The Big Lie of the Google Employee’s Anti-Diversity Manifesto: Biology is why Women… You too Google? Sigh!
He did get fired though. From what I read not everything he says can be summarily dismissed. He does make some valid points, not about the inherent traits of women, but about not treating men and women as tribes with homogeneous traits across the entire demographic. His point about focusing on individual capabilities and not forcing diversity for the sake of it makes sense to me. All he was trying to say was that men are more prepared to take up high stress positions in tech because society puts a premium on a man's status and income. The same pressure does not apply to women so they are less inclined to put up with those demands. That is why women are underrepresented in executive positions. He even suggests how Google could make those positions more attractive to women. Of course, he drew some stupid and unsupported conclusions about women -- increased neuroticism, high anxiety, less stress tolerance -- from the literature he cited. I don't agree with everything he said but I don't think he should have been fired. We shouldn't be in the business of suppressing opinions just because we don't agree with them. The media grossly misrepresented his point of view.
But @Gauri03 that is inherently the problem. One of the reasons we have a corporate culture that we have today is because of an overabundance of testosterone in every meeting Director level and up. Only women/men with specific trait of putting work before everything else in their lives 'succeed' (whatever that means ). That kind of passion/drive comes at a price often paid by those close to them. There is a cold hearted ruthlessness I see as a common characteristic in most execs. That is "a" way to run a successful company..not the only way. Almost like genetic engineering we are pruning all traits that we consider 'weak'. And the sigh was mostly for this. Google accused of 'extreme' gender pay discrimination by US labor department . I am not so sure. I haven't read the whole memo. I need to know more. Some opinions are dangerous enough that they need to be shot down immediately and as a company u need to send the message across strongly. It is one thing to argue in the lunch room or at a bar with ur friends from work..its another to use the company resources and play divisive. Tolerating that would open a whole diff can of worms.
I was following it casually over the weekend, didn't think it would become this big and CEO cuts short vacation level. I totally agree with the above. I read the 10 page "manifesto" and its contents don't need the employee to be fired. The "violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace " reason given by Google is very disturbing. Maybe we need to know more about the context in which the employee used company time (?) and resources to write/circulate the memo, but, given what I have read, it seems Google fired him to show sufficient "action" and for PR reasons. ============== Actual research, study or even discussion around the differences between men and women (genetic, brain, social..) needs so much tact and keeping so many easily hurt feelings/groups in mind, that it might be well nigh impossible to actually research these in an uninfluenced manner. I doubt any person or department with their own future to think about will devote time or money to such research. That memo had many interesting points. Equal opportunity is often mistaken for equal representation.
That is the scary part. Many don't read the whole memo and go by the easier path of joining the comforting collective outrage.
Are store credit cards worth it? The last time I had one was 8-9 years ago. I was reading that these can bring down your credit score due to high utilization if you spend close to the credit limit (even if you pay it off every month). Other than the one time inquiry hit when you apply, and the hassle of carrying them to the store if shopping locally, what are the pros and cons?
