SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-hear-the-jingle-every-time-I-read-the-name dept.
This is a new one ...
Another former Yahoo employee has filed a lawsuit claiming that management running the company's "Media Org" was biased against men.
The complaint (PDF) filed by Scott Ard says that Yahoo's "stack ranking" system was "without oversight or accountability" and was "more arbitrary and discriminatory" than stack ranking used by other companies.
The lawsuit claims that Yahoo's Media Org employees were ranked from 0.0 to 5.0 before being subject to a "calibration" process by higher-level management. Ard claims employees weren't told their numeric ranking but were only informed of their "Bucket" ranking, labeled "Greatly Exceeds, "Exceeds," "Achieves," "Occasionally Misses," or "Misses."
[...] The lawsuit's allegations closely mirror those of Gregory Anderson, another male ex-Media Org worker who sued Yahoo in February. Anderson and Ard have the same lawyer, Palo Alto-based Jon Parsons. Discovery is ongoing in the Anderson case, which is currently scheduled for a trial in May.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:12PM
Intel have set a goal of having a 50/50 mix of men and women in all positions in the company, and they're basing manager's bonuses on how far they progress this goal. For Intel to achieve a 50/50 mix they'd have to either significantly increase their overall headcount or significantly reduce the number of males they employed. I doubt Intel would want to increase their employee count, which means that managers are effectively being told to fire men and hire women. Failure to fire enough men will mean they don't get paid a bonus. It's blatant discrimination, but it's fine because it's socially acceptable to discriminate against white heterosexual males.
I can't help feel that men need to organise to fight for equality, but such an organisation would be savaged by the biased media, politicians and SJWs. Anyone working for such an organisation would be harassed 24/7, because harassing white hetrosexual males is positively encouraged. It would be difficult to find someone to take on a job where the entire media and political system is working against you. Perhaps Anonymous would be a better model for such an organisation.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:23PM
Fight Club is the model for your organization. Trump is your role model. PUNCH EM IN THE PUSSY.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @09:22PM
Oh look. It's a Tolerant Liberal who's a snide, intolerant prick. I've never seen one that isn't.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @09:41PM
See, this is just what I'm talking about. I make a legitimate point about men being removed from their jobs to meet an arbitrary quota and I get a response from an unintelligible response from a social justice lunatic. He doesn't try to debate the point made in my post, he just tries to harass me.
Now imagine I'd put my name and contact details on that post. I'd likely be receiving death threats by now. So, not only are men being discriminated against and losing their livelihood, anyone who questions this discrimination will be harassed and attacked. This goes for women as well; just look at some of the harassment Canadian Libertarian Party member Lauren Southern has received for questioning third-wave feminists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @10:13PM
Are you even familiar with Fight Club? The entire film is a masculist tract about men with menial jobs in a world that denies them the opportunity to live to their potential.
Times moved on, and the situation for men has only gotten worse.
We got our War On Terror, and we got our Great Recession, and now women are taking our jobs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @10:46PM
We got our War On Terror, and we got our Great Recession, and now women are taking our jobs.
Oh, you poor, dear thing! Here, let Mommy kiss it and make it all better.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @10:51PM
The shit that came out of
this woman's mouth, I had never heard!
My God.
I haven't been fucked like that
since grade school.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:44PM
There is an entire industry that already fills the need for such an organization, its called "law" and the members are called "lawyers". You can see one in this story already fighting this inequality.
It sure is entertaining seeing the backlash of outrage by the most privileged class of people. I don't think we've quite reached the point where we need to seriously consider discrimination of white males, the biggest issue so far is inside the minds of said group. Stop being baited into a gender war and start being angry about H1Bs deflating wages and taking jobs from citizens, and be angry at those who promote these divisions through the media to keep people angry and fearful.
If we're angry at a straw man then we won't revolt against the true oppressors, if we're fearful of losing our job we won't stand up for ourselves.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:47PM
Intel are a bunch of fucking Jews, and have backdoors in their chips that lead straight to Mossad. Fuck them.
Jews Jewing Jews.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:54PM
It's not the Jews' fault, they all have Jewish Mothers. It's the Jewish Mothers' fault. Always has been, since the dawn of Jewism.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 09 2016, @08:57PM
I doubt it's the Jewish mothers' fault that all Jewish women grow up to be angry short-haired lesbians.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Monday October 10 2016, @05:37AM
So you're saying her mother made her a lesbian? If I send her the ingredients, will she make me one too?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @09:25PM
s/jew/moslem/gi
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @11:28PM
s/moslem/moooooooooooooslem/gi
gay and vegan optional this time
(Score: 4, Informative) by VLM on Sunday October 09 2016, @09:26PM
Intel have set a goal of having a 50/50 mix of men and women in all positions in the company
Its instructive that if you're looking for senior or experienced folks, my uni EE classes were a complete sausagefest and my upper level "likely to graduate" CS classes were only 75% male.
I don't think there's enough women out there to populate even just the popular high attention employers at 50/50 ratio. I mean not in an abstract sense but in a simple numerical count.
As an example of the ratio, its instructive that I can think of each woman I've worked with on the EE side after school WRT their skills and abilities, and three out of those six were in fact pretty good techs/engineers. Of course there must be oh hell hundreds of guys. On CS the ratio is much like my classes like 25/75. I would guess a place like intel is somewhere in between.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Arik on Sunday October 09 2016, @10:18PM
Sure there are. It's just that most of them are not qualified and have no interest. You're still leaving that unspoken but you're figuring it in. Todays SJWs make it a point not to do so. And it's indeed shaking out exactly like GP said. 'Gender parity' has now become a metric, and like all the other metric, if you want to stay employed you will do anything that is not actually against the rules or illegal in order to boost your metric - and be praised for it.
So, we'll start looking for any excuse we can find to fire a male - and we'll do everything we can get away with to make sure the replacement is a female. Those who push those two lines the hardest without getting busted for something else in the process win - that has become the game many places. EVEN IF your teams performance drops in other ways, it can still be worth it, as that metric may be weighted heavily, and also the people that make certain metrics raise on command are regarded as 'team players' moreso than colleagues whose metrics are better, but don't fluctuate in response to management.
Now there are women who are motivated to STEM. And one thing I will argue to my last breath is that women who are motivated to study a subject usually do quite well - as well or better than a man, even in a subject men generally do better at. I've seen that many times in my life and I believe it to be true. But the number of women who are really motivated to study and do well in STEM fields are very few. Those women are the ones that people are happy to work with, the ones that really have a passion for it and stay home friday night studying and they've always been there and made real contributions and been appreciated. But there just aren't enough of them, as you say, to get anywhere near parity. So what happens when you institutionalize parity anyway?
It's very simply, very predictable. Incentives are used to attract more females to the field. These are NOT people with the passion and drive and talent to really want to do this. They are doing it because they have been offered incentives, doh. The remaining 'old school' employees will be asked to pick up the slack and work harder. It's just deepening the long-existing sex biases that it's supposedly aimed at eliminating.
Oddly enough though, certain fields are still exempt from this social-engineering. No one complains that there aren't enough female trash collectors, or construction workers. Dangerous, dirty, low status jobs are universally male and that's ok. As long as they stay low status, at least.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by arslan on Monday October 10 2016, @02:18AM
Oddly enough though, certain fields are still exempt from this social-engineering. No one complains that there aren't enough female trash collectors, or construction workers. Dangerous, dirty, low status jobs are universally male and that's ok. As long as they stay low status, at least.
That certainly is the white elephant in the room isn't it?
There are potentially light at the end of the tunnel though. Some people are starting to realize that striving to have equity is perhaps better than all out forcing equality and some women leaders - true leaders and not just SJWs, at least the ones here in Oz, are starting to acknowledge that forcing a ratio is counter productive.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 10 2016, @07:46AM
Good points.
Take for example my wife. I call her the human computer doing most complex algebra math in her head. She is extremely task oriented and writes extremely detailed instructions anyone can follow and pretty good at figuring out how people wrote their instructions wrong. She does not get terribly lost on a computer and can get around pretty good. Prime candidate for being a programmer. She has pretty much negative interest in working with computers or programming them. As in 'hey you would make a good programmer' 'I have no interest in that I want to be an accountant'. She will do good at that too. But you can not force being 'STEM' if you have reason to do it. She has the talent but no drive to do it. I show her simple programs. She gets them but does not care how they work at all. "thats boring".
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Monday October 10 2016, @11:51AM
Dangerous, dirty, low status jobs are universally male and that's ok. As long as they stay low status, at least.
Sometimes I wonder if programming will end up like restaurants.
The backend chefs and line cooks are mostly (not entirely) male, treated like shit, worked like rented mules, and poorly paid.
The frontend hospitality squad merely has to look and act nice and is mostly (not entirely) (hot young) female, treated like princesses, hardest work they do is carry a tray of food, and paid like they're gods gift to the earth.
I could see something like this in programming, SV web frontend companies being all young supermodels giving presentations to other departments and companies and conferences, while "real CS" is done by greasy nerd dudes always under threat of outsourcing to Elbonia for pennies on the dollar.
Its not as unfair as you'd think, lifetime earnings for the backend workers are enormously higher because at least around there the economy has been depressed since 1970 or so, such that front end employees are all young 10/10 or 9/10 and that means the term of their employment is extremely short. So you get the ant vs grasshopper thing going on where a 60 yr old chef can still be rocking it, but once a bartender-ess hits 30, only looks 8/10 in the yoga pants, its all over she may as well get her real estate license she's never bartending again. Or waitressing.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Monday October 10 2016, @01:32AM
This is a much harder problem than that. If you make any organization that wants to deal with the needs of people who share demographics with typical western oppressors. No matter how reasonable, soft spoken and compromising. It will attract all sorts of bigots and scared alienated people, depending on the culture of your organization they may hide their nature or tone down their rhetoric but they'll be there fucking up whatever it is you're trying to do and eventually their actions or influence will give someone all they need to paint you as the new SS.
Anonymous is particularly bad since the current crop of online SJWs are composed of the most dedicated sociopathic core of former Anonymous cyberbullies. They were attracted to trolling for the following you could acquire, the marching orders you could give random kids on the internet and the pain you could inflict on other people.
Chanology taught them that they had a greater sphere of influence and power as activists and then Occupy wall street is where they learned traditional political tricks and professional victimhood. Both from the political fringe they encountered and the grifty homeless populations that moved into the camps.
Consider the composition of the online SJW community and 4chan in 2008. Awfully similar.
That's basically what they are, not all of them became SJWs per-se but they're all basically cyberbullies. 4chan concentrated the psychos and then they got together and fell out into their own little groups. Some went to anonops, some went to tumblr but wherever they went they remained ingenuine cyberbullies who like power and inflicting pain on others.
Their true colors are starting to show, you'll never eliminate political correctness and I think that it's not even all bad. But the days of the meddling SJW tech bully is coming to an end and maybe it did some good even if they themselves couldn't actually care less about any woman's career other than their own. I do now hear people thinking about how to encourage young women to get into coding and tech when they're young even as demands that companies staff themselves more from the barely existent pool of women tech workers begin to die off.
(Score: 5, Informative) by butthurt on Monday October 10 2016, @01:39AM
> Intel have set a goal of having a 50/50 mix of men and women in all positions in the company [...]
Bullshit. A February 2016 report issued by the company says
• We exceeded our annual hiring goal, achieving 43.1% diverse hiring against a goal of 40%—up 1.8x hires over 2014.
• We increased hiring of underrepresented minorities by 31% to a total of 11.8% in 2015.
• We increased our hiring of women by nearly 43% to a total of 35% in 2015.
• We narrowed the gap in female representation, ending the year with a workforce that’s 24.8% women, a 5.4% increase over 2014.
[...] goals as outlined below.
• Achieve 45% diverse hiring in the U.S. with a new sub-goal of 14% hiring of underrepresented minorities.
In round numbers, 75% of the company's employees are men. To bring that to 50% by sacking men, it would have to sack two-thirds of its male employees amounting to 50% of its total employees. That's preposterous. What's more, 65% of the company's newly hired workers are male, so it would have to sack 46% of newly hired men as well.
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Monday October 10 2016, @01:46AM
link to the report:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160206043236/http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/diversity/diversity-in-technology-annual-report.html [archive.org]
The Register article about it:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160203233513/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/03/gender_equality_silicon_valley/ [archive.org]