Having diversity goals/quotas isn't equal opportunity (see medical admissions being way more strict on Asians than blacks). Plus, as the original doc points out

Having diversity goals/quotas isn't equal opportunity (see medical admissions being way more strict on Asians than blacks). Plus, as the original doc points out, it's one sided. Underrepresentation of whites/males is fine. No one says hey, there's too many minorities. Just like no one cares that police almost exclusively kill men, with only a handful of women. Why do they aim for a 50/50 gender balance? What if women are actually better in some roles, and it should be 40/60? Why can't this even be questioned? The funny thing is, I dunno if I believe the original doc author, but I find the response so abhorrent I end up against it. Google's response should have been "good but flawed questions. Here are studies, here's how we're going about determining diversity's impact etc". Instead we get people who are gonna quit if he isn't fired, think he should be escorted off premise immediately, write pages misconstruing what was written, and are physically "shaking" at the thought someone might question their beliefs. It sucks because there are systemic issues, and the current diversity nonsense does nothing about it and won't even try to make it's main case. I'm hoping some groups will publish serious research on the issue. (Rust has a huge diversity push, iirc. They should also run some non diverse programs then compare results.)