[vilmosi]

>>> Yes, deliberately. The fact there's inequality in the distribution, when there is no good reason for it is evidence of some sort of bias in the selection process.

If it's unconscious bias, it's not deliberate. And it's much more than just selection bias, it's also a cultural/social issue. It happens way before someone enters the workforce.

>>> For the reason that there is inequality between the two genders in society.

I'm not denying that.

[YeGoblynQueenne]

>> If it's unconscious bias, it's not deliberate.

The bias might be unconscious, but the tendency to avoid hiring people from a certain group is entirely conscious. The person subject to the bias will find a way to rationalise and therefore justify their tendency to hire fewer of that group- "in my experience, most A candidates are not fit for the role" or "maybe group A is just not very good at this role because of human evolution" etc.

>> It happens way before someone enters the workforce.

It's 2016. That excuse -the whole "it's society's fault"- died sometime last century, when society's attention was drawn to the issues of gender inequality for the first time. We all know there are issues, we all know to keep an eye out for them- those of use who care about that sort of thing anyway.

As to the tech companies in particular, they don't have much of an excuse because the lack of diversity in their workplaces has often been pointed out.

[vilmosi]

>>> The bias might be unconscious, but the tendency to avoid hiring people from a certain group is entirely conscious

That statement doesn't make sense. Avoiding to hire people from a certain group is bias by definition. How can it be unconscious and conscious at the same time?

>>> It's 2016. That excuse -the whole "it's society's fault"- died sometime last century

What are you talking about, there's absolutely a cultural and societal element here.

>>> those of use who care about that sort of thing anyway

Oh get off your high horse. Some of us just don't recommend breaking the law to fix this.

Your solution to tech diversity is overly simplistic and unhelpful. Not to mention sexist and ILLEGAL.

At best, it would solve equality of outcome, but not equality of opportunity. Women might still be discriminated against during interviews, but "that's OK because we filled our quota for this year" ?! How is that fixing the problem?

Just curious, would you ask other industries to do the same and implement these quota requirements? Would you impose that sewage workers reach 50% gender parity?

[YeGoblynQueenne]

You're yelling ("ILLEGAL") and getting into personal comments ("get off your high horse"). I'm not interested in discussing any further.