If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Conservatives finally have a reason to like Google Doodles: They are part of the war on women too   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 48
    More: Misc, Google logo, school curricula, Winter Olympics in Sochi  
•       •       •

3630 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Mar 2014 at 10:44 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-02 07:54:06 AM  
Women have been underrepresented in history in almost all fields: science, school curricula, business, politics -- and, sadly, doodles -- despite incredible contributions both directly and behind the scenes,"

There you go, if you randomly pick from famous historical figures, chances are you are going to get a dude, because they wrote history.
 
2014-03-02 08:59:01 AM  
i.huffpost.como

So they got a woman to revenge-troll all us color-blind men with charts?
 
2014-03-02 10:35:28 AM  
Uncertain men and women?
 
2014-03-02 10:41:17 AM  
Oh my God, we're attacking Google doodles now?
 
2014-03-02 10:49:41 AM  

Mugato: Oh my God, we're attacking Google doodles now?


enough-internet-for-today.gif
 
2014-03-02 10:50:30 AM  
Well to be fair to Google you can only celebrate making a sammich so many times.
 
2014-03-02 11:00:27 AM  

EvilEgg: There you go, if you randomly pick from famous historical figures, chances are you are going to get a dude, because they wrote history.


Sad but true. If these idiots answer is to rewrite history by skewing the Google doodles, I object.
 
2014-03-02 11:15:55 AM  
A politics thread in the geek tab?

/more likely than you'd think.
 
2014-03-02 11:45:38 AM  

way south: A politics thread in the geek tab?

/more likely than you'd think.


Ewww.

Waiter, there's some social justice in my geek tab.

I'd like to send this back and speak with your manager, please.
 
2014-03-02 11:46:21 AM  
Ladies and Gentlemen, exhibit #242453 why third wave feminism continues to be a terrible self parody.  Inequality has been a constant through most of history, Google Doodles are merely a reflection of this, not a cause. Since honoring the living comes with all kinds of potential downsides, Google's only real choice here to satisfy the revisionists is to stop honoring historical figures. More embedded games (but not Pac-Man, that'd be sexist), less humans.
 
2014-03-02 11:55:28 AM  
Using that logic, shouldn't conservatives like Bill Clinton?
 
2014-03-02 12:03:58 PM  

EvilEgg: There you go, if you randomly pick from famous historical figures, chances are you are going to get a dude, because they wrote history.


This is true, and they also make sure to include important women. Grace Hopper was one of the most important early computer scientists (if you've ever said "debug" it's because of her), and she got a doodle. It's not like they're going out of their way to exclude women.
 
2014-03-02 12:04:43 PM  
Fark them biches
 
2014-03-02 12:05:43 PM  
Women have been underrepresented in history in almost all fields: science, school curricula, business, politics
[..]
The unconscious sexism apparent in Google Doodles echoes Silicon Valley's brogamming culture.


If it weren't for those Sumerian Valley brogrammers and their damn abacuses with its sexist Sexagesimal numeral systemal, women would have had equal rights four millenia ago.


/or maybe it's rather echoing aforementioned history and the recording thereof than a corporation's business environment? Nah...
 
2014-03-02 12:12:08 PM  

Elegy: way south: A politics thread in the geek tab?

/more likely than you'd think.

Ewww.

Waiter, there's some social justice in my geek tab.

I'd like to send this back and speak with your manager, please.


Uh, anything involving 'the patriarchy' and 'men are bad!' and 'women are under represented!' isn't, by default, social justice.

It's usually, at best, pointing out the glaringly farking obvious, and at worst, it's 'encouraging' people into fields they're not interested in to force-change gender stereotypes, and/or shaming people for conforming to those stereotypes.

And usually anyone calling themselves a 'social justice' monger has a very convenient click-based advertising machine on their website, and/or just really is a racist, sexist, person looking for justification.

No, I'm not saying that's true for all social justice advocates.  I'm thinking of the 'men's rights' advocates here, for example, who are really just sexist woman haters looking for a reason to spew venom.
 
2014-03-02 12:21:39 PM  

Mugato: Oh my God, we're attacking Google doodles now?



It's the Google buses and the Google Barges in San Fran. They pissed off the wrong people and now everything Google does will be raised as evidence  that they must atone or be destroyed.

/That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
 
2014-03-02 12:26:39 PM  
No, no, they got it all wrong. Google Doodle is dominated by drawings of dicks, not by dicks drawing!
 
2014-03-02 12:27:37 PM  
just show a vagina. It's more important than all of men's achievements, because that's why most of them strived in the first place - to get a better class of poontang.
 
2014-03-02 12:28:26 PM  
Simple solution:

Someone (preferably a minority woman) invent a time machine, then go back in history and kill off all the white men who, because of societal norms at the time, were able to attain positions in which they became famous for something. Then, replace them with women from the present (who have been trained to take over the lives of these men.)

Bonus: Throw in some "expert" who determines that as men become exceptional, they sometimes switch gender. Take back a bunch of bogus data to support this.

Problem solved. A nice, evenly distributed pie chart. And, people think that being really good at something makes men turn into women. Something something trannies.
 
2014-03-02 12:33:23 PM  

jjorsett: Mugato: Oh my God, we're attacking Google doodles now?


It's the Google buses and the Google Barges in San Fran. They pissed off the wrong people and now everything Google does will be raised as evidence  that they must atone or be destroyed.

/That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.


You have to admit, watching a massive Google bus drive off, 80% empty, while you schlep yourself down to pack onto a nasty, crowed BART car, isn't likely to kindle warm feelings.
 
2014-03-02 12:52:27 PM  

dugitman: [i.huffpost.com image 570x330]o

So they got a woman to revenge-troll all us color-blind men with charts?


I'm NOT colorblind and I can't make out which color goes with which label,
 
2014-03-02 12:52:41 PM  
The vast majority of recorded historical figures were men because throughout history most societies have been male-dominated. You can either acknowledge that and accept that anyone talking about history is, as a consequence, going to be talking mostly about men, or you can refuse to accept it on ideological grounds and write pissy articles on how OUTRAGED you are because Google's history doodles mostly focused on men.
 
2014-03-02 01:06:56 PM  
This is why social justice warriors are insufferable douchebags.
 
2014-03-02 01:11:21 PM  

EngineerAU: Ladies and Gentlemen, exhibit #242453 why third wave feminism continues to be a terrible self parody.  Inequality has been a constant through most of history, Google Doodles are merely a reflection of this, not a cause. Since honoring the living comes with all kinds of potential downsides, Google's only real choice here to satisfy the revisionists is to stop honoring historical figures. More embedded games (but not Pac-Man, that'd be sexist), less humans.


I think the answer is Cis Pac-Person?

No, that offends the non cis-gendered. Simply just Pac-Person?

Is "Person" offensive yet? The word doesn't seem to have an gender connotations, going back to it's original Latin.

Wait. it's original meaning was "actor's mask, character in a play," and since in those days nearly all actors were male, the word is sexist since it refers to an activity women were once excluded from a couple thousand years ago, so we should be offended by it now.

That's how it works, right?
 
2014-03-02 01:14:42 PM  

Gunther: The vast majority of recorded historical figures were men because throughout history most societies have been male-dominated. You can either acknowledge that and accept that anyone talking about history is, as a consequence, going to be talking mostly about men, or you can refuse to accept it on ideological grounds and write pissy articles on how OUTRAGED you are because Google's history doodles mostly focused on men.


It's seems strange this isn't obvious to everyone.
The limitations on opportunity that have existed through history are something we should acknowledge and strive to correct, not something we should pretend never happened.
 
2014-03-02 01:21:59 PM  
*sigh* "Brogamming".

Listen, princess. I'd LOVE to hire female programmers. It's the right thing to do, it leads to a less stinky work environment, brings another diverse viewpoint that'll save our ass one day, and it makes the feminists in HR calm their tits. Thing is, there just aren't enough to go around. Maybe they aren't interested and don't go into the field. Maybe they're intimidated by the gender split. Maybe they're being steered away from it by a patriarchal society. I have no clue (but I do have suspicions). Go figure it out and fix THAT problem, because I can't go conscript women - I have to hire people who apply.


Here are some anecdotal datapoints:
We have two female programmers. One is absolutely awesome and destined for management as soon as we can talk her into it, one is rather limited and mediocre and admits that the only reason she has a job is so she doesn't  have to ask her husband for money to buy shoes. Her words, not mine. Neither of them came up through the traditional Programmer feed-pipe. The good one came from a business-oriented track, the crappy one came from a document-design track, and both tagged along as the group retooled into automation and then into the full-up development organization it is today.

I have a close friend who was in school to become a programmer. She had a sexuality crisis under the pressure of the gender split - too many awkward teenaged boys who had never touched a boobie. She dropped out, went to community college for awhile, discovered she liked women, and then eventually got a business degree. Now she works for us as an application support specialist, and is picking up the skills in her spare time.


Outside my workplace, I know two female programmers.
One of them has a man's name and enjoys the attentions of many men.
The other wasn't educated as a programmer, but came up through self-taught hobby projects.

In short, I'm pretty sure the filter keeping women out of tech in quantity is at the university admissions level or earlier - with a minor dose of 'intimidating gender split' forcing them out once they already get there. If I were to point a specific finger, actually, it would be at high school guidance counselors and teachers.  We had girls in my comp sci classes in high school. It was about 50/50. NONE of them went on to do it at the university level, whereas most of the guys did.
   
TLDR: Business is not the problem. They aren't there for us to hire, so we can't hire them. The problem is upstream.
 
2014-03-02 01:22:23 PM  

drumhellar: EngineerAU: Ladies and Gentlemen, exhibit #242453 why third wave feminism continues to be a terrible self parody.  Inequality has been a constant through most of history, Google Doodles are merely a reflection of this, not a cause. Since honoring the living comes with all kinds of potential downsides, Google's only real choice here to satisfy the revisionists is to stop honoring historical figures. More embedded games (but not Pac-Man, that'd be sexist), less humans.

I think the answer is Cis Pac-Person?

No, that offends the non cis-gendered. Simply just Pac-Person?

Is "Person" offensive yet? The word doesn't seem to have an gender connotations, going back to it's original Latin.

Wait. it's original meaning was "actor's mask, character in a play," and since in those days nearly all actors were male, the word is sexist since it refers to an activity women were once excluded from a couple thousand years ago, so we should be offended by it now.

That's how it works, right?


Person is offensive to furries, so yep. SJWs have made everything offensive
 
2014-03-02 01:26:38 PM  
Is this reason #214 why I am supposed to feel bad for being a white male?
 
2014-03-02 01:28:23 PM  
If you want to truly see a sausage factory, you need to check out who writes and edits Wikipedia pages. There's about a 9-1 male-female ratio there.
 
2014-03-02 01:30:50 PM  

Weng: *sigh* "Brogamming".

Listen, princess. I'd LOVE to hire female programmers. It's the right thing to do, it leads to a less stinky work environment, brings another diverse viewpoint that'll save our ass one day, and it makes the feminists in HR calm their tits. Thing is, there just aren't enough to go around. Maybe they aren't interested and don't go into the field. Maybe they're intimidated by the gender split. Maybe they're being steered away from it by a patriarchal society. I have no clue (but I do have suspicions). Go figure it out and fix THAT problem, because I can't go conscript women - I have to hire people who apply.


Here are some anecdotal datapoints:
We have two female programmers. One is absolutely awesome and destined for management as soon as we can talk her into it, one is rather limited and mediocre and admits that the only reason she has a job is so she doesn't  have to ask her husband for money to buy shoes. Her words, not mine. Neither of them came up through the traditional Programmer feed-pipe. The good one came from a business-oriented track, the crappy one came from a document-design track, and both tagged along as the group retooled into automation and then into the full-up development organization it is today.

I have a close friend who was in school to become a programmer. She had a sexuality crisis under the pressure of the gender split - too many awkward teenaged boys who had never touched a boobie. She dropped out, went to community college for awhile, discovered she liked women, and then eventually got a business degree. Now she works for us as an application support specialist, and is picking up the skills in her spare time.


Outside my workplace, I know two female programmers.
One of them has a man's name and enjoys the attentions of many men.
The other wasn't educated as a programmer, but came up through self-taught hobby projects.

In short, I'm pretty sure the filter keeping women out of tech in quantity is at the university ad ...


Wrong thread?
 
2014-03-02 01:33:04 PM  

machoprogrammer: Wrong thread?


Nope. Right thread. Just soliliquizing over the real, underlying problem the social justice weenies are distorting into a caricature.
 
2014-03-02 03:55:46 PM  
I DEMAND TO BE OUTRAGED AND OFFENDED BY SOMETHING!

/time to rant about how racist coffee is because if you have it without cream or sugar, it is considered "dark."
 
2014-03-02 03:57:29 PM  

Weng: TLDR: Business is not the problem. They aren't there for us to hire, so we can't hire them. The problem is upstream.


www.quickmeme.com

Time and time again we find that problems start before the level people try to fix them. Kids aren't doing well in high school? Too late, should have intervened in elementary school. Toddlers are mostly a uniform tabula rasa, scatter some Leapster toys in the poor part of town and see if they don't make a difference.  They talk about OLPC lifting the poor of Africa but we could start with Mississippi.
 
2014-03-02 04:13:16 PM  

Weng: In short, I'm pretty sure the filter keeping women out of tech in quantity is at the university admissions level or earlier - with a minor dose of 'intimidating gender split' forcing them out once they already get there. If I were to point a specific finger, actually, it would be at high school guidance counselors and teachers.  We had girls in my comp sci classes in high school. It was about 50/50. NONE of them went on to do it at the university level, whereas most of the guys did.
   
TLDR: Business is not the problem. They aren't there for us to hire, so we can't hire them. The problem is upstream.


I was involved in some interviewing recently. Of a dozen people we saw, two were women. One was really good, we offered her a job, based on our original ad (and at the top value), but she turned as down as not enough, so, you know, thanks for wasting our farking time. The other was quite good, but we saw better candidates at the time.
 
2014-03-02 04:33:14 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-02 04:43:16 PM  

farkeruk: I was involved in some interviewing recently. Of a dozen people we saw, two were women. One was really good, we offered her a job, based on our original ad (and at the top value), but she turned as down as not enough, so, you know, thanks for wasting our farking time. The other was quite good, but we saw better candidates at the time.


I can't blame people who do the listed-salary rejection thing. Oftentimes after the interview the role didn't turn out to be what they were looking for; or it was inadequately described; or they already have other, better offers on the table but are still considering you because they thought you might have something they were more interested in doing (and you don't). Don't forget, they're interviewing you just as much as you're interviewing them.

I'll do anything for money, but the more it diverges from where I want to go in my career right now, the more money it's going to take.


Of course, there are also people who ignore the listed salary requirements range and just expect more than the position is even worth because they read about Google's pay and benefits.
 
2014-03-02 04:48:54 PM  

EvilEgg: Women have been underrepresented in history in almost all fields: science, school curricula, business, politics -- and, sadly, doodles -- despite incredible contributions both directly and behind the scenes,"

There you go, if you randomly pick from famous historical figures, chances are you are going to get a dude, because they wrote history.


Done in one. How do you even do this without honoring stuff like the inventor of the disposable diaper or the windshield wiper?
 
2014-03-02 04:54:05 PM  

Weng: Of course, there are also people who ignore the listed salary requirements range and just expect more than the position is even worth because they read about Google's pay and benefits.


I know the company she was working for and the problem is they pay REALLY well. If people get sick of working there and start looking around, they realise they're going to have to take a salary cut to leave.

It was a DBA role. And we really struggled to find anyone. We saw her and a couple of people who were scary bad. In the end, I convinced the boss (by passing the guy between us) that it wasn't necessary. We, the devs could do most of the DB management and if we needed a specialist, we'd just pay to get a freelancer in. Two years later, we hadn't needed them.
 
2014-03-02 04:55:32 PM  

Weng: farkeruk: I was involved in some interviewing recently. Of a dozen people we saw, two were women. One was really good, we offered her a job, based on our original ad (and at the top value), but she turned as down as not enough, so, you know, thanks for wasting our farking time. The other was quite good, but we saw better candidates at the time.

I can't blame people who do the listed-salary rejection thing. Oftentimes after the interview the role didn't turn out to be what they were looking for; or it was inadequately described; or they already have other, better offers on the table but are still considering you because they thought you might have something they were more interested in doing (and you don't). Don't forget, they're interviewing you just as much as you're interviewing them.

I'll do anything for money, but the more it diverges from where I want to go in my career right now, the more money it's going to take.


Of course, there are also people who ignore the listed salary requirements range and just expect more than the position is even worth because they read about Google's pay and benefits.


Isn't this negotiation 101 though? Turn down the first offer, ask for 1.5-2.0x as much as you will accept, see where they meet you?  Haven't ever done that with my jobs because I was just thrilled to get one.
 
2014-03-02 05:20:09 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: dugitman: [i.huffpost.com image 570x330]o

So they got a woman to revenge-troll all us color-blind men with charts?

I'm NOT colorblind and I can't make out which color goes with which label,


If you can't make out which color goes with which label then you are color blind.  Really, try taking an online test.  A comment in a football thread here showed another farker that he was color blind.  He didn't know it either until he mentioned in the thread that the new color first down lines that the NFL was using were impossible to see because they faded into the background.  That was when they were using the obnoxiously bright pink lines for breast cancer awareness month.  Lines that were so bright they could be seen by a blind man wearing a blindfold and hiding in a dark room two blocks away from the nearest television.
 
2014-03-02 05:20:27 PM  
Women have been underrepresented in history in almost all fields: science, school curricula, business, politics -- and, sadly, doodles -- despite incredible contributions both directly and behind the scenes,"

guess they weren't all that incredible.
 
2014-03-02 06:15:40 PM  
Two things:

1.  I never hear about the disparity in gender makeup for the QA space.

2.  Any lack of female programmers (IMHO) is more due to a skill gap than a sexist culture.  If any of the companies I've worked for in the tech field over the past two decades had an open role and the decision came down to a male or female, all other things being equal, the woman would get hired every time.  As a hiring manager I am looking for skill and ability to mesh with the group.  Skill is more important, but fitting the existing team is also important.
 
2014-03-02 09:46:52 PM  
 
2014-03-03 12:18:50 AM  
It's not google's fault that biatches ain't shiat but hoes and tricks.
 
2014-03-03 08:14:25 AM  
News:  Women sorely under represented in Penile Cancer studies, how do we fix it?
 
2014-03-03 06:03:25 PM  
The word sexism has lost all meaning a long time ago.  I think somewhere around the point that Jezebel was complaining that pink pens labelled "for women" were more expensive than regular pens.

Start listing women equally to men, and what you'll find - given enough time - are a bunch of accomplishments by women that aren't that amazing...they were just put in there because there was a quota to fill.  I think they had it right at about 20%, that actually sounds like they were going out of their way to be fair.

Furthermore, this imbalance is an expression of the preferences of the people who make up the majority of tech geniuses: white men.  I wish for once when something stupid like this happened, the people concerned would just dismissively say, "We do this, because this is what we want to do.  We understand that you don't like it, but we don't care.  Suck my balls."
 
2014-03-03 06:48:01 PM  

IrishFarmer: The word sexism has lost all meaning a long time ago.  I think somewhere around the point that Jezebel was complaining that pink pens labelled "for women" were more expensive than regular pens.

Start listing women equally to men, and what you'll find - given enough time - are a bunch of accomplishments by women that aren't that amazing...they were just put in there because there was a quota to fill.  I think they had it right at about 20%, that actually sounds like they were going out of their way to be fair.

Furthermore, this imbalance is an expression of the preferences of the people who make up the majority of tech geniuses: white men.  I wish for once when something stupid like this happened, the people concerned would just dismissively say, "We do this, because this is what we want to do.  We understand that you don't like it, but we don't care.  Suck my balls."


This person agrees:
southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com
 
2014-03-03 11:45:35 PM  

IrishFarmer: Furthermore, this imbalance is an expression of the preferences of the people who make up the majority of tech geniuses: white men. I wish for once when something stupid like this happened, the people concerned would just dismissively say, "We do this, because this is what we want to do. We understand that you don't like it, but we don't care. Suck my balls."


I wish people would put it down to confirmed factors like X chromosome inactivation.

Huge benefit for greatly reducing the chances of having inconvenient conditions like colorblindness, or deadly conditions like hemophilia.

But it also means there's a lot less variability in many of women's inherited traits overall compared to men, including mental traits like intelligence.  This means there are way more super-intelligent men than women (and thus more scientists) but of course it cuts both ways so it means there are a lot more super stupid men than women.

And that's not even going into the differences in preferences and choices men and women make.

Of course this means that the extremely smart women should be celebrated all the more than the men who have similar levels of achievement since those women are truly more exceptional than the men who are their direct peers.

But of course none of this ever gets mentioned because it interferes with the current cultural narrative, so we're left with Snidely Whiplash and a bunch of people annoyed at Google for no reason.

And while there are plenty of reasons to be annoyed at Google; this just isn't one of them.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report