This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Google fire man who claims that women are underrepresented because they are biologically different, not because of bias....

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
Ok, there's a bit more to it than is in the headlines, but you can see the full "anti-diversity manifesto" here. It's quite a read!


My personal reading is this was written by someone well-meaning but extremely mis-led and confused about why tech companies need to address diversity. It's also full of conjecture and is unnecessarily divisive (constant references to "left" and "right").


Were they right to fire him? Or was he perfectly entitled to publish his thoughts, regardless of whether or not we (or his employer) like it? Any other thoughts on the manifesto? Was there a fair point buried somewhere in the ranting?




Parents
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Thanks Stephen. That's an interesting, albeit cynical commentary on the state of society. Attempting to extrapolate some relevance to the point about the author of the manifesto, I'm not sure whether you're agreeing on the basis that it's wrong to attempt to address the issue, or disagreeing because you think there's no point.


    On a side note, my perception of the work place is quite different to yours. Speaking as a recruiting manager and as someone who leads a team of one man and 10 women, I don't value anybody any more or any less based on their gender and how likely they are to be off sick or on maternity leave. There is huge value in retaining good staff, regardless of their gender, and a few extra sick days (if there's even any truth in that) and/or X amount of time on maternity leave is a small price to pay for loyal and engaged staff. I think the extreme end of capitalism that you describe misses the bigger picture.


    It's also a bit ridiculous to suggest that men are jumping on the band wagon without engaging their brains. It is illegal to pay women either more or less than a man for equal work, but the point is normally around whether women (or any other disadvantaged group) have opportunity to get that equal work to begin with.
Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Thanks Stephen. That's an interesting, albeit cynical commentary on the state of society. Attempting to extrapolate some relevance to the point about the author of the manifesto, I'm not sure whether you're agreeing on the basis that it's wrong to attempt to address the issue, or disagreeing because you think there's no point.


    On a side note, my perception of the work place is quite different to yours. Speaking as a recruiting manager and as someone who leads a team of one man and 10 women, I don't value anybody any more or any less based on their gender and how likely they are to be off sick or on maternity leave. There is huge value in retaining good staff, regardless of their gender, and a few extra sick days (if there's even any truth in that) and/or X amount of time on maternity leave is a small price to pay for loyal and engaged staff. I think the extreme end of capitalism that you describe misses the bigger picture.


    It's also a bit ridiculous to suggest that men are jumping on the band wagon without engaging their brains. It is illegal to pay women either more or less than a man for equal work, but the point is normally around whether women (or any other disadvantaged group) have opportunity to get that equal work to begin with.
Children
No Data