
Silicon Valley Isn't Run by Straight White American-Born Men - shahryc
http://readwrite.com/2015/08/14/silicon-valley-ceo-diversity
======
downandout
Just looking at the CEO roles doesn't exactly give an overall picture of
diversity in SV or tech in general. However, many of the arguments I see on
the other side - namely that all of the groups mentioned here are in fact
underrepresented - neglect one fact: the overall percentages pretty closely
mirror the demographics of degree holders in the fields necessary to perform
many of the tech jobs in SV.

Women, for example, hold a disproportionately low share of STEM undergraduate
degrees, particularly in engineering. Therefore it is only common sense that
they wouldn't be getting jobs that require these degrees at the same rate that
men do. It's not because of evil white males not wanting to hire women (or any
of the other groups that have claimed discrimination in SV) - it's because
fewer of them _choose the profession_. The degree issue is also the reason
that the CEO role _is_ diverse - because it doesn't necessarily take an
engineering degree to be the CEO of a tech company. Diverse qualifications
will yield a diverse pool of talent.

~~~
kitsunesoba
The fact that there's underrepresentation of various groups in SV is but a
symptom of a much bigger problem, which is that for whatever reason, these
fields and the programs they map to are unappealing to many people. I think
the most productive route to take would be to figure out exactly what has gone
wrong in our education system and society that makes STEM fields attractive to
only a very limited set of individuals and fix it. If this root problem is
neglected, making hiring more diverse for diversity's sake will end up being a
bandaid on a broken limb.

I am not saying to put a stop to diversity hiring — it's necessary in the
interim, because society and the education system can't change overnight — but
it does _not_ solve the actual problem and the longer the problem is left
unaddressed, the harder it becomes to fix. We need to be putting serious
resources into improvements in education and pushing cultural changes to how
STEM careers are seen by the general public, and it needs to happen soon.

------
Eyas
The subtitle was cringe-worthy:

> Women, gays, and immigrants form a new majority at the top.

What? Looking at the union of all women, all people of color, and all LGBT
people, and saying that this group forms a "majority" (non straight-white-U.S.
born-males) shows what is wrong with how some view diversity.

Its nice that _some_ women, _some_ LGBT people, and _some_ people of color
make it to the top. The talk about diversity has never been that they don't.

The list shows 4 underrepresented groups in the top 10, as if that is a
success, forgetting that:

1\. There are two women only. 2\. There are no U.S. born persons of color in
that list.

The only valid statement is that non-U.S. born people seem to exist in healthy
amounts. But those like me who are born outside the US shouldn't be helping
Silicon Valley check "non-white" boxes off, pretending like race and socio-
economic problems in the US that keep persons of color from attaining
positions of authority don't exist.

~~~
thelastguy
Economic problems prevent Whites from getting to the top too, not just Asians
or Blacks. So how is that an unfair advantage that Whites have over
minorities?

~~~
Eyas
I'm not sure I follow. Yes, absolutely, Whites are subject to economic
problems too-- not just persons of color.

Are you questioning whether a racial divide exists at all in America, where
non-whites are subject to unique limitations that Whites are not subject to?
Or is your objection different?

~~~
kelukelugames
A lot of people on HN and other places on the internet believe that everything
is the result of class problems. And class problems are completely independent
of race.

~~~
Eyas
Right. I was just asking for confirmation so that I don't argue past the
grandparent poster.

I also feel like a lot of people take that stance because they feel that those
on the opposing side are claiming that it is __only __because of race. More
often than not, we are merely saying that race and class are interconnected;
they are neither completely orthogonal, nor exactly the same.

There are definitely cycles of racism, patriarchy, and homophobia that
perpetuate class struggles that are difficult to break out of. There are also
other class struggles that affect us all.

~~~
kelukelugames
Go read his post history. Unless you enjoy arguing on the Internet then I
wouldn't bother.

------
thelastguy
Well, if my people of color want to get to the top, they're gonna have to
develop the neccessary skills require to be at the top (leadership skills,
negotiation skills, management skills, acquire the required experience to run
a company, and they need to lower their empathy level, down to the point where
they can utterly crush their competitors with no remorse, like all those
pyschopathic CEO, for example, the CEO of Tobacco, who feels no guilt in
killing millions of people each year).

Most of my asians peoples prefer to be the smart math/computer programmer guys
who do not want to do the boring day to day chores of running a company, and
they prefer to just do amazing things with a computer instead.

Nothing wrong with that.

~~~
grardb
What if I told you... that there is an entire continent out there where almost
every company is run by an Asian person?

Please do not perpetuate these ridiculous stereotypes.

~~~
thelastguy
What if I told you that in those Asian companies that is run by an Asian at
the top, that the other 99% of Asian is not at the top?

Not every Asian can get to the top. Just like not every White men can get to
the top. The top is the top for one reason, the reason being that only the top
percentage of people can get to the top.

Anyway, you're basically saying that in a country of White majority, the men
most likely to get to the top of other men, is a White men, while in an
country of Asian majority, the men most likely to get to the top of other men
is an Asian men.

And not only that, not every men want to get to the top. Some men are
perfectly happy with where they are. You can't just force those men who do not
want to get to the top get to the top to take on responsbilities that they
don't want to take on in the first place.

------
qmalzp
Not trying to start any fires, but are non-heterosexuals really
underrepresented in Silicon Valley? The culture I've seen seems to fully
embrace people of various sexual orientations.

According to Gallup [1], only 3.8% of American adults identify as LGBT, so the
fact that even one CEO in the top 10 (in fact #1) is in the club is actually
somewhat remarkable.

[1] [http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-
overesti...](http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-
percent-gay-lesbian.aspx)

------
lumberjack
I didn't know that Tim Cook came from such humble backgrounds. That's pretty
impressive.

------
kelukelugames
1 out of 1 US presidents is black.

We did it!

Oh wait 96 out of 100 members of the US senate is white. But we do have 31
women senators.

~~~
allendoerfer
Ironically, white straight men from SV are under-represented in the Senate -
as is everybody else from California or the other big states.

~~~
kelukelugames
I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic.

HNers should understand basic statistics. Saying 0 out of 2 is an
underrepresentation is inaccurate.

~~~
gtremper
He's saying all Californians are underrepresented in the Senate because we
have the largest population and still only 2 Senators.

~~~
kelukelugames
Thanks! My brain did not make the switch to politics politics. :)

------
coldtea
With small exceptions it very much is. And beyond the CEOs you have to take
into account stats on VCs and Executive Boards...

[Added]:

And I'd take it one step further to see if there's real diversity or just the
appereance of: how many of the women/blacks/asians etc are there with the
exact same criteria as the others and not because somebody (always a white
male) thought "hey, we have too many white men, let's put a woman/minority on
this position, it will look good".

While that might still increase diversity, I see it as hypocrisy for 2
reasons:

1) If the straight white man put aside was better for the job.

2) Token diversity just hides the prejudices under the carpet.

3) Token diversity doesn't help with the underlying reasons behind the
inequality (e.g. being poor with less schooling opportunities prevent many
blacks to be able to get MBAs and CS education, and instead of helping change
that for all, they make a mockery of diversity with random exceptions).

4) Isn't it still white males making those decisions about which token people
to include?

~~~
yummyfajitas
So which of the aforementioned ceos do you believe is the token? Tim cook?
Satya nadella?

~~~
coldtea
Obviously I DON'T believe CEOs are appointed as token minorities.

First of all because the "non white straight male" CEOs are few and far
between anyway, so it wouldn't give much advantage for your company to tout
one when nobody expects you to (not to mention it could hurt in some bigoted
demographics).

But second, and most importantly, because those doing the appointing care very
much for the actual performance of the CEO (which affects their bottom line)
to just put a token person in its place. Whereas for lower positions, even
managerial ones, they can appoint the token person here and there much more
easily.

I also don't believe a listing of 10 companies, especially without also
enumerating also their whole boards, VCs, etc, is enough to make a point.

Besides Asians/Indians are taken as non-threatening and a "safe choice" even
by bigots in these days (there's a reverse stereotype associating them with
IT). I'd like to see some blacks, latinos, etc into that list (which IIRC make
for a huge percentage of the Californian population, but are totally missing
even from the "top 10" list).

