Related Posts
Hi fishes,
Any guess how many people are laid off from Publicis sapient in past few days? Really scared for my future as I'm also under probation period and deeply regret for my choice of joining this firm...I don't understand why were they recruiting peeps when they were short of projects. Publicis Sapient
Community Builder
Layoff in IQVIA?
@iqvia
More Posts
Conversation Starter
Subject Expert
Community Builder
Additional Posts in Consulting
Rising Star
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I got about 30 seconds into it when I saw the "women have a higher agreeableness factor". As someone dealing with situations I do NOT agree with professionally right now, I am bordering the "bitch" line by not being agreeable. I am tapping out. This faux science is what got us Trump and Men's Rights and All Lives Matter. 🙈
This manifesto is like a jar of honey with a teaspoon of shit in it. People who say "but he still had a few valid points" just can't taste the shit. Having a discussion about work discrimination & equality based on this document is like working out ways to resolve Germany's problems between WWI and WWII based on Mein Kampf.
AT4, if that was actually the case, I might agree. Not a single scientist will tell you that a given population performs worse at any cognitive task because of genetics. That's just a completely scientifically unfounded claim. That is a convenient belief for those that wish to deny the existence of discrimination/systemic hurdles.
K2: there is no or little competition for low skill or low pay and/or hard jobs. To extend your argument, there should be diversity officers to ensure that white Americans were better represented in the landscaping services
ATK2, sure - competition is most certainly a factor. But so is interest, which is what the Google memo was talking about. For instance, if .02% of the male segment of an applicant pool applied for a certain position, while .0001% of the female segment of the applicant pool applied for the same position, but the end distribution ends up being 50% male and 50% female, is that equity?
Woman ON AVERAGE are less likely to be interested in stem. It doesn't refer to the level of interest but rather the number of women. That means if a women is interested in STEM, her level of interest won't be less than a guy. Its like saying guys are less likely to be interested in liberal arts than women. How's there so much outrage over scientific facts? Oh and gender isn't a social construct either 😂
You gotta keep that stuff to yourself in a situation like that
@ey4 - That's not what I interpreted from what the piece articulated. What I interpreted was that job descriptions, and how roles are defined is currently sexist. Rather than force fitting a 50/50 split for these roles, reshape the success criteria and definition to equally fit male and female strengths. While I don't agree with all the conclusions, I think there is some truth to the fact the the same behaviors that are deemed socially positive when males exhibit them, and deemed to be negative traits when women exhibit them.
I interpreted the point to be that we change the system, rather than just add women to a status quo that isn't set up for their success in the same way it does for men.
I encourage us all to spend time thinking about what would happen if we implemented some of the changes he suggested. No one here has claimed the author was articulate in the citations or the process to get to specific conclusions...that horse is dead. Move past that person's bias and your bias of that person's paradigm and really focus on the suggested actions in the piece. What do we think of those?
Yonatan zunger didn't add anything to the discussion. Any technical, competitive, or lucrative workplace will have people publicly questioning other people's competency.
Disclaimer, I didn't read the manifesto, but the writer is probably a jerk who deserves not to be promoted, but probably also not to be fired, unless he writes a manifesto.
So, yeah, no wonder he got fired.
s1, I read somewhere earlier this year (sorry I can't cite would have to re-discover it), that one of the reasons boys move ahead of girls in math (maybe stem more broadly) in the later teen years is actually physiological/hormonal. That there is another wave of development in those abilities by the same forces that make skinny teenage boys develop heavy muscles in their later teen years. Could be something there beyond sociology. I think we've had, in America, a good twenty years of pretty heavy social support for girls in stem, I wonder if more time is needed to get the sociology pressures into balance, or whether something physiological is still at work here.
Links?
*predisposed to dislike*
Clickbait
You think those that do not agree with his generalizations or his conclusions are not qualified to be a Googler, but Google doesn't think so, and since it's their company, your opinion of who qualifies to be one of them is irrelevant.
ATK2- I wrote something similar on another thread and people flipped out!
A4-take a stance.
As long as the female candidates are as qualified as male candidates, I see no problem with that.
Fishies, let's take a break from all the arguing to enjoy this piece of comedy gold: https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/im-a-google-manufacturing-robot-and-i-believe-humans-are-biologically-unfit-to-have-jobs-in-tech?utm_campaign=Mattermark+Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=55143319&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8ILu1X2-19VJrPEZa_cPyM8c2YSgcGzuNx_aGBkTm-Fz93HY7y-Ai72Vho3mSxQMtw7gTZpk8SgqatpQJI4VtPmzvJ4A&_hsmi=55143319
P5: wow, what a ridiculous stream of BS generalizations and alternative facts 😂
With his opinion- he never gonna get laid.
Tc1 he lost his only chance when google couldn't hire a female coworker for him