An unnamed senior employee at Google has caused a firestorm after writing a factual and realistic memo about diversity which first went viral throughout the company before being published publicly.
The 10-page long memo, titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” discussed the how men and women tend to have different traits which often means they can excel in different careers. The currently unnamed author argued that by focusing on making sure the company is diverse, instead of finding the best talent no matter the person’s age or gender, that they are forced to lower expectations.
“Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business,” the author wrote.
Despite the left’s outcry and immediate jump to screeching about sexism, the author of the report actually offered constructive ideas and ways to achieve diversity by acknowledging that there are differences between men and women.
He noted that women often have a stronger interest in people rather than things, compared to men, which makes the tech industry less appealing to the ladies, generally speaking.
“These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics,” the memo states.
The memo explains that by acknowledging this difference, the company could find better ways to achieve diversity in tech, such as by offering part-time jobs that may be more appealing to women who wish to have a work-life balance. Another idea he had was to make software engineering more people-oriented by using pair programming and supporting more collaboration.
The author also pointed out that women are often more agreeable, and therefore have trouble negotiating salaries or asking for raises, which is part of the real reason there may be differences in pay for men and women within the company. He added that “there’s overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women’s issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support.”
“I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism),” the author wrote.
Additionally, the thoughtful memo asserts that diversity of opinions and political ideologies are far more important than diversity of races and genders. He explained why it is important to have conservative voices at the company, who aren’t shamed into silence.
“Alienating conservatives is both non-inclusive and generally bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company,” he wrote.
Instead of arguing using facts, logic, or reason, many women within the Google team immediately took to social media to scream about the “sexism.” Their hysterics, and threats to quit over their feelings being hurt by facts, ironically further made his point.
This is the unpaid labour I deal every day after work as being paid probably less in the end due to systematic bullshit.
— Jaana B. Dogan (@rakyll) August 4, 2017
Even worse, Danielle Brown, Google’s new VP of diversity, integrity and governance, wrote an email to all employees condemning the facts contained within the memo. She asserted that the author’s opinions and presentation of facts is “not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”
“Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, ‘Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said,’” Brown wrote.
When will the left learn that feelings will never outweigh facts?
Bypass Tech Censorship!
Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!
President Trump Rejects Paying For Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Private Security
The royal celebrities will foot the bill.
President Trump made it clear on a Sunday tweet that British royals Prince Harry and Meghan Markle would have to pay for their own security costs upon moving full-time to the United States, clarifying that they wouldn’t receive federal security under an existing arrangement that covers British royals temporarily visiting the US.
I am a great friend and admirer of the Queen & the United Kingdom. It was reported that Harry and Meghan, who left the Kingdom, would reside permanently in Canada. Now they have left Canada for the U.S. however, the U.S. will not pay for their security protection. They must pay!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 29, 2020
The royal celebrities have distanced themselves from the Queen, apparently viewing themselves as victims of relentless paparazzi and media attention.
Harry and Markle initially moved to Canada after resigning from the royal family, but they’ve recently moved to Hollywood just before the Canadian border was closed to nonessential travel due to the Chinese coronavirus epidemic. The elitist couple apparently plans on reinventing themselves as American-style celebrities, and have hired a small army of media consultants and public relations agents to market their image.
When information of their move to Los Angeles became public knowledge, many began to speculate if they’d recieve taxpayer-funded security in a manner akin to British royals visiting the United States on official state vists. President Trump’s Sunday tweet appears to eliminate that possibility.
The thirteen colonies that became the United States rebelled against the yoke of the British monarchy for a reason. President Trump’s decision to cut off the wannabee celebrities from publicly-funded security is a deeply American decision. The UK’s monarchy is one of the wealthiest legacy institutions in the western world, and it would be absurd to imagine that it can’t afford to hire private security for the ‘former’ royals, who are set to fully renounce their royal obligations at the end of the month.
Trending on BLP
Big League Wellness3 days ago
POLL: 95% of Americans Support Coronavirus Travel Bans, Trump Approval Highest in Three Years
Tech2 days ago
National Center For Sexual Exploitation: Snapchat and Teen Vogue are Telling Kids to Make Child Porn!
News3 days ago
America First Patriot Kris Kobach Believes Democrats are Using the Wuhan Virus Crisis to Push Socialism
News4 days ago
Georgia State Rep. Wants to Suspend Enforcement of Concealed Carry Laws During Chinese Virus Crisis
Campaign 20204 days ago
Joe Rogan Takes Joe Biden To Task: “Trump Will Eat Him Alive”
Big League Wellness3 days ago
FLASHBACK: NYC Health Commissioner Said Coronavirus Risk Was “Low” Last Month
States3 days ago
California Lets Convicted Murderers of Children and Pregnant Woman Out of Jail Amidst Coronavirus Panic
Big League Wellness2 days ago
Pharma Insider: ‘First Data From Clinical Studies’ Indicates ‘Hydroxychloroquine Kills the Coronavirus’