According to the story on Newsmax, which does NOT provide a link to the 10 page memo, it was not anti-diversity, there were no exclamation points used, and then they try to explain the writer’s view of women is just that they are different, not that men are superior. Then if you go to most of the other sources, they link to the memo itself and then cover his repeated points about women being more emotional, better with people than things and his complaints that people with “conservative” views are shamed into silence. I guess the memo writer wants to be able to tell women to their face that he thinks they are inferior, at least as far as tech jobs are concerned.
“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
Sounds about right to me. His tone is not the best, but he sticks to facts, I think.
His argument is all about dispassionately assessing a distributed data set where you appreciate and understand different strengths different people have for different reasons. Evidence shows there are gender related differences that are widely distributed across the species. The evidence further appears to show gender differentiation is not entirely social. There’s a web of causality in gender-related issues, and the social aspect is critically intertwined with genetic and other physiological factors.
If you measure gender differences statistically, you can derive generalizations that are politically unpalatable, but still accurate. these generalizations are just that. A majority of the observations can be “generalized” as to one thing or another, even though each individual observation will have its own characteristics.
In this case, I think Google is making a huge mistake firing this guy because some people’s feelings are hurt. We have to be honest about these things. Individual variation within a distribution does not invalidate appropriate assessment of the character of cohorts within the distribution.
Read the original 10-page memo and show me why it’s wrong. Not the tone and tenor of the piece. That’s simply dreadful. The guy is a clueless engineer when it comes to his attitude. But the substance is compellingly evidence based.
TWCLIX, search for “women” when reading the memo and you will find plenty of things that are wrong. the first “women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women.” Another example “Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women”. And what is TRUE in this? “For the same work though, women get paid just as much as men. Considering women spend more money than men”
The manifesto writer’s points were “thoughtful, civil and well presented” only in the view of people who were (a) not the ones being told that they were either “aberrations” or fundamentally unfit for their jobs, and (b) ignorant of the enormous mass of evidence which has been out there for literally decades.
Forgive me if I sound a wee bit snappish, but I am a woman in tech — an analyst and software developer, in fact — and I have been having this same bloody discussionagainand againand againand againand againrepeat ad infinitum for over 20 years.
And it does not matter how much evidence there is of parity of talent, because evidence is not the issue. What is the issue, is the fact that men just feel that this is a male field….and if women aren’t there, why, that’s just because women don’t want to do this, and has absolutely nothing to do with the discrepancies in pay, the sexual harassment which is stupidly common in the field, the lack of advancement and promotion opportunities for women in the “harder” technical aspects of the field which in no way reflects the quality of the work done, the way peer review has been shown to systematically come down harder on people who present work with a female name, etc. etc. etc. Oh, no, we get told endlessly, it’s just that women don’t do maths or hard science, we just like all that “feeling” stuff.
I used to enjoy butting heads with idiots and trying to show exactly how they are wrong. After 20+ years, I’m tired of it. I just want to do my d*** job. Unfortunately, I don’t get given the option to do that. I am forced to have these conversations whether I want to or not.
So you aren’t going to get treated with the patience that I’m sure you feel you deserve, seeing as how this conversation is entirely new to you and you’re “just asking questions”, and I bet you haven’t for a moment considered what it is like for people who have been fighting these stupid stereotypes for decades.
My my, you are quite upset about this topic, aren’t you? I certainly feel the anger and frustration in your post. You’ve undoubtedly had quite an unpleasant ride.
No, I’m not looking for your patience or your forbearance. You can be as accusational and impatient of me as you like. It doesn’t change a single thing, except maybe make you feel better as you vent.
I feel for your predicament, but it doesn’t change my views. I am certain you have experienced what you have experienced—and it hasn’t been fun. And maybe it’s as simple as you say it is with “men’s feelings” getting into the way. That’s possible, and may be a near-certainty. You feel that way, and you have direct experience of the matter. That still doesn’t change my view that these things are complicated and ambiguous.
Gender isn’t like race which has no biological validity. Gender occurs on a spectrum where each individual is unique and the same—all at once. But elements of gender enter into a lot of human behavior. Those elements have both physical and cultural aspects, intertwined into a web of causality that is likely impossible to tease out. This intertwined set of issues may or may not have to do with tech.
In the final analysis, I don’t know why tech is dominated by men, and neither do you. You claim to know, and I think your claim is likely partially accurate. But the picture is also probably a lot more complicated. Maybe you’re too stressed to consider that, however (joke).
Actually, yes, pay attention. We DO know why tech is dominated by men. I just told you that…maybe you were too busy being condescending to look at links.
The fact is, you can say “well the situation is complicated”, sure. But ignoring the ample evidence as to what we actually know is a non-starter for dealing with reality, and the only way you can justify claims that the Google dudebro was being “reasonable.”
Now, instead of being condescending, maybe you should stop, shut up, and think about information presented, including just how effing tiresome it is to deal with so many “reasonable” men who think that women couldn’t possibly have a good grasp of what is going on.
I never said I know everything. I’m just pointing out that you are conflating the fact that you are conflating the fact that YOU don’t know anything of the issues in this situation, with the idea that NOBODY knows — and that is flat wrong.
You need to stop thinking that your state of knowledge is what the general state of knowledge is.
If it the levels of women in the field were based on biological differences, then they would be relatively universal. Instead, the levels of women in tech varies quite closely in line with gender equality by country and culture (and America is not nearly as good as it thinks it is). And when those of us who stick with the field have watched women falling away from it as a direct result of sexual harassment, subtle professional discrimination, and the pervasive devaluation of women in programming, then yes, we do get impatient with the poor clueless dears like yourself who are sure we don’t know the “real reason” and “just want to have a discussion about how genders are different.”
Yes, genders are different. But no — that doesn’t mean that so many fewer women have an aptitude for technology and science.
Now grow up and see if you can stop with your current hurt feelings long enough to consider how it would feel if you had done a job you loved for over 20 years and were proud of your accomplishments, but every week or so you had a crowd of random strangers who knew nothing about what you did showing up at your shoulder pointing out that “well, you’re probably one of those ‘diversity’ hires, or else you’re really abnormal, because men just aren’t any good at that.”
Here are examples of the knowledge that actually exists — this is in no way a definitive list of resources to understand this, but I can’t post that many links. These are examples.
@lbstic…you here a strange notion that my feelings would be hurt by anything you’ve written. Nope. Not in the slightest. Your assertions are interesting and undoubtedly borne from hard experience. But there’s much more going on than your embedded biases perceive. So you go ahead and think you have all the answers to gender issues in tech. Fine and dandy. Ok by me. Oh, and by the way, I’m thrilled with more women in tech, I think it’s a great advance to to promote gender equality.
But, apparently, you think you have no part to play in your ongoing drama in tech. It seems like you think your behavior has been exemplary, and it’s everybody’s fault—the men who disrespect you and the other women for tolerating it. But that doesn’t seem to be working for you.
Look, the relationship between (among?) genders is always fraught with the question of sexual reproduction. I don’t care if you don’t agree. It’s always an issue. The maltreatment of women in general stems from sexual dimorphism where most men are physically stronger than most women. These are well worn paths with roots deep in the species. The human cultural roots and biological roots of dimorphism are undeniable and powerful, and need to be dealt with honestly, and I don’t mean simply more powerful masculine musculature. Hormonal cycles, sexual acts, pregnancy, and child care have deep and powerful connections with every single member of the species. All along the gender spectrum, every secon of every day these relationships influence every human being.
Your knee jerk response to both the Google engineer and to my comments demonstrates your deep participation in the conundrum. Your conclusion is borne of experience no doubt. But your refusal to engage on the broader subject is profoundly counterproductive. I never said women were in any way deficient in math and science and engineering etc. That’s YOUR projection and has nothing to do with me.
Striped Cat over 6 years ago
“De-Emphasize Empathy.” How is that a good thing?
Mr. Blawt over 6 years ago
I have little empathy for bigots.
Nantucket Premium Member over 6 years ago
According to the story on Newsmax, which does NOT provide a link to the 10 page memo, it was not anti-diversity, there were no exclamation points used, and then they try to explain the writer’s view of women is just that they are different, not that men are superior. Then if you go to most of the other sources, they link to the memo itself and then cover his repeated points about women being more emotional, better with people than things and his complaints that people with “conservative” views are shamed into silence. I guess the memo writer wants to be able to tell women to their face that he thinks they are inferior, at least as far as tech jobs are concerned.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] over 6 years ago
The Psychopathic Method is used in business today.
twclix over 6 years ago
Read the memo. It’s widely available and I agree with a bunch of it.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber
Consider the author’s response to the criticism:
“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
Sounds about right to me. His tone is not the best, but he sticks to facts, I think.
His argument is all about dispassionately assessing a distributed data set where you appreciate and understand different strengths different people have for different reasons. Evidence shows there are gender related differences that are widely distributed across the species. The evidence further appears to show gender differentiation is not entirely social. There’s a web of causality in gender-related issues, and the social aspect is critically intertwined with genetic and other physiological factors.
If you measure gender differences statistically, you can derive generalizations that are politically unpalatable, but still accurate. these generalizations are just that. A majority of the observations can be “generalized” as to one thing or another, even though each individual observation will have its own characteristics.
In this case, I think Google is making a huge mistake firing this guy because some people’s feelings are hurt. We have to be honest about these things. Individual variation within a distribution does not invalidate appropriate assessment of the character of cohorts within the distribution.
Read the original 10-page memo and show me why it’s wrong. Not the tone and tenor of the piece. That’s simply dreadful. The guy is a clueless engineer when it comes to his attitude. But the substance is compellingly evidence based.
Nantucket Premium Member over 6 years ago
TWCLIX, search for “women” when reading the memo and you will find plenty of things that are wrong. the first “women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women.” Another example “Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women”. And what is TRUE in this? “For the same work though, women get paid just as much as men. Considering women spend more money than men”
lbatik over 6 years ago
The manifesto writer’s points were “thoughtful, civil and well presented” only in the view of people who were (a) not the ones being told that they were either “aberrations” or fundamentally unfit for their jobs, and (b) ignorant of the enormous mass of evidence which has been out there for literally decades.
Forgive me if I sound a wee bit snappish, but I am a woman in tech — an analyst and software developer, in fact — and I have been having this same bloody discussionagainand againand againand againand againrepeat ad infinitum for over 20 years.
And it does not matter how much evidence there is of parity of talent, because evidence is not the issue. What is the issue, is the fact that men just feel that this is a male field….and if women aren’t there, why, that’s just because women don’t want to do this, and has absolutely nothing to do with the discrepancies in pay, the sexual harassment which is stupidly common in the field, the lack of advancement and promotion opportunities for women in the “harder” technical aspects of the field which in no way reflects the quality of the work done, the way peer review has been shown to systematically come down harder on people who present work with a female name, etc. etc. etc. Oh, no, we get told endlessly, it’s just that women don’t do maths or hard science, we just like all that “feeling” stuff.
I used to enjoy butting heads with idiots and trying to show exactly how they are wrong. After 20+ years, I’m tired of it. I just want to do my d*** job. Unfortunately, I don’t get given the option to do that. I am forced to have these conversations whether I want to or not.
So you aren’t going to get treated with the patience that I’m sure you feel you deserve, seeing as how this conversation is entirely new to you and you’re “just asking questions”, and I bet you haven’t for a moment considered what it is like for people who have been fighting these stupid stereotypes for decades.
twclix over 6 years ago
My my, you are quite upset about this topic, aren’t you? I certainly feel the anger and frustration in your post. You’ve undoubtedly had quite an unpleasant ride.
No, I’m not looking for your patience or your forbearance. You can be as accusational and impatient of me as you like. It doesn’t change a single thing, except maybe make you feel better as you vent.
I feel for your predicament, but it doesn’t change my views. I am certain you have experienced what you have experienced—and it hasn’t been fun. And maybe it’s as simple as you say it is with “men’s feelings” getting into the way. That’s possible, and may be a near-certainty. You feel that way, and you have direct experience of the matter. That still doesn’t change my view that these things are complicated and ambiguous.
Gender isn’t like race which has no biological validity. Gender occurs on a spectrum where each individual is unique and the same—all at once. But elements of gender enter into a lot of human behavior. Those elements have both physical and cultural aspects, intertwined into a web of causality that is likely impossible to tease out. This intertwined set of issues may or may not have to do with tech.
In the final analysis, I don’t know why tech is dominated by men, and neither do you. You claim to know, and I think your claim is likely partially accurate. But the picture is also probably a lot more complicated. Maybe you’re too stressed to consider that, however (joke).
lbatik over 6 years ago
Right, right. “You women are so emotional….”
Actually, yes, pay attention. We DO know why tech is dominated by men. I just told you that…maybe you were too busy being condescending to look at links.
lbatik over 6 years ago
The fact is, you can say “well the situation is complicated”, sure. But ignoring the ample evidence as to what we actually know is a non-starter for dealing with reality, and the only way you can justify claims that the Google dudebro was being “reasonable.”
lbatik over 6 years ago
Now, instead of being condescending, maybe you should stop, shut up, and think about information presented, including just how effing tiresome it is to deal with so many “reasonable” men who think that women couldn’t possibly have a good grasp of what is going on.
twclix over 6 years ago
Yes, I can tell you know everything. Good. Hope that works out well for you.
lbatik over 6 years ago
I never said I know everything. I’m just pointing out that you are conflating the fact that you are conflating the fact that YOU don’t know anything of the issues in this situation, with the idea that NOBODY knows — and that is flat wrong.
You need to stop thinking that your state of knowledge is what the general state of knowledge is.
If it the levels of women in the field were based on biological differences, then they would be relatively universal. Instead, the levels of women in tech varies quite closely in line with gender equality by country and culture (and America is not nearly as good as it thinks it is). And when those of us who stick with the field have watched women falling away from it as a direct result of sexual harassment, subtle professional discrimination, and the pervasive devaluation of women in programming, then yes, we do get impatient with the poor clueless dears like yourself who are sure we don’t know the “real reason” and “just want to have a discussion about how genders are different.”
Yes, genders are different. But no — that doesn’t mean that so many fewer women have an aptitude for technology and science.
Now grow up and see if you can stop with your current hurt feelings long enough to consider how it would feel if you had done a job you loved for over 20 years and were proud of your accomplishments, but every week or so you had a crowd of random strangers who knew nothing about what you did showing up at your shoulder pointing out that “well, you’re probably one of those ‘diversity’ hires, or else you’re really abnormal, because men just aren’t any good at that.”
lbatik over 6 years ago
Here are examples of the knowledge that actually exists — this is in no way a definitive list of resources to understand this, but I can’t post that many links. These are examples.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057475/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/29/are_women_bad_at_math_graphs_refute.html
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding
http://valleywag.gawker.com/this-is-why-there-arent-enough-women-in-tech-1221929631
Geezer over 6 years ago
Right, right. “You women are so emotional….”
Indeed. Your several comments here amptly demonstrate why such an assertion is unfounded.
edward thomas Premium Member over 6 years ago
Ask not for whom the bell tolls!
twclix over 6 years ago
@lbstic…you here a strange notion that my feelings would be hurt by anything you’ve written. Nope. Not in the slightest. Your assertions are interesting and undoubtedly borne from hard experience. But there’s much more going on than your embedded biases perceive. So you go ahead and think you have all the answers to gender issues in tech. Fine and dandy. Ok by me. Oh, and by the way, I’m thrilled with more women in tech, I think it’s a great advance to to promote gender equality.
But, apparently, you think you have no part to play in your ongoing drama in tech. It seems like you think your behavior has been exemplary, and it’s everybody’s fault—the men who disrespect you and the other women for tolerating it. But that doesn’t seem to be working for you.
Look, the relationship between (among?) genders is always fraught with the question of sexual reproduction. I don’t care if you don’t agree. It’s always an issue. The maltreatment of women in general stems from sexual dimorphism where most men are physically stronger than most women. These are well worn paths with roots deep in the species. The human cultural roots and biological roots of dimorphism are undeniable and powerful, and need to be dealt with honestly, and I don’t mean simply more powerful masculine musculature. Hormonal cycles, sexual acts, pregnancy, and child care have deep and powerful connections with every single member of the species. All along the gender spectrum, every secon of every day these relationships influence every human being.
Your knee jerk response to both the Google engineer and to my comments demonstrates your deep participation in the conundrum. Your conclusion is borne of experience no doubt. But your refusal to engage on the broader subject is profoundly counterproductive. I never said women were in any way deficient in math and science and engineering etc. That’s YOUR projection and has nothing to do with me.