I find the linked HBR article• quite interesting since it proposes a mechanism for diversity improving performance: in non-diverse environments, out-group members receive less support for their ideas. Assuming performance is equivalent and that the ideas are just as good, it means you're throwing away some percentage of your employees' ideas without justification. That's just hamstringing yourself.

Another one mentioned there is the bit about success among certain groups correlating with whether you have a member from that group. There are others like that but I hadn't heard about the first thing before.

• https://hbr.org/2013/12/how-diversity-can-drive-innovation

I think it is time to begin pushing back more against articles like this and their underlying data, which is superficial at best and genuinely dishonest and one-sided at worst. They may have a couple positive diversity studies, but when I look out my window I see Amazon, Microsoft, Netflix, Apple, Tesla, Alibaba, DJI, Google...all founded by men of various descriptions, all destroying their global competition.

Could they really be "better" by having female CEOs? Is that really true? Should we really continue to entertain this fantasy in order to avoid being screamed at online?

If the answer is "yes," then the conclusion is that there is a massive global conspiracy to prevent women from succeeding. This conclusion leads directly to the massive undercurrent of resentment and social persecution that is now the norm in tech. Tech has been made much worse by this...to the point where I no longer even want to participate in the community.

If the answer is "no," you get reality: Men simply tend to out perform at engineering and mathematical extremes and this results in more male CEOs. Men are also genetically predisposed to having to win economically in order to find a mate...is it any surprise they tend to be more competitive?

None of these male CEOs had their success handed to them, they had to annihilate a huge field of competitors to win and that effort and brilliance deserves respect. With "diversity think," suddenly, all these brilliant CEOs no longer deserve credit for their accomplishments - After all, they had it handed to them by the system!

That seems deeply wrong to me, it also seems inconsistent with values that made America the leader in the world: Great people rise to the top, no matter what.

I know many highly successful engineering and technical women. The more successful they are, the less they are concerned with diversity-related issues. The most successful technical women I know in engineering and venture capital do not whine and complain and blame other people for their failures - They bulldoze their competitors and they win by being truly better.

My problem is not that there aren't advantages to diversity in some situations, my problem is the cultishness of the opinions being expressed here and the refusal to question many of the relatively superficial data points which are brought forth to "prove" these statements.

The fact that these opinions are so viciously defended and people asking questions so viciously persecuted makes me certain that they can and should be questioned more frequently and treated with less reverence.

I have noticed over the last five years, the diversity-related content in many Meetups and Conferences has grown to the point where it is now 30% of content by weight. Fail to include a woman in your speaking line up, get excoriated online. Make someone uncomfortable by making an off-color comment, get banned from an event like Doug Crockford did without explanation.

What started as a positive desire to promote inclusiveness became a dogmatic and viciously enforced standard: YOU MUST BE DIVERSE OR WE WILL FUCK YOU UP AND GET YOU FIRED, RUIN YOUR CAREER!

I used to organize three large meetups. Once I began seeing how organizers are treated for not paying this "diversity tax," my desire to ever organize a conference or event ever again shrank down to nothing.

Quite frankly: There aren't a whole lot of women in tech because they may not generally want to take some of the jobs available here. Engineering sucks. It is not glamorous work, it is right below plumbing as a job in how it is treated at many large tech companies. I was an engineer and I saw many women try it out and then move on to other roles with more human interaction, operational and social components such as design or product management. I do not blame them.

Am I literally the only person who feels this way? Who is with me?