Women say they quit Google because of racial discrimination: 'I was invisible'.
Yes, I'm still on this because it bothers me because I am a woman. I read through this whole article claiming men were racist and sexist based on a misunderstanding of intent. The women in the article complained because they "have to constantly prove themselves". My take away was these women wanted special treatment because they were women.
Look - if you ask most men they will tell you that they feel invisible in the world. That is a mans lot in life. A life of invisibility. So, men constantly have to prove themselves to each other and to women frankly to not be invisible. That is also a mans lot in life. They are not treating women any differently than they would treat each other. They are treating you as an equal. And as a women - you shouldn't want to be treated differently then men. This is a workplace. Prove yourself on your merits- not because you have lady parts. Men will respect you just fine. But you do have to prove yourself to them like they do to each other. That is not a "boys club". That is competition which makes the world a better place. Girls just don't feel like we need to compete.
They also complained they didn't see "people who looked like them" who were mentors. i.e. women. I don't really understand women's deep seated need to see other women in their field. I've talked to a bunch them. Tech is not a social club. It's a place where things are built. It's no different than construction. You are based on what you can build or fix.
I bet a hundred dollars that if you were to ask any man that worked in tech if they felt the same way as these women did - they would say YES. But because women are complaining it s huge problem. If women really wanted prove themselves - build a software or hardware company. Get off your ass and change the world that way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Invisible" = "Able to perform at expected levels, but frequently not beyond them, and does not tend to kick up flak" ...
ReplyDeleteWhat I heard instead was that these women expected special privileges but weren't granted any because at best their performance was satisfactory, but not remarkable ... so nobody remarked about it.
One way how not to be invisible is to screw up, and simply kicking up flak gets you the non-invisibility you might think you want. But this doesn't work because if you're still performing at expected levels, but frequently not beyond them, you are now under-performing because of the flak.
That's what I'm also hearing out of these women at Google.
Obvious answers are obvious.
Why would a manager want to pay to have extra mentoring for screw-ups?
Why would they take further risks on surrounding screw-ups with potentially more screw-ups so they can feel good about themselves?
Why not shove these people into "special projects" so they can perhaps prove that they can once again aspire to being even as good as "invisible" again?
Maybe some of them will take the hint and leave?
Operational success achieved!
If the plan for joining Big Tech was eventually to be able to get hooked up with The Alpha Engineer (or someone like him), that's clearly not going to work out, is it? If he's going to hook up with "invisible", it's more likely she's going to be someone like Ghost-Like Used Bookstore Waif, because at least the "waifs" are better looking and the nerdy cosplaying will be fun.
If someone can't compete in the "being good enough" game, maybe that person can compete in the "special considerations" game instead, where simply showing up earns cash and prizes? If HR departments are going to grant letters of marque and reprisal, why shouldn't the recipients act like privateers?
Walk the plank ... anyone? :-)
It's even worse than that because some senior engineer gets "volunteered" to be a baby sitter. Then he gets punished and isn't happy with his work life because he went to school to be a programmer or whatever. Not a baby sitter.
ReplyDeleteI sort of feel like they are forcing girls into careers they won't ultimately like. And instead of accepting that they are blaming men for not making it the way women want it to be. I mean, how many girls are mechanically curious? I'd say about 10%. I came by it accidentally because I was an only child and I had to learn to fix things so I didn't get into trouble. But lots of boys grow up taking things apart. Girls don't.
The past two years I get so many invites to join girls only tech stuff. I hate it. They are really beating the bushes for every single girl who might have an interest in tech. And maybe even those who don't. It seems like quota filling to me. I bet they start cattle prodding them next.