A Thread About Women

[gourimoko]

Google has encouraged this type of behavior in the past.

That's false.

His manifesto was to improve the work place

No it wasn't.

It was a "manifesto" in the very literal sense of the word. Again, you haven't read it. It's truly a statement of his beliefs.

He wanted to use Google as a means of giving those beliefs weight -- it had nothing to do with improving the workplace but instead was used as a blunt object to attack the means in which Google has constructed and continues to construct one of the best working environments in the industry.

The only reason Google is even mentioned in the manifesto is to give it weight. He knew what he was doing; because had he written the exact same manifesto, and never mentioned Google, no one would care about another Men's Rights Activist type railing against women getting promotions in Silicon Valley.

Frankly, his views are quite honestly absurd and are simply being promoted by folks who clearly have the same agenda but aren't remotely aware of how discriminatory the IS/IT industry is against women.

and promote diversity through non discriminatory practices.

Ty, that's ridiculous...

 

[TyGuy]

Goury, just because I said I hadn't read it in it's entirety like 20 minutes ago doesn't mean that I haven't read it since then. Haven't read it in it's entirety doesn't mean "didn't read it." Since then I have read the entire thing, so stop using that as a point.

 

[DJTJ]

Goury, just because I said I hadn't read it in it's entirety like 20 minutes ago doesn't mean that I haven't read it since then. Haven't read it in it's entirety doesn't mean "didn't read it." Since then I have read the entire thing, so stop using that as a point.

You posted and commented on something without reading it because you figured it pushed this weird ass pro-men agenda you've had in this thread, and others have elsewhere in this subforum.

 

[gourimoko]

Goury, just because I said I hadn't read it in it's entirety like 20 minutes ago doesn't mean that I haven't read it since then. Haven't read it in it's entirety doesn't mean "didn't read it." Since then I have read the entire thing, so stop using that as a point.

So you've read it now...

You see how it has nothing to do with making for a better workplace environment at Google and is in no-way "pro-diversity," right?

There's nothing "pro-diversity" about the manifesto...

So .. now that you've read it, surely you can stop pretending that this guy is somehow being misunderstood.

 

[gourimoko]

You posted and commented on something without reading it because you figured it pushed this weird ass pro-men agenda you've had in this thread, and others have elsewhere in this subforum.

It's kinda pathetic...

I find it funny as hell that someone would suggest that women and minorities are somehow being propped up at Google or in Silicon Valley in general.

In this guy's field, as a programmer, your code speaks for itself. Company coding standards are shared by teams working on the same projects, everyone has the same rigorous testing to get into the job, everyone shares the same deadlines, and your code is visible to all who have access to the repository.

The idea that somehow diversity programs are harming the workplace at Google is a fucking joke. And I can't help but to think that folks who parrot this nonsense are pretty obviously pushing a potentially sexist or anti-minority agenda, as you said, which to me, is kinda sad...

 

[gourimoko]

To the folks who somehow "disagree" with me about the guy getting fired and why he should be fired; here's another engineer's opinion, this guy worked at Google so that's the vantage point he's coming from:

"That brings us, however, to point (3), the most serious point of all. I’m going to be even blunter than usual here, because I’m not subject to the usual maze of HR laws right now, and so I can say openly what I would normally only be allowed to say in very restricted fora. And this is addressed specifically to the author of this manifesto.

What you just did was incredibly stupid and harmful. You just put out a manifesto inside the company arguing that some large fraction of your colleagues are at root not good enough to do their jobs, and that they’re only being kept in their jobs because of some political ideas. And worse than simply thinking these things or saying them in private, you’ve said them in a way that’s tried to legitimize this kind of thing across the company, causing other people to get up and say “wait, is that right?”

I need to be very clear here: not only was nearly everything you said in that document wrong, the fact that you did that has caused significant harm to people across this company, and to the company’s entire ability to function. And being aware of that kind of consequence is also part of your job, as in fact it would be at pretty much any other job. I am no longer even at the company and I’ve had to spend half of the past day talking to people and cleaning up the mess you’ve made. I can’t even imagine how much time and emotional energy has been sunk into this, not to mention reputational harm more broadly.

And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just created a textbook hostile workplace environment.

If you hadn’t written this manifesto, then maybe we’d be having a conversation about the skills you need to learn to not be blocked in your career — which are precisely the ones you described as “female skills.” But we are having a totally different conversation now. It doesn’t matter how good you are at writing code; there are plenty of other people who can do that. The negative impact on your colleagues you have created by your actions outweighs that tremendously.

You talked about a need for discussion about ideas; 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.” Not all ideas are the same, and not all conversations about ideas even have basic legitimacy.

If you feel isolated by this, that your views are basically unwelcome in tech and can’t be spoken about… well, that’s a fair point. These views are fundamentally corrosive to any organization they show up in, drive people out, and I can’t think of any organization not specifically dedicated to those views that they would be welcome in. I’m afraid that’s likely to remain a serious problem for you for a long time to come. But our company is committed to maintaining a good environment for all of its people, and if one person is determined to thwart that, the solution is pretty clear.²

I’m writing this here, in this message, because I’m no longer at the company and can say this sort of thing openly. But I want to make it very clear: if you were in my reporting chain, all of part (3) would have been replaced with a short “this is not acceptable” and maybe that last paragraph above. You would have heard part (3) in a much smaller meeting, including you, me, your manager, your HRBP, and someone from legal. And it would have ended with you being escorted from the building by security and told that your personal items will be mailed to you. And the fact that you think this was “all in the name of open discussion,” and don’t realize any of these deeper consequences, makes this worse, not better."

...

This kind of gets to the entire point here.. @TyGuy

 

[The Oi]

I read the whole thing. Completely disagree with you gourimoko.

As in, it's as if I read an entirely different document.

 

[gourimoko]

I read the whole thing. Completely disagree with you gourimoko.

As in, it's as if I read an entirely different document.

Why/how?

Also, did you just read my last post?

What this guy wrote would and should get anyone fired... period.

 

[The Oi]

Why/how?

Also, did you just read my last post?

I think what he described about women's personalities was accurate. I think he's likely right to say that he works in an environment where conservative viewpoints are suppressed and must be hidden.

 

[gourimoko]

I think what he described about women's personalities was accurate.

1) Based on what?
2) Why/how are women's personalities remotely relevant to diversity programs at Google or their ability to do their jobs at Google or in IS?

I think he's likely right to say that he works in an environment where conservative viewpoints are suppressed and must be hidden.

He's not likely right, that's false, there are many conservative IT/IS personnel in Silicon Valley and California and across the country.

And although they don't make up a large segment of the population (my guess would be less than 1-in-5 in IS, and maybe less than 1-3 in IT), that doesn't mean they are shunned.

If, however, you mean alt-right or MRA views would be shunned at Google; then yes, that'd probably be right, just like those views would be shunned at most large corporations.

And so what?

You realize I do not talk politics with my clients, right? I specifically avoid such conversations even though I'm one of the most political people you'll ever meet.

Google, i.e., your fucking job, is not where you should be platforming your pet theories on women's biological inferiority as it relates to their jobs. Anyone and everyone should know this... But for some reason, this common sense aspect of "political correctness" is wrong .. simply because it's "politically correct."

 

[TyGuy]

Why/how?

Also, did you just read my last post?

What this guy wrote would and should get anyone fired... period.

He read it himself instead of being spoon fed a filtered version from somebody else. This isn't something that should get anybody fired; let alone everybody that dares to have an open fair dialogue. Nobody is arguing that free speech should protect you at the work place. And nobody is arguing that he shouldn't have been fired has suggested this.

He wanted to discuss the biological differences between men and women, he even cited this data. He recognized that not all women meet that criteria, but he wanted to take an average to create a better working environment for women that fit that criteria.

 

[gourimoko]

He read it himself instead of being spoon fed a filtered version from somebody else.

Who is "he?"

This isn't something that should get anybody fired; let alone everybody that dares to have an open fair dialogue.

Dude.. where do you work where you could do something like this?

How is it that you do not understand that your workplace is not the platform to use for this kind of conversation?

You cannot just hijack Google's brand and attempt to wage some political campaign against their company policies and expect to keep your job.

Nobody is arguing that free speech should protect you at the work place. And nobody is arguing that he shouldn't have been fired has suggested this.

How on Earth are you not suggesting this if you're saying Google shouldn't have fired him? What he did was wholly inappropriate and created a firestorm at and around the company.

It's ridiculous to think that someone should be able to disrupt the entire Google campus and continue on with their development, in their teams, as though nothing has happened.

He wanted to discuss the biological differences between men and women, he even cited this data.

1) He cited a few cherry-picked sources, some of which were not reputable let alone demonstrative of his point.

2) Google is not the place for this kind of discussion.

He recognized that not all women meet that criteria,

How thoughtful of him..

but he wanted to take an average to create a better working environment for women that fit that criteria.

Right... it's just.. you know.. the average of all women that meet this criteria.. (looks out on campus of hundreds of female Google employees).

 

[David.]

I'm surprised the guy attached his name. He had to have known this would happen.

Not saying it wasn't calculated, it had to have been.

 

[TyGuy]

Who is "he?"



Dude.. where do you work where you could do something like this?

How is it that you do not understand that your workplace is not the platform to use for this kind of conversation?

You cannot just hijack Google's brand and attempt to wage some political campaign against their company policies and expect to keep your job.



How on Earth are you not suggesting this if you're saying Google shouldn't have fired him? What he did was wholly inappropriate and created a firestorm at and around the company.

It's ridiculous to think that someone should be able to disrupt the entire Google campus and continue on with their development, in their teams, as though nothing has happened.



1) He cited a few cherry-picked sources, some of which were not reputable let alone demonstrative of his point.

2) Google is not the place for this kind of discussion.





How thoughtful of him..





Right... it's just.. you know.. the average of all women that meet this criteria.. (looks out on campus of hundreds of female Google employees).

'He' quite obviously means @The Oi . It was a response to your response to him. I'm pretty sure you knew that though, but yes, multi-quote for the win.

Also, why isn't his job the place to discuss issues he has with his job?

 

[gourimoko]

I'm surprised the guy attached his name. He had to have known this would happen.

Not saying it wasn't calculated, it had to have been.

Of course...