5 ms·

How is this the top rated comment? It swats down the post based on points that the post has already addressed: > Why do we place the blame and assign malice of

How is this the top rated comment? It swats down the post based on points that the post has already addressed: > Why do we place the blame and assign malice of intent to those who have little control over the constraints? The post suggests searching and hiring outside of the traditional pipeline, which is something that is within control. The comment is then topped off with a strawman argument: > If we put actual performance metrics and pay on the line for achieving these physically unattainable goals, everyone would be fired. 50% is clearly a goal that is a long way away but it doesn't mean we cannot work towards it. Yes, it's probably unrealistic to expect anyone to bring 50% representation to a significant sized workforce within an average tenure. It doesn't mean that the pursuit of gender parity is delusional or that meaningful and achievable targets cannot be set. If anything this top comment is a prime example of the prevailing biased and unwilling attutide to improve representation in the industry, that has been placed on a pedestal.

adamsb6 7y ago
The alternative sources in the post still aren’t at gender parity, though they do show a higher percentage of women. If you can hire equal amounts of men and women from those sources then you’ll move your metric up, but you won’t get to 50%. To hit 50% when the hiring pool is less than 50% women would require women to get accepted at a higher rate than men.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ramblerman 7y ago
The article is based on how we have failed to achieve 50/50 parity and why that is bad. You yourself have reiterated it as a good goal to chase. But is it? That is what OP is objecting to. Do you believe if the world was completely fair we would have 50/50 in every industry or is there (shock and horror) perhaps an uncomfortable biological difference driving our interests.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
thu2111 7y ago
How is this the top rated comment? Because it spells out a view that the majority agrees with. The post suggests searching and hiring outside of the traditional pipeline It suggests the only way to hire more women is to discriminate against the best credentialed candidates. It doesn't mean that the pursuit of gender parity is delusional Lots of us believe it's actually, truly delusional. How long have women been encouraged to go into engineering? Decades. My entire life. The numbers studying it don't shift. Diversity initiatives have long ago passed the King Canute stage and turned into full blown reality denial based on a big pile of nasty conspiracy theories about men. Aline Lerner is one of the better "women in tech" out there but even she goes there: hostile university culture in male-dominated CS programs, biased hiring practices, and ultimately non-inclusive work environments that force women and people of color to leave tech Ugh. Women would prefer teaching children to software? It must be that men are hostile, biased and "force" women to leave! What about the fact that most childcare workers are women? Is it due to rampant bias, hostility and discrimination by women that "force" men to leave? Where are the hundreds of millions spent on fixing that? At least with teaching there's some slightly plausible argument about why gender diversity might be useful, whereas in engineering there is none. These beliefs are insulting, demeaning, condescending and ultimately false. The vast, vast majority of men I've encountered in the tech world bend over backwards to give women anything they want if they even so much as express an interest in tech. Sometimes they push them to the front even if they don't. The idea that women's lack of interest in tech is all the nasty male's fault is absurd and is the inverse of the reality: namely, women routinely campaign hard to exclude men from opportunities. All in the name of "equality".
- commandlinefan 7y ago
  > My entire life. Mine, too, and I'm in my 40's now.
- quineoa 7y ago
  Except every single one of the dozen+ female engineers I personally at FAANGM+ has a first-hand account of something vile that a male collegue did. In one case an internship mentor asked someone to come to their house, stating the wife and kids aren't home at night. Maybe you're a great man, and you only know other great men . But you can't dismiss a whole group just because you don't experience what they do. Just because it's not happening to you, doesn't mean it's not happening. Similar situation is when my non-minority friends are surprised that racism still exists in <area>. "I know racism exits, but that kind of thing cannot happen <here>!" Well, my friend, you wouldn't feel that way if you looked like me.
supernova87a 7y ago
You sound like a shining example of someone who believes that representation in a selected-for-some-attribute population should match the general population. That is a fallacy from the beginning, and I would encourage you to carefully justify to yourself why you believe that to be true. And this also just illustrates how difficult it is to debate on similar ground with a random person in a well-defined scope on these kinds of issues. I speak concretely of the things companies are able to achieve within the constraints and resources they're given. You speak of hopes and dreams. But more importantly (and worse), I think you seek to turn your hopes and dreams into unworkable policies that penalize people for not achieving your hopes and dreams.

adamsb6 7y ago

The alternative sources in the post still aren’t at gender parity, though they do show a higher percentage of women. If you can hire equal amounts of men and women from those sources then you’ll move your metric up, but you won’t get to 50%. To hit 50% when the hiring pool is less than 50% women would require women to get accepted at a higher rate than men.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ramblerman 7y ago

The article is based on how we have failed to achieve 50/50 parity and why that is bad. You yourself have reiterated it as a good goal to chase. But is it? That is what OP is objecting to. Do you believe if the world was completely fair we would have 50/50 in every industry or is there (shock and horror) perhaps an uncomfortable biological difference driving our interests.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

thu2111 7y ago

How is this the top rated comment? Because it spells out a view that the majority agrees with. The post suggests searching and hiring outside of the traditional pipeline It suggests the only way to hire more women is to discriminate against the best credentialed candidates. It doesn't mean that the pursuit of gender parity is delusional Lots of us believe it's actually, truly delusional. How long have women been encouraged to go into engineering? Decades. My entire life. The numbers studying it don't shift. Diversity initiatives have long ago passed the King Canute stage and turned into full blown reality denial based on a big pile of nasty conspiracy theories about men. Aline Lerner is one of the better "women in tech" out there but even she goes there: hostile university culture in male-dominated CS programs, biased hiring practices, and ultimately non-inclusive work environments that force women and people of color to leave tech Ugh. Women would prefer teaching children to software? It must be that men are hostile, biased and "force" women to leave! What about the fact that most childcare workers are women? Is it due to rampant bias, hostility and discrimination by women that "force" men to leave? Where are the hundreds of millions spent on fixing that? At least with teaching there's some slightly plausible argument about why gender diversity might be useful, whereas in engineering there is none. These beliefs are insulting, demeaning, condescending and ultimately false. The vast, vast majority of men I've encountered in the tech world bend over backwards to give women anything they want if they even so much as express an interest in tech. Sometimes they push them to the front even if they don't. The idea that women's lack of interest in tech is all the nasty male's fault is absurd and is the inverse of the reality: namely, women routinely campaign hard to exclude men from opportunities. All in the name of "equality".

commandlinefan 7y ago
> My entire life. Mine, too, and I'm in my 40's now.
quineoa 7y ago
Except every single one of the dozen+ female engineers I personally at FAANGM+ has a first-hand account of something vile that a male collegue did. In one case an internship mentor asked someone to come to their house, stating the wife and kids aren't home at night. Maybe you're a great man, and you only know other great men . But you can't dismiss a whole group just because you don't experience what they do. Just because it's not happening to you, doesn't mean it's not happening. Similar situation is when my non-minority friends are surprised that racism still exists in <area>. "I know racism exits, but that kind of thing cannot happen <here>!" Well, my friend, you wouldn't feel that way if you looked like me.

supernova87a 7y ago

You sound like a shining example of someone who believes that representation in a selected-for-some-attribute population should match the general population. That is a fallacy from the beginning, and I would encourage you to carefully justify to yourself why you believe that to be true. And this also just illustrates how difficult it is to debate on similar ground with a random person in a well-defined scope on these kinds of issues. I speak concretely of the things companies are able to achieve within the constraints and resources they're given. You speak of hopes and dreams. But more importantly (and worse), I think you seek to turn your hopes and dreams into unworkable policies that penalize people for not achieving your hopes and dreams.