For years, unemployed cultural revolutionaries with access to Twitter and corporate CEOs have wracked their brains trying to understand why women are underrepresented in certain male-dominated industries.
One of those industries is tech, making waves this week after a Google employee was fired for posting his theory on why such underrepresentation may be taking place.
He begins his memo by first acceding that sexism exists and some fields struggle with gender pay gaps. He says Google is aware of the issue, but they can’t approach it squarely enough to fix it because they’re so politically biased and overtaken by emotion. Their attempt to “fix” the injustice is by forcing unnatural egalitarianism:
“At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story.
On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:
-They’re universal across human cultures
-They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
-Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
-The underlying traits are highly heritable
-They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective”
This is a pretty reasonable truth. Men and women are different. As a result of our biology, we inherit disparate traits and therefore have differing strengths. That doesn’t mean one gender is lesser. But that’s where Google makes it murky.
Men tend to have a greater drive for status and competition, whereas women are better interpersonally. Men often enjoy coding and systematic computation while women largely prefer aesthetic creativity and socialization.
Google, with its large market cap and inflated corporate ego, blithely rejects millions of years of biology wants to “socially engineer” nature. The employee says in part about their diversity initiatives:
“are based on false assumptions generated by our biases and can actually increase race and gender tensions. We’re told by senior leadership that what we’re doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology that can irreparably harm Google.”
There’s a danger to this. Google diligently stocks its office with physically diverse individuals, which can in turn hurt the company. A less qualified Latino woman may get the job over a highly qualified white male simply because she is disparate from the tech “norm.”
Furthermore, such fabricated diversity oppresses the “norm:”
“Nearly every difference between men and women is interpreted as a form of women’s oppression. As with many things in life, gender differences are often a case of “grass being greener on the other side”; unfortunately, taxpayer and Google money is spent to water only one side of the lawn.”
How has it come to this? Is Google so hellbent on diversity that it’s willing to oppress another group in the process?
And since it’s 2017 and we can’t have a discussion without bringing up politics and the scourge of conservatism, here it comes:
“Stop alienating conservatives.
-Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently.
-In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility. We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves.
-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.”
Bingo. This, above all else, is what got the employee fired. If he’d stuck to biology and gender differences, he probably would have been asked to take an extended vacation. But the moment he stood up for conservatives, he was toast.
And herein lies the issue. Group-think adherent hives like Google only tolerate a narrow definition of the word diversity. It’s not about open debate or even progress. Such liberty is far too threatening to their public relations push to appease that loud and perennially offended minority that found its genesis on college campuses.
“Diversity” at Google is a fabricated, socially engineered, egalitarian demagoguery. All races, genders, and sexualities are welcome so long as they subscribe to cultural groupthink. Politically diverse individuals are thus ostracized and blacklisted.
When is a company going to stand up for their right-to-work?