I don't. However, it's a fine line. Pro sports is a bit special, but it might be racist to not let a player try out because of an asian name, quoting that "thanks for your letter, but asian men are on average so short that we don't want to see you". Context, and what precise actions are taken is important here.

The underrepresntation of black people in tech isn't "racist" though there are probably a lot of racist actions taken place that led up to it, and of course tons of structural racism that cause it long term. But the discrepancy isn't "racist" in itself. It's just a discrepancy.

> Pro sports is a bit special, but it might be racist to not let a player try out because of an asian name, quoting that "thanks for your letter, but asian men are on average so short that we don't want to see you".

Well of course it is, but it's inaccurate to suggest that the gender disparity in tech is entirely attributable to companies turning away female applicants on account of their gender. And if the suggestion was for some hypothetical company that was doing that to stop, there would be no objection.

The problem comes when the portion of the gender disparity that isn't attributable to discrimination is attributed to it anyway, and then employers are continually lambasted for something they didn't actually do.

It distracts from addressing the real problems (especially at the high school level) that could actually improve the gender ratio going forward.

> it's inaccurate to suggest that the gender disparity in tech is entirely attributable to companies turning away female applicants on account of their gender.

And that's why no one makes that argument I hope!

Then what was your claim supposed to be an analogy for?