“Literally 1000 to 1" - If by “literally” you mean presumptuously. Considering you have no idea who all the sexual offenders are in the country and what their political affiliation is, your statement is idiotic at best.

“Menstrual tracking was an incredible oversight.”

Right but you’re saying why not blame X instead of Y. I’m asking why any of you think anyone needs to be blamed for anything. Blame implies guilt and guilt implies wrongdoing. How is the basic dynamic of supply and demand in a free market wrong?

And how do you know these people are that similar? A hunch?

I do agree with you that multiple perspectives can be useful depending on the context but we’re not talking about multiple perspectives, we’re talking about creating workforces that are purposefully diverse in gender, race, and I’m guessing other things (since nobody can define exactly what is diverse and what’s not…

Again, I’m looking for proof, not conjecture.

Why blame anyone? Why does someone have to be blamed?

“and people requesting services that require people to do so that generally pays poorly while at the same time pushing those people (who have to work those jobs, someone has to of course) further and further away”

Yes, gentrification, the improvement of a neighborhood. How awful. We should all protest it when people improve things that they own because it might make those things unaffordable to us. We all know that property owners have no rights and should always submit to the whims of random people.

Yeah but that’s just racist! We all know that every business has to be exactly 50% of every race, gender, religion, disability, nationality, economic class, obese and thin, sexual orientation, etc. Then everything will be fair, because reasons. Otherwise, they’re not “diverse”. And white people are no diverse, they’re…

So exactly which one of the 632k results are you implying proves that workplace diversity is inherently better and a lack of it is inherently bad?

I didn’t lay out a hypothesis. I asked where the proof is for the hypothesis which you subscribe to.

Well I’m sure you have some good qualities too?

What’s so hard about about backing up your claims with evidence? Either you have the evidence or you don’t. If you don’t, just admit you don’t and say that these are your guesses or opinions rather than positing them as facts. Just be honest.

Spoken like a true idiot.

“Ideas for startups/products often come from those that understand a demographic’s needs/frustrations.”

Why do people like you think that, “educate yourself” is an argument? You know that means nothing, right? Where is all this “scientific research”? Why even reply and mention it if you can’t even cite any of it?

What’s dumb is saying, “there are literally hundreds of reports” then not even citing a single one. You just backed up my entire point. You and those who think like you simply make claims and don’t back them up. And when you do try and back them up, its either with more unfounded claims, misrepresentations, or data…

It takes seconds to read your article and see that it proves nothing nor cites anything that proves anything and it even explicitly states that this is just correlation and not causality:

“It’s actually super simple - homogeneity of employees leads to homogeneity of viewpoint, which is bad for business.”