google employee's internal diversity memo goes viral

I remember reading this link a while back.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/

Pretty interesting article, i was reminded of that article when i saw a poor bloke on FB get shot to flames when he suggested that women in general might not be interested in STEM subjects compared to guys. Look at Norway for example, considered one of the most equal and fair societies in the world, around 2005, they tried to push an agenda for women to go to university and do STEM subjects, 10 years on, no change at all, women still outnumber men in terms of university undergraduates, 2 to 1. The subjects they study though, women tend to lean to social degrees where as men tend to lean to more STEM based subjects and they're still the same ratio's basically as in 2005..
 
Trusty said:
I remember reading this link a while back.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/

Pretty interesting article, i was reminded of that article when i saw a poor bloke on FB get shot to flames when he suggested that women in general might not be interested in STEM subjects compared to guys. Look at Norway for example, considered one of the most equal and fair societies in the world, around 2005, they tried to push an agenda for women to go to university and do STEM subjects, 10 years on, no change at all, women still outnumber men in terms of university undergraduates, 2 to 1. The subjects they study though, women tend to lean to social degrees where as men tend to lean to more STEM based subjects.
Click to expand...

So the "diversity" and "equality" people in Norway have a massive concerted push to get more men into university, right? Grants for men only, men accepted with lower scores than women for the same courses at the same university, all the usual stuff? 2 to 1 is a rather large difference. Surely "diversity" and "equality" advocates would be passionately all over that problem.
 
Angilion said:
So the "diversity" and "equality" people in Norway have a massive concerted push to get more men into university, right? Grants for men only, men accepted with lower scores than women for the same courses at the same university, all the usual stuff? 2 to 1 is a rather large difference. Surely "diversity" and "equality" advocates would be passionately all over that problem.
Click to expand...

You would think they would be all over the problem, i don't see anything though. It's a weird time we're living in, very weird. Interesting documentary on iplayer about Silicon Valley, well worth a watch.
 
Good. He thinks men are better coders and leaders due to biological differences which makes an idiot. Any reasonably intelligent person can code or lead, the idea that either activity requires a penis to achieve excellence is ridiculous.
 
Angilion said:
Which nobody is arguing for. A representative sample of society would result in almost everyone being unqualified for the job since almost everyone is unqualified for any particular job. For example, in the UK only about 3 in 1000 people are qualified doctors. If you wanted true diversity, then only 3 in 1000 people working as doctors could be qualified as doctors in order for those jobs to be filled by a representative sample of society. Also, a very large proportion of doctors would be children for the same reason.

What some people are arguing is that a few biological characteristics (usually sex and "race") are of such extreme importance that they define everyone, so a representative section of society must be measured by those characteristics alone. It's NewSpeak - what they call "diversity" is biological group identity, which is in key ways the opposite of real diversity. That's the least prejudiced view amongst advocates of "diversity". Many of them are just rationalising their own irrational prejudices against people with what they regard as the wrong biological traits. Racists using "diversity" to rationalise anti-"white" racism. Sexists using "diversity" to rationalise anti-male sexism. Sexual orientation, gender and sex changes are being brought into that as well.

I want real and relevant diversity. So, for example, in parliament I want people with diverse political views. In medicine I want people with diverse specialised medical knowledge and generalists. That sort of thing. What I don't want is the idea that all that matters is a person's sex, "race", sexual orientation or whatever is fashionable in any given time or place and that prejudice and discrimination on that basis is a good thing and that's what is usually meant by "diversity" nowadays. "Diversity" will almost always stifle diversity of opinion (as this incident shows), which is probably the most important diversity.

In short, "diversity" is bad for diversity. Or perhaps I should say that "diversity" is doubleplus ungood for diversity.

EDIT: There is a case for suspicious correlation. All things being equal and with a large enough sample size, the proportions of various types of irrelevant biological characteristics in a group of people should usually roughly mirror the proportions in society in general. When they don't, that's a suspicious correlation that warrants investigation. But it isn't a valid excuse for irrational prejudice and discrimination and it isn't a valid excuse for suppressing diversity of opinion and it isn't anything to do with real and relevant diversity.
Click to expand...

Except that's not what was meant at all. It's nothing to do with hiring one of the 997 people that aren't doctors, rather having a representative selection of society* being qualified to be doctors. There's no reason the majority of doctors should be white men, the majority of nurses women or the majority of engineers white males either. These are largely hangers on from history, as we see from the increased uptake of women in engineering after a push to get girls interested in it from a young age.

Increase the number of qualified engineers that aren't white males and you get a knock on effect of more a more representative section of society qualified and working in those roles.

I don't disagree with you regarding that sex and race shouldn't be important, yet it quite clearly is, otherwise there wouldn't be such a racial and sex divide within many industries. That needs to change, and it's a change best started from a young age, not with "positive discrimination" in the interview room.

*in this instance it meaning a relatively similar makeup to the sex and ethnicity of the country as a whole, as this thread is about sex and ethnic diversity...
 
Angilion said:
So the "diversity" and "equality" people in Norway have a massive concerted push to get more men into university, right? Grants for men only, men accepted with lower scores than women for the same courses at the same university, all the usual stuff? 2 to 1 is a rather large difference. Surely "diversity" and "equality" advocates would be passionately all over that problem.
Click to expand...

It's normal for women to significantly outnumber men in universities because most women can't compete with men in fields that require intense physical activity due to biological differences.
 
VincentHanna said:
What "fields" would they be Zethor, that require such physical activity that men flock to them?
Click to expand...

Construction and many others. I didn't say men flock to them but if a significant part of the job market is inaccessible to women, it's natural for them to focus on different parts of the market, such as jobs which require degrees.
 
MissChief said:
True, TRUE Diversity is hiring the best person for the job, be that Male, Female or whatever gender identity someone decides to be on any given day.
Click to expand...

If you actually hire the best person for the job though, this should lead to representative diversity though, right?
 
On the other hand many interviews are carried out in such a way they don't even assess which candidate would be the best person for the job, either through poor interviewers, poor interviewing processes or just the simple fact you can't gauge how well someone will do for the role in such a short amount of time with them. Obviously any competent company usually has multiple stages where various levels of your ability is tested but there's still many places that don't do that.
 
Last edited:
I've just been reading about the blacklists, essentially the far left SJW employees are blacklisting anyone who says anything they find offensive and then refusing to work with them. What happened to the liberal concept of tolerance?
 
Angilion said:
I want real and relevant diversity. So, for example, in parliament I want people with diverse political views.
Click to expand...

To have true diversity you need to have people with a diverse range of life experiences. How is that realistically possible without diversity in gender, race, class, age, etc?
 
Mr Jack said:
If you actually hire the best person for the job though, this should lead to representative diversity though, right?
Click to expand...

No. Some groups will naturally be more attracted to certain jobs. Genders are fundamentally different. Men and women are wired differently both mentally and physically as consequences if evolution. It's a fact that can't be changed. Yes there's cross over and wide variation but still fundamental differences. This may mean for example that more women than men want to be gardeners or more men want to be lorry drivers so certain roles will not be representative of the population as a whole.
 
Tunney said:
To have true diversity you need to have people with a diverse range of life experiences. How is that realistically possible without diversity in gender, race, class, age, etc?
Click to expand...

Two people of the same sex, race, class and age can have very different positions and views on the same issue. You don't need that sort of "diversity" to have diverse views.

Anyway, Google have gone down in my estimation significantly as a result of this. I for one will be looking at alternatives to the Google family of products.
 
Ha! Never mind their tax dodging - They sack one alt-right person and you are done with them.

You know he's alt-right when a just-giving page setup by other alt-right people for legal costs is setup in his name...
 
As part of my job I'm required to take additional training. One of the big up and coming things will be ventilation, especially with regards to recent events.

My company therefore sent me on a training course in Harrogate that was hosted by Enviro-Vent in conjunction with Vent-Axia, two of the biggest companies in ventilation.

During the course they took us on a tour of the facility and showed us around the assembly line. When it came to the construction of some very intricate parts involved with the circuitry of whole house ventilation systems they exclusively employed women in those roles. This was simply because they were more capable at handling the tiny finicky parts due to having smaller hands.

Nobody complained about this, it made perfect sense. A company was using the BEST person for the job and at that particular job the women were better.

There were plenty other women involved in the CAD area as well. They were responsible for calculating the size of ducting runs and air flow through the entire property.

This is the reason why the company is so successful. Diversity quotas in the workplace doesn't come into it. The women were simply more efficient when it came to wiring the intricate circuit boards so they got the jobs. When it came to other aspects, particularly installation of large ventilation units, they obviously employed men in those roles.

A person's competence is not defined by their sex or their race. It's determined solely by their intelligence, their drive and commitment.

Where a company is completely agnostic over these things you will see a truly diverse workplace that is hugely successful. Where a company tries to force these issues you will see that long term these companies will struggle.
 
Zethor said:
Good. He thinks men are better coders and leaders due to biological differences which makes an idiot. Any reasonably intelligent person can code or lead, the idea that either activity requires a penis to achieve excellence is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said at all. Did you even read the memo?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom