In reason 3, she cites "Google’s attempts at creating a fair and broadly welcoming working environment."read the Vox column 92 posted and pay particular attention to Reason 3 and 5 she is a much better writer than me and she nails my thoughts here
Seems like this is true if you share a specific point of view regarding the value of their diversity initiatives. Their response to dissent is the opposite of broadly welcoming.
Too much is being made here of "biological differences" A whole lot more than biological differences are driving the characteristics of Google's applicant pool, and nothing in the 10 pages denies that. Several pages are devoted to discussing these other factors.In other words, it is clear that we are still operating in an environment where it is much more likely that women who are biologically able to work in tech are chased away from tech by sociological and other factors, than that biologically unsuited women are somehow brought in by overzealous diversity programs.
Now this, I can get behind. Which is why I asked specifically for evidence of being dismissive to ALL WOMEN. It isn't true, and there are far more useful criticisms to be made.In the end, focusing the conversation on the minutiae of the scientific claims in the manifesto is a red herring.