Google Engineer's Leaked 'Gender Diversity' Essay Draws Massive Response (medium.com) 1122
An anonymous reader writes: An engineer at Google's Mountain View headquarters circulated a 3,400-word essay internally that argued a "moral bias" exists at Google that's "shaming dissenters" and silencing their voices against "encroaching extremist and authoritarian policies." It attributes the gender gap in technology to biology-based differences in abilities (such as "speaking up" and "leading") and different personality traits (including "neuroticism"). Its suggested remedies include "Stop alienating conservatives" (calling it "non-inclusive" and "bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness"), and it also suggests as a solution to "de-emphasize empathy" (which "causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases").
As the essay leaked over the weekend, former Google engineer Yonatan Zunger identified its anonymous author as "not someone senior," saying the author didn't seem to understand gender -- or engineering -- or what's going to happen next. "Essentially, engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers. If someone told you that engineering was a field where you could get away with not dealing with people or feelings, then I'm very sorry to tell you that you have been lied to... It's true that women are socialized to be better at paying attention to people's emotional needs and so on -- this is something that makes them better engineers, not worse ones... You need to learn the difference between 'I think we should adopt Go as our primary language' and 'I think one-third of my colleagues are either biologically unsuited to do their jobs, or if not are exceptions and should be suspected of such until they can prove otherwise to each and every person's satisfaction.'"
The leaked internal essay is now being discussed in literally dozens of news outlets. Click through for some official responses, including leaked reactions from Google's VP of Engineering, from Google's new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance -- and from Slashdot's readers.
Google's new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance -- who started just a few weeks ago -- responded internally that the document "advanced incorrect assumptions about gender," saying it's not a viewpoint Google endorses or encourages, and adding that "Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable."
As the essay leaked over the weekend, former Google engineer Yonatan Zunger identified its anonymous author as "not someone senior," saying the author didn't seem to understand gender -- or engineering -- or what's going to happen next. "Essentially, engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers. If someone told you that engineering was a field where you could get away with not dealing with people or feelings, then I'm very sorry to tell you that you have been lied to... It's true that women are socialized to be better at paying attention to people's emotional needs and so on -- this is something that makes them better engineers, not worse ones... You need to learn the difference between 'I think we should adopt Go as our primary language' and 'I think one-third of my colleagues are either biologically unsuited to do their jobs, or if not are exceptions and should be suspected of such until they can prove otherwise to each and every person's satisfaction.'"
The leaked internal essay is now being discussed in literally dozens of news outlets. Click through for some official responses, including leaked reactions from Google's VP of Engineering, from Google's new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance -- and from Slashdot's readers.
Zunger seemed to agree in part, writing sympathetically that "One very important true statement which this manifesto makes is that male gender roles remain highly inflexible, and that this is a bug, not a feature. In fact, I suspect that this is the core bug which prompted everything else within this manifesto to be written."
Google VP of Engineering Ari Balogh also responded internally that "we want to continue fostering an environment where it's safe to engage in challenging conversations in a thoughtful way. But, in the process of doing that, we cannot allow stereotyping and harmful assumptions to play any part. One of the aspects of the post that troubled me deeply was the bias inherent in suggesting that most women, or men, feel or act a certain way. That is stereotyping, and it is harmful."
Long-time Slashdot reader Lauren Weinstein believes that leaking the internal memo to the outside world was a major breach of trust that will do more damage. But he also links to an earlier essay which argues "The men of computer science and the computer industry are misogynous jerks. Not all of them of course. Likely not even the majority. But enough to thoroughly poison the well."
VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Insightful)
Talk about a useless position.
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not just his knees, the whole media is doing this right now with their knees, and the hyperbole is in full swing. Here are a few headline titles I've seen on Google News:
- Dueling Google Memos Reveal a Company Struggling With Culture Change
- Google Employee's Anti-Diversity Manifesto Goes 'Internally Viral'
- Google Engineer writes anti-women essay
Anyways, it's best to just ignore barbarahudson, he's a narcissist who can't stand it when people say something that he doesn't like, up to and including telling y
Re:No kidding. (Score:5, Interesting)
If they guy really believes what he wrote, why doesn't he put his "gender-based superiority" to the test and just go start his own tech biz filled with guys who think like him and make bazillions consulting to all those mature companies he says want guys like him, instead of working for Google?
Google already did. Now that they are huge and rich, they can dabble in this nonsense.
Re:No kidding. (Score:5, Insightful)
...why doesn't he put his "gender-based superiority" to the test and just go start his own tech biz...
This is just like asking someone who has criticized their country/governenment, "Why don't you just go live somewhere else then?" It dismisses the criticism and ignores reality.
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sourced?
It isn't just this field, and my source is the US federal government's BLS, here. [bls.gov]
Many fields are dominated by a specific gender. In software it is about an 80/20 split, buy software is mild compared to other fields. There are many documentaries, books, and reports decrying how this is biased and unfair.
Firefighters, bricklayers, road construction, these are 99.9% male. Somehow there is no social plea for women to be pipelayers, or for more women to hang drywall.
On the flip side, women make up about 90%-95% of various nursing occupations, 97% of dental hygienists, 97% of preschool and kindergarten teachers, 95% of childcare workers, 90% of diatitians and nutritionists. I've heard a few cries for men to enter some of these fields, but generally these are socially accepted as well. When men express an interest in childcare or teaching young children they're socially accused of being pedophiles or creeps.
The gender balance in software development is in line with the variation across most fields. People who say they want the fields to be balanced 50/50 should consider why they aren't going after other fields that are far more imbalanced.
In that regard, I thing the person with the original manifesto has some points, the writeup against the manifesto also has some points, but both need to realize that the distribution is still well within bounds that are typical for many fields. People have preferences, including gender preferences brought on both by nature and society.
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Insightful)
Somehow there is no social plea for women to be pipelayers, or for more women to hang drywall.
ORLY? Seriously it took me like 5 seconds to find that there are similar concerns about the construction industry.
http://constructingexcellence.... [constructi...nce.org.uk]
http://rg-group.co.uk/whitepap... [rg-group.co.uk]
https://www.gov.uk/government/... [www.gov.uk]
Re: (Score:3)
And yet, given that the half-life of a software engineer is 3 years, and that most won't even be looked at after 40, perhaps women going into careers that last longer and provide higher lifetime earnings are smarter than men.
Software engineering is a dead-end career [slashdot.org].
And now the idea that coding is not going to secure you a bright future is not just in the business mags - it's gone mainstream [www.cbc.ca].
Re: (Score:3)
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Insightful)
Men really can't choose to be involved in early childhood education (and its getting more difficult even in middle and high schools) because of the child molester stigma. They would have to really really want to teach kids in order to risk putting themselves in a situation where even a false accusation will almost certainly end that career and potentially can ruin their entire future.
Of course that's quite a special case where there's potential legal ramifications to the stigma. On the other hand, there's no reason why more men couldn't be say, dental hygienists, except for the stigma (well and the fact that women tend to keep themselves up more than us guys due to other social factors, and that's something most people kind of prefer when their hygienist is practically nose to nose with them while digging around in their mouth.)
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Insightful)
Your daughter could very well be the exception! But here's the catch - should she demand that half of all metal workers in the future are female, even if most of them are not interested in it? I welcome people into the job who have a passion for the job - female or male, But I'm not going to go around hand-wringing because when I start interviewing for a mechanical engineering position, 90% of all applicants are male, and thus there's an 90% chance that my hire will be male (ME students are about 90% male).
Equality should mean both genders are perfectly accepted into positions and roles, and it's their opportunity - NOT the numbers who are present - that determines equality. Equality of opportunity should be the goal, not equality of results (which can never actually happen).
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Its not "new knowledge" thats the problem, its forcing people to change their existing "old knowledge".
Excellent examples of this is Politics, and Religion. Science has its problems too, thats why we end up with conspiracy theories (faked moon landings, etc) and the anti-vax crowd, Chem Trails, Area 51, among others.
People with strongly held beliefs have a strong conformational bias, i.e. anything that agrees with their ideas is "knowledge /
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've read your response. It is well thought out (considering its goal) and sourced (though sources aren't used, but there are a number of baseless assertions), and very cleverly written, but the ideas it expresses are not reasonable or novel.
The response is meticulously written to keep one's SJW radar close to background noise level. The effort put into this response's stealth is admirable. There are only a few sentences that should send it into yellow alert.
But under this response's matte black, angled
Re: (Score:3)
No it doesn't. Personal preference? Personal preference for race or gender in business? That's called bigotry. And "authoritative shaming and public posturing" are just attempts to hand-wave away my disagreement with scientific racism as hollow (an appeal to hypocrisy). If you think that the essay in question does not actually support scientific racism or oppose affirmative action entirely, we could debate that.
If you agree that it is making those arguments but disagree that the essay should be disregarded
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If personal preference is bigotry then so having policies that advantage either sex is bigotry as well.
It is possible that men are different than women, society has no problems when it goes against men, for example there are more men in jail than women. The answer is will be men are more violent than women. It would be absurd to suggest we should give men less harsh sentences to even out the numbers.
It maybe the case that there is discrimination against women in certain fields but it also maybe women prefe
Re:VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:4)
It is possible that men are different than women, society has no problems when it goes against men, for example there are more men in jail than women.
Have you not noticed all the groups working to keep men out of jail and demanding change, demanding that there is less institutional bias against the worst affected groups like black men? It's mentioned on the TV news every now and then.
Feminist academics have also done a huge amount of working trying to understand why so many men end up in jail and what can be done to reduce it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance... (Score:4, Insightful)
And here you fall into the same trap that the 'official' Google response, like so much of the outrage to the post... anger that someone would dare say something they disagree with... without refuting a single word of what is said.
Someone may think they win an argument via insults & shame... but then quite a few people got sick of being called 'racist' at every turn and voted for Trump instead... perhaps that tactic has worn out it's effectiveness?
And this being said by a #NeverTrumper.
Yeah... good luck with that. I'm going to stick with my pushing for the Article V convention of the states [conventionofstates.com] which has a fair bit more historical support.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't really have an opinion on most of this, and I don't really have a horse in this race either, but you do get that your blanket assertion about the worthlessness of an entire field of study, and your assumption that market value == actual value, well, make you seem kind of pridefully ignorant and tragically naive?
I think there's a lot of bullshit in many discussions about gender, and I think there's a lot of bullshit in many discussions about economics. Meanwhile, I'm going to keep my mouth shut until
Buckle up (Score:4, Interesting)
It's going to be a bumpy ride
Re: (Score:3)
Sunday night popcorn!
woohoo!
Re:Buckle up (Score:5, Funny)
I read that as "Sunday night porn!", does that mean anything?
It means you need glasses. I'm afraid to guess why.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Release the hounds!
Social Justice Diversity Warriors have to be some of the least tolerant people on the planet.
Re: (Score:3)
Tolerance comes from tolerare, which basically means to endure, to bear or to suffer something.
In that sense, saying that I tolerate this bullshit is right on the money.
Re:Buckle up (Score:5, Insightful)
This stuff has gotten so silly at this point that it's hardly even worth attacking anymore. It would be pure comic gold if it weren't so Orwellian and real people weren't losing their jobs and even facing actual jail time over this insane bullshit.
I just hope the people who designed the bridge I drive over every day didn't think that "engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I just hope the people who designed the bridge I drive over every day didn't think that "engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers."
I hate to break it to you, but unless 'the bridge you drive over every day' is little more than a couple of planks, then there was more than one person involved in its design, and its design involved cooperation and collaboration. Sorry.
Re:Buckle up (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, then I hope at least one person on that team realized that engineering also involves things like mathematics, metallurgy, wind resonance, modeling, etc.--not just feelings.
Re: Buckle up (Score:5, Interesting)
Speaking for structural engineers, that's college stuff. EVERYBODY on the team knows it. Budgets, schedules, coordination of six contractors, placating government inspectors...that's the "project management" piece, which is adult-hard. And women are often better at.
It doesn't matter if the design is correct if the rebar isn't inspected correctly because the site engineer had a shouting match with the inspection company foreman. Because he was a dick.
Re: Buckle up (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking for structural engineers, that's college stuff. EVERYBODY on the team knows it. Budgets, schedules, coordination of six contractors, placating government inspectors...that's the "project management" piece, which is adult-hard. And women are often better at.
Why the flying fuck is it not sexist and dismissive to say women are better at something than men, but if you say men are better at some things than women, you risk losing your job and dozens of news outlets tear apart your reasoning?
The hypocrisy and indoctrination is at levels the Catholic church would be proud of.
Re:Ironic that (Score:5, Insightful)
The same crew that claims traditional religion is horseshit has created their own called secular humanism. And it will brook no dissent.
Don't group all atheists with those bag of dicks who get their feelings hurt whenever someone disagrees with them. Speaking as an atheist, the clear majority of us don't care for identity politics, and we don't go around telling our friends and families that their beliefs are wrong.
For example, I'm openly atheist, and married to a woman who follows two major religions (Catholicism and Hinduism), and yet we have no problems. It's because, unlike those asshole thought-police above who want to silent opposing opinions, we (current wife and I) grew up instead.
The people you are angry with are not assholes because you're christian, they're assholes because they're assholes.
In much the same way, the hard-left crowd who will attack and shame free thinkers aren't doing so because of the free-thinkers, they're doing it because they're assholes.
Re:Buckle up (Score:5, Interesting)
It's worth talking about precisely because people are losing their jobs or facing other consequences.
I just hope the people who designed the bridge I drive over every day didn't think that "engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers."
I sure hope they did! I am an engineer, electronic and software, and a bit of mechanical stuff. Cooperation and collaboration are key to building a good, reliable product because when they break down is when mistakes happen. The wrong material gets used, the contractor building the thing doesn't understand what is required for structural integrity etc.
That's exactly what happened with the infamous Hyatt Regency walkway.
As for empathy, I find it much easier to deal with other human beings, from explaining complex ideas to them (something essential for engineers) to getting them to do what I want and work well with me if I can understand their mindset and how they view things.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I just hope the people who designed the bridge I drive over every day didn't think that "engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers."
Jesus fucking H. Christ on a bike I do!
No one is capable of designing a large bridge single handed which means it can only get done with huge amounts of cooperation and collaboration. And yes empathy for your colleagues too because cooperation and collaboration is awfully hard without them. This is partly becaus
Attacking dissent at Google (Score:5, Informative)
Includes what is purported to be an internal survey at Google:
http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2017... [blogspot.ca]
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what the author said, but I don't think there's much truth to it. Yes, a lot of us are socialized to want competition, but is it really what we want, or just what we were taught to want? I rode that bandwagon into my thirties before I realized what a lousy ride it was, and then I got off. I'm much happier since. In point of fact life would be better for all of us if it were not only not encouraged, but not acceptable to work more than a seven hour work day.
If you think about it, doing so is actually depriving other people of the opportunity to excel, assuming that those extra hours are productive, and just causing damage if they aren't.
Re: (Score:3)
is it really what we want, or just what we were taught to want?
For answers, you can look to nature, human and otherwise.
Consider school. Every child knows exactly where they fit into the class pecking order. The only way to change your rank in that pecking order is through competition--sometimes non-violent, but sometimes violent.
This tendency didn't start with school children. The animal kingdom is full of examples of animals that observe a similar pecking order, from birds (from which it was named) to many mammals.
It's really hard to argue that we are only competitiv
Re: (Score:3)
The animal kingdom is full of counter examples too. Many animals live in herds or packs with a very flat structure, often with no leaders at all. The strongest bird doesn't take point or handle navigate, it's a group effort and they rotate.
It's also interesting that animals often behave very differently in captivity or when raised by other species (it's rare but it happens). That confirms that much of their behaviour is learned, and what genetic components exist can be overridden. Good thing too, as we expe
Re: (Score:3)
It actually originates from observations of hens, which of course don't fly in formation, or much at all for that matter.
Re: (Score:3)
... ergo pigeons don't exist.
Yay! Finally my car is safe!
Re: (Score:3)
Ants.
We should be more like ants.
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps you could clarify... Because it sounds like you are saying I want to murder people for fun, and that's why I support the efforts on diversity that Google is making.
I... I can't even...
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what the author said, but I don't think there's much truth to it. Yes, a lot of us are socialized to want competition, but is it really what we want, or just what we were taught to want? I rode that bandwagon into my thirties before I realized what a lousy ride it was, and then I got off. I'm much happier since.
Into your 30s, and you don't have kids, obvoiously, which is sad. If you'd ever seen the way little girls and little boys play together you'd understand that it has very little to do with nurture. Little boy play is competitive, little girl play is cooperative and egalitarian. And that's in mixed households where you can't even say that the toy choice forced it upon them.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree. My wife and I have 16 month old fraternal twins. One girl and one boy. We also have two older sons and an older daughter.
The twins are always (due to their age) in the same play environment, wether it be the play room, living room, their bed room, or in the back yard. She gravitates towards dolls, picture books of people, and wants to be held/cuddled a lot. He gravitates towards cars, dump trucks/loaders, blocks, picture books of trucks and construction sites, and only wants to be held if it involves tumbling, tossing, and spinning. This is not to say they don't have significant similarities, however there are also significant differences, especially in how they choose to play when by themselves. As I said, they are always in the same play environment where they can choose for themselves which toys they want.
So from my limited observation, little boys and little girls appear to have different play patterns which then will not surprise me if when they are adults they have different interests.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Informative)
The twins are always (due to their age) in the same play environment, wether it be the play room, living room, their bed room, or in the back yard. She gravitates towards dolls, picture books of people, and wants to be held/cuddled a lot. He gravitates towards cars, dump trucks/loaders, blocks, picture books of trucks and construction sites, and only wants to be held if it involves tumbling, tossing, and spinning
And in the picture books that they read, are there the same number of male and female protagonists? If you look at the packaging for the trucks that he likes to play with, are they showing pictures of boys or girls or both playing with them, (or driving real ones)? In the TV that he watches, how many show girls in physically active roles? Very young children are particularly sensitive to picking up biases from their surroundings. Being in the same environment means nothing if that same environment is full of subconscious visual clues about gender roles.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:4)
I'm not saying it's one thing or the other like you are, I'm saying it's a complex combination of things.
I already wrote that. And you seem to have ignored it. Again. I give up.
That is not masculinity (Score:5, Insightful)
making poor technical or unethical decisions just to "win", and a winner-takes-all attitude where being anything less than the champion, the alpha-male, is failure and shameful.
That doesn't sound anything like masculinity, which is about inherent strength and self-reliance and has nothing to do with notions of victory or dominance.
What it does sound an AWFUL lot like is projection, as you have outlined the very basis of thought for the modern left. No person of differing ideology can every win against the group-mind, and nothing can ever be shared from the Great Bounty Of the State, it is only for those that belong to the club.
The only thing being rejected is a straw-man, so that you can worship the new straw-man propped up by a different farmer.
Re:That is not masculinity (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not a spokesperson for "the left", so all I can tell you is that I very clearly rejected those things in my post and if you still think I support them... Well, there's nothing I can say to convince you, is there?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed. A problem with these arguments for absolute equity is they shun any arguments against (like the essay) and anyone criticizing is committing career suicide. That's not my idea of free speech. We are being shamed into agreeing or at best remaining silent.
Of course men and women have different interests. Should we put blinders on and pretend to believe something that contradicts our own senses? That creates a disconnect within our own selves, not a healthy thing, and doesn't solve anything.
I have
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed. "Equal opportunity" means a woman can become an engineer, a scientist or a pilot by bringing about as much talent and as much dedication to the table as a man. I know quite a few female engineers and scientists. None of them said they ever faced discrimination on a level that mattered to their career-choice. But most of them have stories of women that decided to study something easier when faced with what it actually takes to get though such an education path. Ask a female engineer or scientist in the hard sciences why there are so few women in engineering and the hard sciences and you will hear things that would get a man burned at the stake if he dared to utter them.
So, while equal opportunity is a good thing, enforcing equal numbers in such a situation is about the worst thing you can do. It will kill a technological society. As does denying clearly observable statistical facts.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:4, Insightful)
While I can respect your attempt to manipulate the discussion by attempting to twist the facts, I will not respect the big lie inherent in doing so.
I am also prod to continue to make Slashdot an environment toxic to idiots, like you are one.
Re: (Score:3)
It is not even bluster: You are not worth the effort.
Re: (Score:3)
The idea of equality of outcome is a straw man. You won't find many people defending it, because as you say it's silly and outright harmful.
The issue here boils down to if there is something inherent to being female that makes a person less interested in technology, or if the interest is there but there are other reasons why women don't pursue it as a career as often. The latter isn't all about misogyny either, it's way more complex than that.
The essay actually comes close to realizing it at one point. It m
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, so you agree with the whiny right-winger now?
If there weren't oodles of clumsily expressed truth in his little essay, the SJW-sphere wouldn't be screaming its head off right now. He'd be dismissed and ignored like all cranks. There wouldn't already be a million words spilled over this, most of it claiming he said or believed things that weren't in the document.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:4, Funny)
Its in the fucking SJW literature.
I think I missed that. They didn't send the booklet out with my membership card. Can you point me to the official decrees of the SJW institute?
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that "SJW" can mean whatever you like, and no one can agree who is one... Basically they are a straw man.
I can't make a counter argument because you will just respond "but SJWs believe X".
Point to someone specific who is involved, or better still something I said and might want to defend.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
I did no such thing.
You keep attacking me with blame for stuff I didn't do. You seem to think I'm a member, maybe even the leader of the official Social Justice Warrior club.
What do you want from me? An apology? I don't even know enough about the situation to know if your complaint has merit.
Re:The essay's critics are missing the point. (Score:4, Insightful)
Not sure about the whole essay, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
One point where the author is spot on is the overwhelming efforts to silence any other viewpoints. Loom no further than the response to this memo. On twitter, a prominent tech entrepreneur said he thinks the real problem isn't the memo's content but that the author thought it was okay to share it at a place like Google. Isn't that exactly the point the author makes?
I also found interesting his point about how we feel differently about seeking 50-50 gender representation in manual labor occupations and work related deaths.
These topics are worthy of discussion. The "we must get girls to code" push always seemed worthy of skepticism. But there is no real debate in this area, and raising questions gets you labeled unfairly and possibly fired.
One thing is for sure: this guy's career is over. He will be doxxed by some news org who apparently does remember how to do investigative journalism when it comes to random civilians expressing a politically incorrect opinion. And the pitchforks will come out from the SJWs and no company -- certainly google -- wants to get mixed up in that PR nightmare. Game over, bro. Hope it was worth it.
Re: (Score:3)
One thing is for sure: this guy's career is over.
Indeed. The heinous thoughtcrime offender is doomed.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not sure about the whole essay, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The only name given in the memo is Ari Balogh, but in the context of "he responded to this essay by saying it was unacceptable". She isn't saying he is the author of the document. No-one was doxxed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One point where the author is spot on is the overwhelming efforts to silence any other viewpoints
Ehhhh. How long should someone waste other people's time banging on old, tired and deunked [*] arguments that also happen to insult a good chunk of the workforce? Not all arguments and points of view are valid. Everyone has the right to be a complete moron, but if you're going to be a big enough moron, yeah you can STFU or GTFO.
[*]This guy doesn't seem to know what he's talking about, frankly. He has at most a v
Re: (Score:3)
I also found interesting his point about how we feel differently about seeking 50-50 gender representation in manual labor occupations and work related deaths.
That bit just demonstrates that he doesn't understand the issue at all, or is making a deliberate straw man.
The goal is not to force people to become engineers, which he actually suggests is happening at one point. The goal is to help people do the things they want to do.
And as such, it's much easier to do that with attractive jobs in tech than it is for unattractive jobs collecting refuse or caring for the elderly. That doesn't mean there aren't efforts to make it happen (women's participation in construct
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That's a great question. The answer is complex, but a lot of it is to do with men there being pressured to go into other fields and with women supporting each other because education is seen as a way to change and escape the patriarchal nature of their society.
Re:Not sure about the whole essay, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
So there is an effort to silence, but it's not working very well is it?
No, it's working quite well. You can bet this ends with the guy who wrote this memo being fired or forced to resign, and being blacklisted in Silicon Valley. The only reason he hasn't been fired already is that his memo got leaked to the public and Google knows there will be a backlash from non-SJW's if they do it now.
So they'll either wait for the uproar to die down and then dispose of him quietly (probably make him sign an NDA to get severance) or they'll fire him soon and just take the backlash in exchange for some virtue-signalling. Either way, the guy is toast and a clear message is sent to everyone else: "If you engage in wrongspeak or wrongthink, you WILL be punished for it!"
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't make Eich unemployable, and I'm sure this guy will either continue at Google or quickly find somewhere else to go.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. It never has been.
It's always been the case the unpopular opinions can make it harder to get a job. That's why anonymous speech is so important.
What you are really complaining about here is that this guy's opinion is now so far from the mainstream and so distasteful too many people that there are consequences to attaching his name to it.
Re: (Score:3)
Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. It never has been.
I keep hearing that. I don't think you realize what it's actually saying. One of these days, the speech will be disagreement with government policy, and the consequence will be public execution (accompanied by the righteous cheers of the majority).
It's always been the case the unpopular opinions can make it harder to get a job.
Just because it's been this way for a long time, doesn't mean it's right or we shouldn't change it. How would you feel if I turned this around? "It's always been the case that being a woman can make it harder to get a high-paying job, so it okay if it stays this w
Re:Not sure about the whole essay, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes it will be debated, but only from the political correct viewpoint
Yes, the "debate" will consist of everyone at Google publicly agreeing that he's wrong, and anyone who agrees with him keeping their mouths shut in fear.
Sexist feminists on the march again :-( (Score:4, Insightful)
Google VP of Engineering Ari Balogh "One of the aspects of the post that troubled me deeply was the bias inherent in suggesting that most women, or men, feel or act a certain way. That is stereotyping, and it is harmful."
Feminist idiot Lauren Weinstein : "The men of computer science and the computer industry are misogynous jerks. "
Deal with the sexist feminists, realise that when people use factual arguments to prove them wrong, they are not being sexist.
Men and women are different and enjoy doing different things. FACT.
Re:Sexist feminists on the march again :-( (Score:4, Insightful)
He is saying that trying to claim that 50% of the population, more than 3 billion people, think it act a certain way is both ridiculous and causes problems.
Are we really still having this debate? I thought that even the anti-feminists had adopted "not all men" as a slogan, but it seems that they think such broad statements as you just made are fine.
Sweet FSM (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the sort of thing that lands in history books as an example of the backwardness of previous generations.
Elimination of Subconscious Bias (Score:5, Interesting)
Having read the email/document that forms the subject of this article, one of the things I observe is that the document itself discusses both conscious and subconscious bias as it can be applied in a workplace [and for this post I'll group together *all* forms of bias, not merely gender bias].
So let's think about this for a moment. Most of us probably work for organisations which claim [publicly at least] to be a meritocracy. But how objective are the performance review procedures? [ Or recruitment, for that matter? ] Here are a few points to consider:-
If your recruitment process gives hiring managers application forms with the age and/or name of the candidate included, then your organisation has an open door for selection bias.
If your appraisal process includes a ranking process that is susceptible to tactical voting ["I'll give your promotion candidate the nod if you do the same for me", then your organisation has an issue with performance review bias.
If your organisation allows a single manager - *any* single manager - to make recruitment, promotion and/or disciplinary decisions in isolation, then your organisation is at risk of allowing "individual bias" to harm your employees.
Creating a truly neutral, inclusive and meritocratic workplace is *HARD*. It requires leadership, sponsorship [from the top], honesty, integrity and commitment. But it also requires something that large, modern organisations have gradually sacrificed. As individuals are pushed ever harder, as we move into more and more of a "performance culture", acts of mutual support and inclusiveness are not merely not helpful for the giver, but they are detrimental - they help someone else to succeed to the giver's loss.
These two things, then, are not mutually exclusive, but they are rarely found in the same organisation in full and effective health.
I'm concerned at the way that the author of the original piece chose to express their views. I do not believe that the author did themselves or their suggestions any favours. I also worry that some of the issues a rooted far more deeply, insidiously and tenaciously than we might yet be willing to accept.
Notification (Score:5, Funny)
To circulate, agree with, or repeat crimethink is volunteering to unperson
DoublePlus Love,
Danielle Brown
Commissar of GoodThink
ThinkPol, Google Corp
Not what I was expecting (Score:5, Informative)
That was an interesting essay. Based on some of the reported reactions, I was expecting an alt-right anti-women screed. But the essay was IMO thoughtful and fairly well-considered. I don't necessarily agree with parts of it or even most of it, but I do think the motivations of the author were not harmful.
Essays like this are useful for us to learn from! (Score:3)
As long as ultra-liberals make views like in this essay taboo to express, then these ideas will simply be driven under ground, and people who hold those views will just feel unfairly suppressed. I think it’s a problem that people who hold these views feel the need to express them anonymously, because they know that the reaction will just be one of unmitigated vitriol. Seriously, if that Google employee openly expressed those views, they would just be fired.
Now that this anonymous essay is out, this is an opportunity to critique it carefully. For instance, there are indeed lots of people who think that men and women and people of difference “races” have such significantly different intelligences that it’s okay to utilize stereotypes as part of hiring decisions and such. Well, now we can take this opportunity to revisit the scientific evidence. Surely there ARE differences, but what differences are genetic, and what are the result of culture and socialization? And for any of these differences, what impact do they have (statistically) on engineering talent? And how much does “talent” matter when combined with hard-earned skills?
We do not want to turn gender and racial equality into dogma. First, we should be completely honest and open about scientific research on this matter. Let’s say it became taboo to talk about skin color. Then if you really liked the skin tone of some person of African descent, then you might risk backlash from just complementing someone. Or more neutrally, if you’re trying to make someone look really good in their clothing, then we need the ability to be matter-of-fact about it; the color of your skin, hair, and eyes and the shape of your body do have a real impact on what clothing styles are best for you. Or biologically, it’s important to recognize the relationship between melanin content and sun exposure.
But establishing that diferences do exist an it’s okay to talk about them, what impact do those differences have on things like job effectiveness? Let’s say we unfroze a population of early humans from 500K years ago. They were not quite as intellectually advanced as us, but they had language and other characteristics that we would recognize as human. How should the be treated? Should they be enslaved? Or just relegated to the menial jobs? What if one wanted to study engineering—should we stop them? Why? And what harm would it cause you if one of them went to college, got a degree, and got hired? White men vary in engieering talent VASTLY and are not hired on the basis of simply being white men, so why should a woman, a black man, or a Neanderthal be excluded simply on the basis of one of these labels? And why the hell would you care to try to force people to be judged on those bases?
Although I haven’t met any neanderthals, I have met people with mental disabilities who were capable enough at math and engineering skills that they could hold down an engineering job and be *productive*, without “special treatment.” And of course, I have known lots of downright brilliant people who were female and/or with skin color darker than a norwegian. Are they less common than brilliant white men? If so, that’s interesting for the anthropologists, but not something that HR people should worry themselves with. BESIDES, even if there were some genetic bias that made them “10% less likely to be at skill level Z,” or something like that, the artificial prejudices from our society’s past have a FAR greater impact. We have a long way to go to get those people up to parity with their true underlying abilities. And the longer we take to do that, the longer we keep shooting ourselves in the foot for not benefitting from their ability to contribute.
I believe a lot of the criticism that women and minorities face often comes from confirmation bias. People make mistakes in their jobs or are sloppy. For some reason, when white men make mistakes, t
My Sympathetic Interpretation (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been in tech in some way for almost twenty years now, from programming and IT heavy classes in high school through today. The way I see it, we bred this attitude, and should all have a little compassion for this writer.
In the late 90s and early 2000s, I never heard anyone suggest the all male or nearly all male CS and IT classes I was in were full of sexist men keeping the women out. Just the opposite, I constantly heard they were full of loser boys, women weren't there because they had better ways to spend their time. These guys were nerds, and were on the fringes where they belonged. (The notion that "nerd" and "geek" were positive words was just barely beginning to become a thing.)
Fast forward 15-20 years, and that time they thought they were outcasts? They're now being told that no, quite the opposite, they were being privileged jerks. That whole time they thought they were being ostracized, they were actually gender bullies who now must take responsibility for all the women they've been keeping out of the field. The shift should be enough to make anyone's head spin, but It was a slow burn with no clear demarcation. It's easy to miss. It's not surprising some people who've been in this system feel unhappy, betrayed, angry, or a number of other things.
Twenty years may seem like a long time, but what other profession has changed so fast? "Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable." Indeed.
I'm not saying this guy is right. I'm not even saying he's wrong. I'm saying we shouldn't be surprised quite a few of him exist. I'm surprised there aren't a lot more.
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, is this guy's experience that different from any of ours? We're mostly comp sci or engineering majors of some sort. Sure, being a CS major wasn't outlandishly cool, but really, was there a major at your school that was really considered cool? Yeah, a lot of people may have flocked to psychology or busin
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But, sure, I'll give you that society doesn't exactly hold IT-related interests on a platter. But what does that mean really? Some jokes in movies and TV shows about nerds? Maybe women don't flock to us? How many times do you really experience an active outward action where someone belittled you for being in CS/engineering? A few jerks here and there? Those are the people he should be mad at - the people who actively picked on him and made him supposedly worthy of our compassion.
A "few" jokes? Listen to those jokes. Some are how "geeky" nerds are but most are how nerds get mentally and physically assaulted. I've known one person who actually committed suicide because of it. Right after Columbine, I heard many stories about such treatment resulting in suicide attempts.
Hell to show everyone he is not a total nerd Woz shelled out shit load of cash to pay for the US festival.
Alert science denial. (Score:3)
One of the aspects of the post that troubled me deeply was the bias inherent in suggesting that most women, or men, feel or act a certain way. That is stereotyping, and it is harmful
Statistical trends between men and women are science. Stick to your search engine snapper-head.
I honestly don't care (Score:5, Interesting)
I really don't care if there's an ideological echo chamber at Google. I'd guess he's probably right, but if it pisses him off so badly, he doesn't have to work there either.
However, we can't be hypocrites.
If we are ok with Google stomping its ideology into its employees, then we should be equally ok with other ideologues pushing their private causes onto their employees, or inviting them to leave if they don't like it, such as Chik Fil A.
If it's ok for Google, it should be ok for Hobby Lobby, no?
Maybe it's just the career merits (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's a funny thing: Medicine, Law, and Engineering were also fields that were over 90% male - women had to "break in". And don't imagine they didn't have to push past a lot of sexism and belittling and interrupting.
There was one woman in my 50-man engineering class of 1980; I saw the first woman hired as P.Eng. in my workplace in 1993. By the time I left, five of my last six bosses had been women (2003-2017), and in two cases, THEIR bosses had been women; I'd say they're now a third of the shop. I think this generation has to put up with much less prejudice and belittling (from their women boss, for sure).
Medicine and Law have been half women for a while now.
Then there's IT. Happens I also got a CompSci degree, 1985. A third of my class were women and it was widely assumed it would hit 50% by 1990 or so. And it WAS doing pretty well in the 1990s, then the female participation rate plummeted after the dot-bomb and has never really recovered.
The driving force here, I think, is not poisonous culture, but money. Medicine and Law were rapidly integrated because they are the best-paid jobs in society, and women kept pushing, hard; they had cause. Engineering is mostly better-paid than IT, at least the actual coding jobs.
It's the same as that thing about women not going in to drywall; obviously the best-paid, relative to work pain, jobs will be the most attractive. Coding has become way less attractive lately. Oh, and it's not a licensed profession, like medicine, law, engineering...that may have something to do with both its attractiveness and stability, too.
Re:It would be nice if things were unrelated, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Excellent example. I do not even remember gender ever coming up in the systemd "debate" (well, more "train-wreck"), except as a completely made-up accusation against its enemies. Of course, if you want to discredit somebody, even the most basic propaganda manual states to associate them with anything that is deemed unacceptable in society. For example, say, in Germany around 70 years ago, it would have been stated that "the Jews" were against systemd, with about as much validity to it. Or in the US a bit later, it would have been "the communists".
I do know a few pretty good women scientists and engineers. I respect them. I recently encouraged my employer to hire one of them. I also think that systemd is an engineering abomination and that the community has dropped the ball there to an extreme degree.
Re:It would be nice if things were unrelated, but (Score:5, Insightful)
If you really want to make a difference in how women are treated, look at sales. Utterly harassing towards women. Look at bankers! Look at doctors. Inappropriate advances by men having more power? It's there! While people in the tech industry complain about dongle jokes, the building/developer industry is actually groping women. Our president is!
Compared to all those communities, programmers are basically saints. The focus is in the wrong area.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What annoys me is that tech is not that bad for women. [...] If you really want to make a difference in how women are treated [...]
I quite agree! We should only ever worry about this guy's problems:
www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-07-22www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-07-22www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-07-22
Re:It would be nice if things were unrelated, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, if you have a rational argument, I'll discuss it with you. If you're just going to make jokes, then it's not a discussion.
Re:Googledox ,VP of diversity doxxes engineer (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
No, it's worse than that. You're not only wrong but you have misinformed other people which is a far worse transgression.
Re: (Score:3)
she is now guilty of workplace harassment.
Oh no, it looks like she's about to have a very tense meeting with Google's VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I heard she's a total bitch!
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. There is a _very_ clear line between "stereotyping" and statistical observations. The second happens to be facts. But SJWs are not mentally equipped to understand that. These morons basically destroy everything they take over, because they have an invalid model of reality.
Re:Does anyone argue with the Zunger? He's spot on (Score:5, Insightful)
Empathy doesn't fucking enter into it. You know what's good for cooperation and collaboration? Effective leadership.
Understanding where your people are coming from and etc (ya know, empathy) is what makes it possible to lead effectively.
Re: (Score:3)
But we do not bear him any ill-will, we are not out to shut him up or cause him harm.
So all those death threats to trans people are writing themselves?
The leftists are a small minority with all the power.
Which is why democrats received a plurality of the popular vote in the last three presidential elections.
They destroy careers by firing and blacklisting.
Like how Trump wanted to fire all the DoE employees that believe in climate change?
They use the force of law to arrest, fine and harass dissenters.
This one is extra insane. I don't even know what you are talking about here. Are you under the impression that law enforcement, a current major target of liberal outrage, is somehow under the control of leftists? Literally wtf.
Followed by your allies in the media pronouncing that we "hate government," "oppose education" and "deny science" because we are incensed by corruption of those institutions and endeavors to serve your own ideological and political ends.
Isn't that what every group