>That what James Damore said that really cut to the core was that a lot of us women in tech were only there because a bar was lowered to get us in to meet some quota.
I don't think that is what he was saying, he was saying lowering the bar is of limited utility if not that many women are choosing tech careers. Maybe addressing the reason that tech is not attractive to women is a better solution?
I don't think that is what he was saying, he was saying lowering the bar is of limited utility if not that many women are choosing tech careers. Maybe addressing the reason that tech is not attractive to women is a better solution?