Google has some issues with a manifest some Google employee (fired now) has written.
It opposes Google’s „diversity“ programs, which seemingly discriminate against some employees of Google because of their race, cultural background, and sex ((here: white men)), by favoring other employees because of their race, cultural background, or sex.
The left tries to frame the manifesto as „sexist“ and „anti-diversity“, though seemingly it only opposes increasing the count of women at all costs to reach diversity goals.
Diversity goals which are based on the (ideological) belief that the share of women in tech is so low as it is because of discrimination, not because women are either not interested in or not qualified for jobs in tech.
Though, actually, tests with a blind selection process in Austrialia, overseen by academics from Harvard, have failed to prove that there is a bias against women in hiring. In the opposite, there rather seems to be a bias against men.
GitHub also had to experience that a blind selection process may very well have the outcome that the most qualified candidates all are men.
So how do the genderistas explain that? That blind selection processes still select mostly men as most qualified candidates, and that adding sex information even increases the likeliness of a woman to be hired?
Unless this is all just coincidence (which gender feminists don’t belief, because it opposes their „discrimination against women“ premise), this may have some biological root causes. Either men being more qualified for tech jobs, or women being more qualified for jobs they prefer over tech jobs.
We must stop trying to make reality match gender/equality feminist theories; instead, feminism should make their theories fit reality.