The article doesn’t even provide enough detail to make an informed decision if this is a problem or not. They state 45% of layoffs in the tech industry were women, then only contrast with Metas 63% male workforce to get to the conclusion that women were more affected by the layoffs. Without noting if metas male dominant workforce is on to high or low side for the industry.

Then the article goes on to explain that the positions most affected were the traditionally female dominated roles, HR, recruitment, etc. (I.e., the non “tech” roles that one would expect tech companies to inherently value less as a core part of their business).

This isn’t to say the tech industry isn’t male dominated, doesn’t have issues with recruiting and retaining women in tech roles, etc. I just wanted to know more about this and was left with more questions be because the framing of the article is so poor.

So women are more disposable and companies cut “soft skills” first. Great, working with tech companies is already full of people with absolutely no social intelligence, let’s cut the “fluff” departments (yet what hires on the tech spots? Insurance and the other underpinnings of the compensation packages), and then people show up with “wElL iTs NoT wOmEn iN TeCh”.

It’s the same energy as when an article gets posted about racial equality. So many ways to talk around a big societal problem.

From what I read in the article, layoffs were higher in the non-techy departments of these tech companies.
Departments like marketing, and HR, that have a higher demographics of women, as stated in this article.
I don’t think the article is being fair by saying this drags us back many years regarding efforts in equity, when said efforts were targeted towards tech and engineering departments.