Right. The whole “diversity for diversity’s sake” assumption. Do I still need to call out that this is problematic, obscures what is a well-documented real problem (gender bias), and reduces women’s substantial contributions to nil?
Here’s your point by point refutation of the google memo.
J. Doe
1.7K113

While I agree, and do think that his argument boils down to a classic anti-affirmative-action case, do you think this might actually imply that Google ought to be better at making the reasons behind it more transparent and open to discussion? Then this might be something that is settled in an orientation session, where questioning is not “shamed” as he claims, rather than involving such a public soap opera? I think there may be more to be glimpsed from the fact that someone would still say this, beyond the explicit meaning alone.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.