throwaway0wha8h

DEI industry relies on that narrative to support itself.

The assumption in the "weeded out" rhetoric is that girls are on their way into tech in equal numbers and diverted out by some experience or more nefarious dissuasion. This has not been sufficiently demonstrated and usually is presented without evidence.

It's unclear what people make of the fact that certain STEM disciplines, say Biology or other Life Sciences, have an over-representation of women. Curious why the "weeding" only occurs in certain STEM disciplines.

Lot of things are illegal but still happen everyday. The violation has to be known to lawmakers and they have to have the will and resources to enforce the penalty. That's not the case here.

I have observed some people pushing back, but it's rare. I know there is a fear of dissent to the DEI dogma. Particularly if you're a white man. If you're a minority you have more leeway to dissent and it will be fine you'll just be ignored or perhaps have someone read the pro-DEI talking points to you. After Damore firing most people just think it's not worth it I would guess, why risk it? And if you're a founder why risk a campaign against your company when you need to raise funding etc.

Throwaway.

I'm happy to have more women in tech and hope it occurs or continues. However, virtually everyone recruiting in tech has observed some toxic diversity initiatives, I would venture. Some examples I have seen personally or one degree removed from me.

- pressure on HMs to hire more women despite 95% of applicants being male

- people in interview panels openly saying "but he's a white man" / "do we want to hire more white men" etc.

- people championing all women teams as a win for diversity

- women getting a salary premium to help companies boost DEI "representation"

I think eventually this will be shown for what it is, but it will take a long time. Personally every tech founder I know thinks it's bullshit but won't say it in public.