>the mentoring program could be for girls and young women //
How is that fair for boys/men if they're excluded from mentoring opportunities (eg in a company that hires them) simply because they're male.
This is "fine" if your objective is "hire more women". As someone who supports equality of opportunity I don't see how compounding more sexism will ever lead to less sexism.
In the UK, overall, young men get poorer school results, are less represented at university, receive lower wages than women (up to the ages when people choose to start families) ... how does this sort of sexist mentoring policy fit in here? Is it really enough to say "well if we look only at this industry segment"?
I didn't comment on any of her suggestions other than to say I've seen them in place already. So if we're not happy with the current proportion of women in tech, the industry should explain why, say, current mentoring efforts aren't working.
The answer could be "it works, but there's not enough of it" I guess.
I mostly brought it up because tptacek wrote, "It's unsurprising that a Google engineer would believe that gender balance can't be addressed without fixing the college pipeline..." and I thought the recommendations for helping already-in-engineering women pointed to a more complex position. Though perhaps that position wasn't communicated, at least not clearly enough.
How is that fair for boys/men if they're excluded from mentoring opportunities (eg in a company that hires them) simply because they're male.
This is "fine" if your objective is "hire more women". As someone who supports equality of opportunity I don't see how compounding more sexism will ever lead to less sexism.
In the UK, overall, young men get poorer school results, are less represented at university, receive lower wages than women (up to the ages when people choose to start families) ... how does this sort of sexist mentoring policy fit in here? Is it really enough to say "well if we look only at this industry segment"?
What's wrong with equality?