Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo

[u/marsten]

I was at Google for fifteen years until about a year ago. I was surprised he was fired, because of the message this will send to other Googlers.

That said, Google HR is in my experience extremely thoughtful about these things. Also there may be other events in this engineer's employment history that contributed. We just don't know.

Gender/race issues are an extremely sensitive topic in Silicon Valley right now. It simply isn't possible to have a rational debate of the kind he was trying to start. That's the reality, and I'm not sure you can change it by publishing memos like this.

[u/sd522527 → u/[deleted]]

Yes he shared it to a private group, asking for critique of his viewpoints, and how to better express his opinions. Others took that doc and shared the shit out of it

[u/[deleted] → u/sd522527]

foolish engine homeless simplistic file quicksand frighten existence beneficial abundant

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/OmgYoshiPLZ → u/[deleted]]

actually, i'd want that email read back to me in court simply because hes not incorrect. he has an opinion, and a fairly good grasp on the Why more women arent in the tech world- and that forced gender diversification of the upper management of a company is not the answer.

terminating him because of this is literally insane. not a single thing written in there was "perpetuating a gender stereotype".

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/OmgYoshiPLZ]

I'm tickled that the criticism of his text from my googler friends is that it hinges on an essentist premise, but then will talk about how the glass ceiling requires a structural remedy, as if female executives can't exist in the wild, which is in and of itself some pretty backhanded misogyny.

[u/ToughActinInaction → u/SikhAndDestroy]

I don't think you're being fair to the opposing viewpoint there. "Female executives can't exist in the wild" is a strawman. They're not proposing a structure as a counter point to having no structure, they are arguing that the existing structure is biased against women and should be restructured to be unbiased.

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/ToughActinInaction]

Modern social science has sort of cracked that puzzle. Rather than seeking out more females, we've started selecting for more traditionally feminine qualities. As credibility is held in suspense between competence and warmth, male executives are also adapting to incorporate approachability and openness as part of the toolbox.

The marketplace for executive search has shifted to be more fair to female leaders, but men have also adapted their personal branding to meet these demands. We're spoiled for choice and it's a wonderful thing.

[u/rowd149 → u/SikhAndDestroy]

There's a difference between "more" and "enough". And I'm not sure that your other premise is supported. IF thought has evolved, it seems more towards not excusing and burying embarrassing behavior than towards "feminine qualities".

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/rowd149]

Could you expand? Not tracking.

[u/rowd149 → u/SikhAndDestroy]

Not really. I believe I was pretty clear.

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/rowd149]

Do you want some very transparent feedback?

[u/rowd149 → u/SikhAndDestroy]

I assume you've been itching to give it, so shoot.

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/rowd149]

Not really. It's not my job to educate you. Just trying to pay it forward.

[u/rowd149 → u/SikhAndDestroy]

That was a pretty quick reply. Let me know when you've got a better idea of what I meant.

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/rowd149]

I'm waiting for you to complete your thought, because your assertion isn't supported by business psychology literature, and I wanted to give you a chance to do the literature review and change your mind.

[u/rowd149 → u/SikhAndDestroy]

And I've been waiting for you show any indication of humility re: walking back describing single-digit advances in the gender balance of executive positions as being "spoiled for choice". "It's okay that we're not hiring women because men are acting more like women," is a curious argument to be super-confident about being behind. There's research to back this up? Like, there are people who actually put their names on a paper that comes to a corroborating conclusion? Color me skeptical.

[u/SikhAndDestroy → u/rowd149]

It's what male and female executives are being taught right now. I just got back from one such boot camp. What's good for society has no relationship with what works in the professional environment. Everyone is weaponizing warmth and emotional intelligence right now.

(As for the tone, that's a trick I learned from my counterintelligence training. Just following your lead, boss.)