with them in marketing, business requirements gathering, bid work etc.
I find females do not seem to stick around in the IT type of work very long and seem to move on to other career paths (like project management, business analytics etc) that are not really IT focused work. Meanwhile, I Find most males are just happy to stay and continue doing the same work.
Anecdotally, I kind of feel that the bias of less female workers in IT isn't really related to sexism (I mean, we work in the same offices as all other departments in many jobs, intermingling our people and still these differences exist just within IT-related work). The pay gaps to me seem more caused by personal life choices people are making and the fact we keep seeing people compare "experience" and "education" rather than hours worked or work throughput I think is telling where the fault in analysis lies.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
None of the owners or founders or Google are women. If they really believe diversity is so important why doesn't one of the founders step down and give his position to a woman.
should say:
I have never worked with a female passionate in doing IT work ..
I have in fact worked with many females doing IT work.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I wish I could work with competent people, these days everyone is so hyper specialized and can't apply critical thinking outside of their little box or even willing to be a bit more of a generalist, requiring hand holding every step of the way.
I'm so fed up of every time I manage to teach people some of these skills, they just fuck off to the States.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I would say that is not a good interview question, as the answer will reveal someone's age and that is not something you are allowed to try to discover (same concept as "date you got your degree" question some uninformed companies put on job forms). Might want to talk to HR to verify.
The problem is that we have a law that allows women power over men in the workplace by asserting that a man has created a "hostile work environment." The definition is based not on whether truth has been spoken, but on how it makes someone feel. This is not like libel law, where you can't win a suit if the offending statement was true. In the case of workplace law, you win if the offending statement was offending. It doesn't matter if it was true.
No, they haven't been free to choose. That's the point. When you assume there is no discrimination, then the conclusion is there is no discrimination. When you assume nothing, there's an obvious gender gap. It could be discrimination, or something else.
Only when you are a sexist bigot and assume no sexism is it obviously not sexism. I don't make that assumption, so I don't come to the same conclusion as you.
Careful there, you're drawing a conclusion before looking at the data. The logical default position is to assume nothing is happening, then look at the data to see if something is happening. Just like how the logical default position for the existence of a deity is to assume no deity, then look at the data to see if there is evidence of a deity. This is the principle behind the Null Hypothesis
Logically, it's correct to assume no sexism, then see if you can find evidence of sexism. If having the correct logical default position is being a sexist bigot, then beware that this has a lot of implications on other logical positions. And if you're fine with being logically inconsistent between the topic of sexism in the workplace and other viewpoints in your life, then the more power to you.
They don't want Diversity. They want Conformity.
So Jews complaining about the gas chamber should not have, because they didn't have a solution. Russians complaining about Gulags didn't have a solution either. I guess they deserved what they got for complaining.
Finding as solution to a problem _REQUIRES_ that the problem gets accepted as valid!
And before you claim my example is extreme, I admit it is. At the same time, I have a son growing up who feels overwhelmed by a society which does not give a shit about him or his accomplishments because he's male.
Oh yeah, like me he's tough and can cope. But why is it that we have to cope with discrimination when that is the problem allegedly being addressed? Oh yeah, you don't get the cultural Marxism at all.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Even if the difference in means is small between two bell curves if only people in the extreme tail of the bell curve are suitable the difference in the integral below the curve above that cutoff point can be large. Moreover, if there is a greater variance in once curve than the other the difference in integral below the curve above that cutoff can be larger still *even if there is no difference in mean*. Discussing averages is pointless if people who are far above average are required for a position, but as software development. Men have higher variance in IQ than women in addition to higher spatial IQ subcategory performance. Programming is not a verbal skill, it is a logical reasoning skill. Assuming advantage from spatial reasoning and fairly high cutoff point 80/20 ratio could be exactly right in terms of aptitude. I'm not saying this is the case, I'm saying it is a plausible case, though disagreeable to our sense of fairness.
Step back from the hypocritical hivemind echo chamber that is Google(and probably most other Silicon Valley companies) and you will see the pattern repeated on the scale of the State of California. Which is very, very sad because we are not all looney tunes here. In fact most of us are pretty much like folks everywhere else in the country. And it is a very beautiful state. Love the geography and the climate, despise the overbearing politics and repressive pseudoprogressive culture. Time to split the state into several states. The motto for the movement: If you like your Pelosi, you can keep your Pelosi.
My point is that your biological sex doesn't automatically qualify or disqualify you for any intellectual job.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Men tend to have better spatial reasoning for spatial tasks selected by men.
Men tend to suck at adjusting a pattern (sewing- 3 dimensional and a hell of a lot more complicated than blocks or gears).
Men tend to suck at picking the correct size container for leftovers (too small- throw away food. too big- air in the container makes the food go bad faster).
Women who sew (a lot more women sew than you might think) excel at spatial reasoning for adjusting patterns.
Women who put away food (more often than men) excel at spatial reasoning for picking the correct size container.
If women designed the spatial reasoning tests, we would be talking about how men tend to suck at spatial reasoning.
And that's just one example where males in a field have defined things to benefit males.
The military is another. Just recognizing that most females need less food than males the same size would lower their backpack weights by almost 10% (6 pounds). Instead females are required to carry grossly more food than they need and as a result a heavier pack. Likewise uniforms were designed for males. If males had to wear uniforms designed for females, they'd have problems in those uniforms. If you want to talk about down in the dirt using bayonets to kill each other- sure- I might be called sexist by the more extreme left but I'll agree that men have an advantage in that kind of combat. But the females who won medals for combat in Iraq were appreciated by the male soldiers whose lives they saved. And those women were not built like Arnold Swartzenegger. They had bravery and cool heads under fire (and in more than one case dragged males with gear on to safety).
That's the thing about sexism- when you are too close- you can't see it. You assume "that's just the best way of doing things" when really its the 'best way of doing things for males".
Same thing for programming. It *was* a female field. Then males came to dominate it as it went thru a period that frankly favored loners with no social life who loved machines (and autism spectrum is 75% male/ 25% female). Then it went thru a period where creepy behavior by huge majority of males actively drove the females who entered right back out of the field.
Now, it's in a period that doesn't favor aggressive loners with no social life who love machines. It may even favor females more than most males. But with male high school teachers and guidance counselors being caught actively steering bright females away from STEM and then creepy/hostile STEM classroom environments followed by creepy/hostile STEM work environments, we have a long way to go to get back to neutral.
In any case, the writer of the google feedback was an idiot. A much shorter letter privately delivered would have been productive. That screed publicly distributed which brought a bad light on to Google (already struggling with gender discrimination issues) was all but begging for a firing.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
They're fine with their zampolit when it's doing the attack.
They're cowardly when they're being publicly called out on it.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
The logical default position is to assume nothing is happening,
That's never the default position. The only reason to look at the data is because someone, somewhere, suspects that something is happening, so you look for something.
"It's morning, and it's bright outside. I assume the sun is not up because "nothing happening" is the logical default position."
Also the "something" has already been proven to have happened. The only question is about the cause. Again, your dismissive assumptions are the opposite of reality and the opposite of useful.
Learn to love Alaska
What it means is that women don't get into higher-paid job titles as much as men.
Pathetic attempt at misdirection.
I replied to the statement "the woman engineer who's paid less", which was clearly about people with the same job title getting paid less if they have a vagina. Since you can't win on that topic because it's established that same job title = same pay, you're trying to change the context.
It's funny because you're not just defending the feminists, you're arguing like them. Why don't you let women fight their own battle?
lucm, indeed.
Just as it is impossible to have a frank discussion on race, it's now impossible to have a frank discussion on gender.
Congratulation liberals, you've managed to suppress speech while claiming to be the poster child for it. The level of self delusion for half of them is incredible -'I'm making a difference!'. The level of smirking from the rest, as they accomplish exactly what they aimed for, is disturbing.
Make no mistake - it's always been about suppressing free speech. They hide what they do by calling it 'hate speech' or claiming that they won't 'normalize' it by discussing it. All code for 'suppress any speech that we don't agree with'. Just look at college campuses - shouting down, unplugging mikes or just flat out prevent the discussion for anything they don't like has become the norm. They are incapable of having a rational discussion on anything they don't agree with.
These are our future 'leaders'.
Seriously, if you can't understand just how big a threat this is to the country...it's the breaking of our very foundation.
... they suddenly realized how exposed they are. That the meeting would be recorded and useful against them in future civil/criminal proceedings.
Google gonna be payin' some serious cash to settle this. I hope the engineer refuses to sign an NDA as part of the settlement and demands that a VERY public apology/shaming be part of the package.
BTW, where is the ACLU? They used to have the guts to stand up to shit like this. Have they finally surrendered to the SJW inquisition, too?
No, it was never a majority of women in programming - you have to go back to ENIAC for an example of more women than men doing the programming, and even then the people who designed and built it were men.
Through the 1960s as the field was growing, women made up about 25% of the programming field, which declined after 1980 and rose again. I don't think it's ever been more than about 1/3 female. I'd like to see figures showing otherwise.
lol. what a statement.
To paraphrase, "There was NEVER a majority of women programming-- except when there was during ENIAC."
Designing and building aren't programming.
Yes- why did we go from ENIAC to the 80s?
It could be it favored autistic types who loved machines more than people.
It could be that men could work the long hours required because back then they had full time wives who supported them at home.
It could be working alone in buildings on nights and weekends.
But it did change to be almost exclusively male by the late 80s.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
> Designing and building aren't programming.
Back then, programming meant reconfiguring hardware so it pretty much was the same thing.
Besides, the point is it was never "a female field" if you mean dominated by females.