Can I get some iron shield pots later?
The fact that games design seems to attract more white males is no coincidence. It’s almost like more white males want to design games than POC or the LGBT crowd.
This new policy of blizzards is completely racist/sexist and if you replace “white” with “black” or “male” with “Female” You’d hear the blue hairs screetching to the high heavens on twitter about it.
6 Likes
Blizzard has known for a long time they have a problem: "Only 21 percent of Blizzard employees are women, wrote company president Mike Morhaime in an email, and “they leave our organization at a higher rate than men.”
In 2017 they set out to right that ship but again, ignored the real issue of failing to retain women: “By focusing on recruiting women into its paid internship program. Blizzard increased its number of female “Blizzterns” by 166% in the past year – from 12% to 32%, and plans to bring on even more next year.”
https://www.linkedin.com/business/talent/blog/talent-acquisition/how-blizzard-increased-its-number-of-female-interns-by-166-percent
Within a year they lost 43% of their female workforce. So Blizzard has already actively sought to employ an equitable representation of women. This isn’t a new thing. What they failed to do was take steps to retain their female workforce.
If men were underrepresented, paid unequal wages, regularly passed up for promotion, harassed, assaulted, demeaned and exploited, and then left the company because of that, no, you wouldn’t hear anyone screeching about them trying to make things right. But as usual, Ion is intentionally glossing over the real problem.
Ion with his sanctimonious “Oh hey. We’re going to do this, isn’t that great?” is nothing more than another PR stunt. They already did that. Blizzard isn’t known for treating their employees well, or caring about them at all. Until they’re committed to ensuring all their employees are treated fairly and respectfully, nothing is going to change.
I love how a country that is so focused on making sure there is more than 10 genders and sexual orientations and enabling everyone to live their life to the fullest is equally obsessed with gender stats in the work place, mostly focused on female gender
(ignoring all the other genders that exist here btw in terms of said discrimination) discrimination in the workplace, wether it being a pay gap, chances to advance in the work place or chances to retain their jobs.
As usual its all thought out well and clearly thought through. Def. no pseudo hypocrisy going on
1 Like
If this is a problem, you’re sexist and want discriminatory quotas.
5 Likes
What this comes down to is that if you are a woman and/or a person of color and you were hired by Blizzard, you know it won’t be because of your qualifications. It will be because you were a woman and/or a person of color.
What kind of existential crisis does that give a person? Knowing the company you worked for is deliberately turning down certain people who might actually be better at your job than you are simply because you were born with a darker skin color or a different set of genitals…
6 Likes
Right… because nothing says progression like discrimination. Do you think white males are just naturally bad or something? A person’s gender or skin color has nothing to do with how qualified they are for something. Their ability to perform the skills required for the job has everything to do with their qualification of it. The last thing anyone should care about for any job is how diverse the people are. The fact that this has even become a narrative and concern in today’s society has me worried for the future of humanity. We are all human, regardless of gender or skin color. Too many people have forgotten that.
5 Likes
Big techs are all recruiting unqualified people over qualified people to fit into those roles.
I have interviewed people for some positions and 6/10 were filed with people below the expected knowledge/experience, while there were candidates that clearly had them.
I worked closely with 2 of those that were hired even without a recommendation, they still struggle after 5 years, but won’t get fired because progressivism has taken over.
3 Likes
Yes but we fixed sexism and racism, so that was obviously worth it. Big techs always know whats best for us as a species!
Not according to Harvard Business Review. Not according to the actual math. Over 40% of women abandon their STEM careers compared to just 17% of men. Surveys of women exiting the field conclude, “It’s the climate, stupid!”
Other findings include:
-
In a randomized, double-blind study by Yale researchers, science faculty at 6 major institutions evaluated applications for a lab manager position. Applications randomly assigned a male name were rated as significantly more competent and hirable (
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full.pdf+html) and offered a higher starting salary and more career mentoring, compared to identical applications assigned female names. -
When men and women negotiated a job offer by reading identical scripts for a Harvard and CMU study, [women who asked for a higher salary were rated as being more difficult to work with and less nice (
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=779506), but men were not perceived negatively for negotiating. -
In 248 performance reviews of high-performers in tech (
http://fortune.com/2014/08/26/performance-review-gender-bias/), negative personality criticism (such as abrasive, strident, or irrational) showed up in 85% of reviews for women and just 2% of reviews for men. It is ridiculous to assume that 85% of women have personality problems and that only 2% of men do.
There is a HUGE gender bias in STEM and the data shows how bad it is. Women leave the field at almost triple the rate men do because “It’s the climate stupid.” Women are harassed. Women are assaulted, ffs. Women who assume leadership, are assertive and confident are perceived as “not nice,” while no such labels are applied to their male counterparts for the same qualities.
We have NOT fixed sexism. The people here claiming that qualified people are being passed over for women (because obviously women aren’t qualified) pretty much says it all.
https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/if-you-think-women-in-tech-is-just-a-pipeline-problem-you-haven-t-been-paying-attention-cb7a2073b996
Justice Clarence Thomas has some fantastic writing on this exact concept and how he had to fight it off nonstop.
Hunger of Memory by Richard Rodriguez is another excellent read, if for no other reason than the emotional toll of being split between two worlds (his childhood culture and his mostly white-academic peers) while being accepted by neither.
I can’t imagine why women, who have the unique biological property of childbearing, would abandon careers in STEM which are primarily odd-hour on-call tech work or semi-dangerous Nomex-clad plant/refinery jobs… WHAT A MYSTERY THIS MUST BE
[Citation Needed]
n=1
What’s hilarious is that 127 made-up students were given, on a one-to-one basis, to 127 professors. So really, this is just an n=1 study since there were no controls for differences in pay from state to state, university to university, and the position applied to wasn’t even the same. So all of the metrics like hireability, salary, mentoring, etc, would differ ANYWAY regardless of gender because you didn’t use the same schools.
PS - Loving how they only show the difference in salary by making the “zero” of the graph start at 25k in order to make the difference in 26.5k and 30.5k seem inordinately large…
This study is a farce. NEXT.
n=0
This isn’t a study. This was an attitudes survey that means literally nothing. Participants weren’t actually rated by an interviewer, the participants were tasked with answering whether or not they thought they’d have more or less success getting hired if the imaginary hirer was a man vs a woman. This literally shows nothing more than the beliefs of some women that men are more likely to frown upon them if they ask for something… IT DOESN’T ACTUALLY SHOW THAT SUCH A THING OCCURS
NEXT
n=0
Not a study, like the last case, this one is just an attitudes assessment and also has absolutely no controls whatsoever. This conclusion is pure incredulity.
You haven’t supplied anything that proves this. You’ve only supplied sufficient information to show that SOME WOMEN believe they have it bad in STEM compared to their male peers without actually providing any PROOF of this assertion. Women who think and act like you do likely assume a bias against themselves and when you do something wrong or negative and get called on it, you assume it is based on the bias rather than the wrongful conduct.
THIS SAME EXACT ASSESSMENT COULD BE DONE WITH RAGING GOOSE-STEPPING RACISTS AND THEY’D SELF-SELECT IN THE SAME MANNER AGAINST ANY NON-WHITE PERSON
“I do work hard, but I’d rather wake up early than stay up late, and I was already thinking ahead to when my husband and I would need to coordinate our schedules with daycare drop-offs and pick-ups. Kegerators and ping pong tables don’t appeal to me. I’m not aggressive enough to thrive in a combative work environment. Talking to other female friends working in tech, I know that I’m not alone in my frustrations.”
Woman whose personal experience doesn’t align with a work environment that requires long nights rather than early mornings and needs you present rather than out and about with family does not a systemic problem make.
This is no different than someone whining about “not being a morning person” and thus complaining that the medical profession has biases and prejudices against nightowls and family oriented people that have children to manage in the morning.
You’ve done nothing but spew tripe. STEM doesn’t have a woman problem, it has a “we work best when we have young, unattached, able to work all hours, people at the helm instead of those that want a steady 9-to-5” problem… which isn’t a problem.
6 Likes
You lost everyone here with even half an open mind at the other side of the fence with this sentence alone.
Im not here to judge or anything, but this quote would even make sure jesus christ himself would get retconned in 2021
I’m not going to lie and deny a fundamental property of women vs men. If you want to work and compete hard in oversaturated markets, taking even just the bare minimum of time off for delivery and recovery is going to necessarily place you behind anyone that works just as hard as you, but isn’t suddenly unavailable for 3-4 weeks at some vague time in the future.
If someone is going to argue with me about basic biology I’m not going to care about their lunacy.
7 Likes
And yet, you will never win the argument at this point.
Again im not saying you are wrong or your approach is wrong. Just pointing out, there is no way you will convince the person sitting directly in front of you to accept your PoV.
And isn’t thats what its about? To make the other person have a change of heart afterall? Otherwise its just 2 adults (or children?) crying at each other… no?
That would be the happy conclusion to be sure, but no. Most debates are not charitable, so they primarily exist for the benefit of readers and onlookers. A lot of folks just like a good rabble-rousing fight so they’ll consider the “winner” to be whoever managed to sling sufficient insults and more or less bully the other person into frustration and abandoning the discussion wholesale, which is why the YouTube tier of “debate-me-bro” is so popular.
But even those still reveal things about the arguments presented to anyone approaching it somewhat soberly, and there are a LOT of folks that do so because they just don’t yet have a dog in the hunt. You catch someone without an anchoring bias and you have the one-time opportunity to help really convince them to your way of thinking.
I have no doubt in my mind that Soada is not arguing in good faith, that Soada is likely going to throw some nonsense at me about one phobia or another, and is going to just incredulously attack conclusions… but folks that aren’t Soada are not going to be so uncharitable. I can’t tell you the amount of back-to-back likes I suddenly get alerts for on posts that are weeks/months old from folks that I’ve never once seen post.
6 Likes
Nobody is voting here dude. And trying to convince the other forum guys, specially here, is eh… lol
Discussions don’t have to be formal.
You don’t have to participate if it bothers you so much.
1 Like
You’ve never been one to express a rational thought here on the forums. If that’s something you’re capable of, you hide it well.
1 Like
Im the guy who made the post lol
edit:
well thank you, i try really hard
1 Like
It doesn’t show.
1 Like