Support NeoGAF

[finowns]

His source was garbage and his science was garbage.

He's a spoiled whiny brat who threw a tantrum because he wasn't being treated as a natural genius an feeeemmmalllesss were being given equal treatment to him.

Do you have some qualification to call the science garbage or a link to someone who does that agrees with you? And he's spoiled brat? I wouldn't know I never met him but you should attack the argument not the person.

 

[Shamylov]

And you disagree with: 'Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things' ?

Damore got it from an actual study:


It's a clear statement backed with some evidence. You are adding the extra bit about Damore believing women are less apt and fools to go against nature.

I already explained that the disparities deserve a more thorough and in-depth analysis than "females are less interested in tech".

Also, I didn't add anything to his statement. It's very clear what he is trying to communicate even if he's trying to sound less offensive.

"Women show more interest in *people*
You can try to make software engineering and programming more *people-oriented*
but you can only make it so much *people-oriented*"

It'd be just as obvious if he said software engineering needed to be more *basketball-like* to attract blacks to the field since obviously blacks have a greater interest in *basketball*.

 

[PataHikari]

Do you have some qualification to call the science garbage or a link to someone who does that agrees with you? And he's spoiled brat? I wouldn't know I never met him but you should attack the argument not the person.

I'm absolutely going to attack a misogynistic baby for being a misogynistic baby.

This guy is not worthy of respect, his ideas are not worth considering.


You don't give bigots a platform, you don't debate them, you tell them they're wrong and to shut up or go away. He clearly didn't shut up, so Google told him to go away.

 

[TaroYamada]

Some of it's oriented around their politics too much, afaik a company can fire you for your politics. I know Goodwill fired somebody for being a socialist in Florida in the early 00's. I don't support such actions but it's legal afaik. What's questionable is the allegations that they were taking actions in hiring that were potentially detrimental to white or asian men, definitely not legal and where Damore and his cohort have a potential case.

 

[finowns]

I already explained that the disparities deserve a more thorough and in-depth analysis than "females are less interested in tech".

Also, I didn't add anything to his statement. It's very clear what he is trying to communicate even if he's trying to sound less offensive.

"Women show more interest in *people*
You can try to make software engineering and programming more *people-oriented*
but you can only make it so much *people-oriented*"

It'd be just as obvious if he said software engineering needed to be more *basketball-like* to attract blacks to the field since obviously blacks have a greater interest in *basketball*.

This is what I mean you are purposely avoiding criticizing his idea and asserting you know what he really means; I assume implying he is a sexist/racist. It's a much easier way to argue but not very persuasive

 

[PataHikari]

This is what I mean you are purposely avoiding criticizing his idea and asserting you know what he really means; I assume implying he is a sexist/racist. It's a much easier way to argue but not very persuasive

He is sexist, and racist.

I mean, this is the guy who said we should look at the "cool" parts of the KKK.

 

[cubicle47b]

With regards to your second point, I am not sure why you think what Damore did shouldn't be a mistake. He's promoting negative stereotypes that pervade the industry that he's a part of and that his now-former company is trying to get rid of. It should be as simple as that. Also, I'm afraid I don't understand the point of the video that you included.

You argue that he's promoting negative stereotypes, but he's just pointing out legitimate science and drawing conclusions based on it. Pinker argues that when people are exposed to true statements that don't get voiced (or are rejected) by society they become outraged that those truths are unsayable and have no defense against taking them to repellant conclusions.

 

[AntoneM]

Well, there's a lot of good scientific evidence to that end. Men have much more naturally occurring testosterone which is a driver of interest and mastery in humans. There are many studies to this end.

But his conclusion isn't "oh well", it's to promote blind hiring that would benefit women should factors change and increase their numbers in the field.

He's against forcing equal representation when there's not equal interest.

Are you really seriously making these claims, especially the testosterone part, without even trying to back them up, as if it's some sort of common knowledge?

Also, women being interested in the field might just well be lacking because there are so few women in the field; and because it's like a men's locker room at work every day. You know what might fix that? Increasing women's interest in the field through outreach and cultural changes. Those cultural changes can't really be articulated by men either.

I even feel bad that I'm trying my best to explain this to you as a man myself because I can't know the experience of the opposite sex in this situation.

Finally, I can't think of a modern field, not just tech, which doesn't require collaboration, humility, and compromise. As a poster said before, maybe women should be running the tech industry and men should be the programmers doing the dirty work.

 

[PataHikari]

but he's just pointing out legitimate science and drawing conclusions based on it.

He's talking about trends but A) inserting his own unsupported, bigoted and selfish, reasons for those trends, and B) then applying broad trends to his individual coworkers rather then simply assuming they're exceptions to the broad trends.

Also, there is no major difference between male and female brains. Pretty much all the differences between men and women beyond basic physical differences is the result of social development.

 

[Kotzen Ducha]

So easy to spot the ideologically motivated posters. A real shame that the "science rules!!!!!!!" crowd is so averse to evidence that goes against their world view. You'd almost think they were creationists.

 

[cubicle47b]

He wasn't applying broad trends to his individual coworkers. That was actually the opposite of what he was doing. I agree that he was drawing his own conclusions.

I will also post a link about the difference between male and female brains: https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different.html

 

[Shamylov]

This is what I mean you are purposely avoiding criticizing his idea and asserting you know what he really means; I assume implying he is a sexist/racist. It's a much easier way to argue but not very persuasive

I'm sorry, what? I am purposely avoiding criticizing his idea? I am very explicitly criticizing his ideas. Women are not inferior to men in engineering and their lack of interest in the field is due to bias and culture driving them away. Damore is showing he is sexist in his memo and maybe even worse. We need to look for the reasons why women are not showing as much interest in tech and I support Goggle in trying to reach out to them. What else do you think I need to say?

My assertion about what he really means comes from reading what he wrote exactly how he wanted it to be read.

You argue that he's promoting negative stereotypes, but he's just pointing out legitimate science and drawing conclusions based on it. Pinker argues that when people are exposed to true statements that don't get voiced (or are rejected) by society they become outraged that those truths are unsayable and have no defense against taking them to repellant conclusions.

This is nonsense. There is no legitimate science and conclusions if the best that they come up with is "females just don't have as much interest in tech". Such a shallow explanation to the problem.

Also, that explanation in the video is even more nonsense meant to excuse the appalling attitudes that the alt-right has. You know what are truths that get rejected by the mainstream? White people becoming neo-Nazis is not a new phenomenon because America has had a history of scapegoating marginalized groups for their woes and also racism continues to be an essential aspect of the American experience. You don't see minorities becoming terrorists because of it.

Why would you even bring up the alt-right in this discussion?

 

[cubicle47b]

Why would you even bring up the alt-right in this discussion?

I'm clearly talking about Damore.

This is nonsense. There is no legitimate science and conclusions if the best that they come up with is "females just don't have as much interest in tech". Such a shallow explanation to the problem.

Feel free to read this: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/0...es-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/ Of course socialization also plays a part. Nobody is denying that.

 

[PataHikari]

I'm clearly talking about Damore.

I don't think he has officially claimed membership in the Alt-Right Nazi sphere, despite them treating him as a hero. So why did you bring up somebody trying to defend those subhuman monsters?

 

[Punchpudding]

Women are not inferior to men in engineering and their lack of interest in the field is due to bias and culture driving them away.

I don't think this is proven fact yet, you should be careful basing your whole argument around it.

 

[PataHikari]

I don't think this is proven fact yet, you should be careful basing your whole argument around it.

Nope it's a proven fact.

 

[finowns]

I'm sorry, what? I am purposely avoiding criticizing his idea? I am very explicitly criticizing his ideas. Women are not inferior to men in engineering and their lack of interest in the field is due to bias and culture driving them away. Damore is showing he is sexist in his memo and maybe even worse. We need to look for the reasons why women are not showing as much interest in tech and I support Goggle in trying to reach out to them. What else do you think I need to say?

My assertion about what he really means comes from reading what he wrote exactly how he wanted it to be read.

Where does he say women are inferior engineers? Again, you have some special insight into Damore and can read his mind. The science he cites shows men and women have similar aptitudes in math, especially the math an engineer at google would use. His point is that it's possible that population distribution isn't entirely because of gender bias in the work place. That women's choices and evolution have impact. He cites evidence. That shouldn't be controversial.

 

[PataHikari]

Where does he say women are inferior engineers? Again, you have some special insight into Damore and can read his mind.

The part where he says that women are only working at Google due to affirmative action.

And reading Damore's mind is not difficult. He's a transparent privileged brat.

 

[finowns]

The part where he says that women are only working at Google due to affirmative action.

And reading Damore's mind is not difficult. He's a transparent privileged brat.

We get it. You really hate the guy, chill out

 

[cubicle47b]

I don't think he has officially claimed membership in the Alt-Right Nazi sphere, despite them treating him as a hero. So why did you bring up somebody trying to defend those subhuman monsters?

Did you watch the video? Pinker is not defending the alt-right. I agree that Damore is not alt-right, but (to a certain extent) I see what Pinker is talking about in the video playing out in him. He sees a dominant belief that all differences between the two genders are due to socialization that's clearly wrong based on the science he's reading and must speak out against it.

edit: removed 'social constructionism'

 

[cubicle47b]

The part where he says that women are only working at Google due to affirmative action.

He didn't say that.

 

[PataHikari]

We get it. You really hate the guy, chill out

Facts about James Damore:

He says he's a Conservative

He says that "Compassion for the Weak" is a leftist idea.

Why should he get anything but disdain from anybody?

He didn't say that.

Yes he did. His entire screed is about how Google needs to stop coddling women and hire on men.

 

[Punchpudding]

Nope it's a proven fact.

Some studies would say they lose interest before they're in the work place since most girls lost interest in engineering around the age of 15, well before working age: http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/28/technology/girls-math-science-engineering/index.html.

But that is just one study right? There are a ton of studies out there and there isn't a clear picture right? You can't point at one study and say the discussion is over (and start implementing discriminatory hiring practice against a whole race/gender of people) right?

 

[finowns]

Facts about James Damore:

He says he's a Conservative

He says that "Compassion for the Weak" is a leftist idea.

Why should he get anything but disdain from anybody?



Yes he did. His entire screed is about how Google needs to stop coddling women and hire on men.

Jesus. You're outraged we get it

 

[PataHikari]

Some studies would say they lose interest before they're in the work place since most girls lost interest in engineering around the age of 15, well before working age: http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/28/technology/girls-math-science-engineering/index.html.

Ah yes Society keeps hammering in that engineering and math are "boys" things and girls lose interest, I'm shocked, shocked.

Wait, not shocked.

 

[Shamylov]

He wasn't applying broad trends to his individual coworkers. That was actually the opposite of what he was doing. I agree that he was drawing his own conclusions.

I will also post a link about the difference between male and female brains: https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different.html

I fail to see the significance of the link above in this discussion. I mean, just look at what it says in the article:

"All these measured differences are averages derived from pooling widely varying individual results. While statistically significant, the differences tend not to be gigantic. They are most noticeable at the extremes of a bell curve, rather than in the middle, where most people cluster. Some argue that we may safely ignore them.

But the long list of behavioral tendencies in which male-female ratios are unbalanced extends to cognitive and neuropsychiatric disorders. Women are twice as likely as men to experience clinical depression in their lifetimes; likewise for post-traumatic stress disorder. Men are twice as likely to become alcoholic or drug-dependent, and 40 percent more likely to develop schizophrenia. Boys' dyslexia rate is perhaps 10 times that of girls, and they're four or five times as likely to get a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder."

According to Stanford Medicine, the differences between the male and female brains are not very significant outside of the medical field. Cool, so nothing to do with Damore, his memo, Google, and women in tech.

I'm clearly talking about Damore.


Feel free to read this: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/0...es-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/ Of course socialization also plays a part. Nobody is denying that.

That link has a ton of information as well as several links within that I'd have to dive into. There' not enough time for me to go through all of it so I'll just focus on this bolded part in the conclusion:

"Population differences in interest and population differences in variability of abilities may help explain why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and may contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations"

I would agree that there are biological differences between men and women, but what's more important in the current time are the social and psychological barriers that prevent women from going into technology and engineering.

To support Damore you would have to believe that the current ratio of men to women in the tech industry as close as possible to the true ratio in interest between the sexes and that trying to even it out with diversity efforts is actually detrimental to men. This is a ridiculous notion; as it was already mentioned, women used to be the majority of programmers and they made significant strides in its progress at the beginning. There's no reason why the current number of female programmers should be so low if we exclude social and psychological biases.

 

[PataHikari]

Jesus. You're outraged we get it

This isn't outrage. This is contempt. I feel scorn for this guy.

He's a pathetic spoiled brat that was given tons of jumps ahead in life and wasted it all because he was upset that girls got to be in his clubhouse, and now he's trying to throw one final desperate tantrum.

This lawsuit will be thrown out because it's very clear he was fired for creating a hostile work environment.

 

[finowns]

This isn't outrage. This is contempt. I feel scorn for this guy.

He's a pathetic spoiled brat that was given tons of jumps ahead in life and wasted it all because he was upset that girls got to be in his clubhouse, and now he's trying to throw one final desperate tantrum.

This lawsuit will be thrown out because it's very clear he was fired for creating a hostile work environment.

Thank god we got that cleared up. I wasn't sure

 

[cubicle47b]

I fail to see the significance of the link above in this discussion.

It was being argued that there are zero differences between men and women's brains in the post 1 or 2 above it so I provided my own link. It didn't involve you.

That link has a ton of information as well as several links within that I'd have to dive into. There' not enough time for me to go through all of it so I'll just focus on this bolded part in the conclusion:

"Population differences in interest and population differences in variability of abilities may help explain why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and may contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations"

I would agree that there are biological differences between men and women, but what's more important in the current time are the social and psychological barriers that prevent women from going into technology and engineering.

To support Damore you would have to believe that the current ratio of men to women in the tech industry as close as possible to the true ratio in interest between the sexes and that trying to even it out with diversity efforts is actually detrimental to men. This is a ridiculous notion; as it was already mentioned, women used to be the majority of programmers and they made significant strides in its progress at the beginning. There's no reason why the current number of female programmers should be so low if we exclude social and psychological biases.

I agree with you, believe it or not. Well, most of what you wrote. Women were the majority of programmers when a tiny fraction of the population had access to computers. It's hard to draw conclusions about differences in interest between men and women with such a small sample size. Of course, socialization also makes it incredibly difficult.

 

[Shamylov]

Where does he say women are inferior engineers? Again, you have some special insight into Damore and can read his mind. The science he cites shows men and women have similar aptitudes in math, especially the math an engineer at google would use. His point is that it's possible that population distribution isn't entirely because of gender bias in the work place. That women's choices and evolution have impact. He cites evidence. That shouldn't be controversial.

"He cites evidence" is not a legitimate excuse for what Damore did in his memo. He made claims and cited evidence to back some of them but he arranged them all in such a way to reach the following conclusion: Google is suffering from left-wing bias which is pushing them to increase diversity to the detriment of white men and Google's own work since women aren't naturally inclined to tech work and they must be warned because their totalitarian, echo-chamber actions are blinding them to the truth that the silenced conservatives are trying to share. We can find trolls in here with more subtle and elegant methods.

It's all there in his memo. I'm not sharing any exclusive thoughts from within his mind that he didn't put in there himself.

Did you watch the video? Pinker is not defending the alt-right. I agree that Damore is not alt-right, but (to a certain extent) I see what Pinker is talking about in the video playing out in him. He sees a dominant belief that all differences between the two genders are due to socialization that's clearly wrong based on the science he's reading and must speak out against it.

edit: removed 'social constructionism'

Pinker is defending the alt-right because rather than just say they are a deplorable group of people and their views are contrary to the ideals of society, he is saying that the alt-right attitude is coming from the denial of reality coming from leftist institutions. That all his statements may seem outrageous because they are superficially anti-socialist, racist, or sexist but they're actually not and you should stop being outraged since that's what creating and fueling the alt-right to begin with. It's utterly nonsense.

 

[Punchpudding]

Ah yes Society keeps hammering in that engineering and math are "boys" things and girls lose interest, I'm shocked, shocked.

Wait, not shocked.

Sorry, did you read the article? Or the Heterodox Academy article? Lots of companies and researchers are looking for ways to keep girls interested in engineering (which is important) but the clues are all over the place. Maybe your facts are not as proven as you thought? Maybe we shouldn't start discriminating against white males because of uncertain assumptions and ideologies?

 

[Shamylov]

It was being argued that there are zero differences between men and women's brains in the post 1 or 2 above it so I provided my own link. It didn't involve you.


I agree with you, believe it or not. Well, most of what you wrote. Women were the majority of programmers when a tiny fraction of the population had access to computers. It's hard to draw conclusions about differences in interest between men and women with such a small sample size. Of course, socialization also makes it incredibly difficult.

I mean, it doesn't personally involve me but it is part of the conversation that we are all in so I don't see why I can't comment on it. Specially since the differences that are being brought up in your link are not relevant to the disparities between men and women in the tech industries. So really, we can ignore them.

If computers were available to such a small fraction of the population then how come women were the ones becoming programmers? How did they overcome the low availability and innate disinterest in such work? I'm not sure your argument makes sense.

 

[Shamylov]

Sorry, did you read the article? Or the Heterodox Academy article? Lots of companies and researchers are looking for ways to keep girls interested in engineering (which is important) but the clues are all over the place. Maybe your facts are not as proven as you thought? Maybe we shouldn't start discriminating against white males because of uncertain assumptions and ideologies?

A push to increase diversity is not discrimination against the dominant group any more than Obama becoming president was discriminating against McCain and Romney. It's a ridiculous assertion.

 

[PataHikari]

Sorry, did you read the article? Or the Heterodox Academy article? Lots of companies and researchers are looking for ways to keep girls interested in engineering (which is important) but the clues are all over the place. Maybe your facts are not as proven as you thought? Maybe we shouldn't start discriminating against white males because of uncertain assumptions and ideologies?

Nobody is discriminating against white males. What's happening is that White Males are simply no longer being as preferred.

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

 

[Punchpudding]

Nobody is discriminating against white males. What's happening is that White Males are simply no longer being preferred.

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

OK, but that is the allegation from the James Damore lawsuit that we are talking about in this thread. It will be interesting to see how the lawsuit plays out.

 

[finowns]

"He cites evidence" is not a legitimate excuse for what Damore did in his memo. He made claims and cited evidence to back some of them but he arranged them all in such a way to reach the following conclusion: Google is suffering from left-wing bias which is pushing them to increase diversity to the detriment of white men and Google's own work since women aren't naturally inclined to tech work and they must be warned because their totalitarian, echo-chamber actions are blinding them to the truth that the silenced conservatives are trying to share. We can find trolls in here with more subtle and elegant methods.

It's all there in his memo. I'm not sharing any exclusive thoughts from within his mind that he didn't put in there himself.

I would ask where Damore said 'women aren't naturally inclined to tech work' but it seems pointless.

 

[PataHikari]

OK, but that is the allegation from the James Damore lawsuit that we are talking about in this thread. It will be interesting to see how the lawsuit plays out.

And James Damore is a misogynistic baby who's throwing a tantrum and I hope Google decides to actually go through with the lawsuit to crush him out of principle. Because he's going to lose if Google doesn't decide to just settle to make it go away.

I would ask where Damore said 'women aren't naturally inclined to tech work' but it seems pointless.

It's literally the central point of his entire manifesto.

He gussied it up in dogwhistles but his true self shows through with wonderful lines like saying we need to "de-emphasize empathy."

 

[Shamylov]

I would ask where Damore said 'women aren't naturally inclined to tech work' but it seems pointless.

Seriously? You can't figure out why I would get the idea that the memo is saying that? I genuinely don't know if you are being serious. I've already explained this; the writing in the memo is proof and I shouldn't have to translate it for you.

EDIT: this post seems a lot more snarky than I meant it to be and I want to apologize if my previous ones seem that way too. Please just understand that I am truly confused here.

 

[cubicle47b]

I mean, it doesn't personally involve me but it is part of the conversation that we are all in so I don't see why I can't comment on it. Specially since the differences that are being brought up in your link are not relevant to the disparities between men and women in the tech industries. So really, we can ignore them.

If computers were available to such a small fraction of the population then how come women were the ones becoming programmers? How did they overcome the low availability and innate disinterest in such work? I'm not sure your argument makes sense.

So we can say "there is no difference between male and female brains" even if it's not true?

I never said innate disinterest (and wouldn't). We're talking about population trends, not individuals. They overcame low computer availability by working for the government in jobs related to the first computers. In the case of the ENIAC, the women who became programmers were working during WWII calculating ballistics trajectories. I'm sure you've seen Hidden Figures and seen an example of how women became programmers during the space race. There was definitely sexism involved as well. Programming was seen as low value work. As availability increased the general population could be better matched with their interests. Of course, those are heavily shaped by socialization.

 

[Dunki]

"Population differences in interest and population differences in variability of abilities may help explain why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and may contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations"

I would agree that there are biological differences between men and women, but what's more important in the current time are the social and psychological barriers that prevent women from going into technology and engineering.

To support Damore you would have to believe that the current ratio of men to women in the tech industry as close as possible to the true ratio in interest between the sexes and that trying to even it out with diversity efforts is actually detrimental to men. This is a ridiculous notion; as it was already mentioned, women used to be the majority of programmers and they made significant strides in its progress at the beginning. There's no reason why the current number of female programmers should be so low if we exclude social and psychological biases.

How do you explain the fact that women in 3rd world countries or countries with less equality laws rather go into tech while women in countries like sweden which are even getting a ton of programs to bring women in these type of male dominant jobs really struggle because women there rather want to work in more "traditional" jobs. Or better jobs with more social contacts? MY explanation would be, that they do not feel that they have to fight for their rights anymore and they can do what they want while in 3rd world countries they constantly have to fight and this is also a way to fight this.

Also I love how people thinkk he is a sexist and his opinion is garbage even though he backs it all up with scientific evidence while the other ones just try to explain how wrong he is with feelings....

 

[PataHikari]

Seriously? You can't figure out why I would get the idea that the memo is saying that? I genuinely don't know if you are being serious. I've already explained this; the writing in the memo is proof and I shouldn't have to translate it for you.

That's the reason why dogwhistles and coded language are used so much. By not directly saying it merely imply it with the subtly of a bullhorn Damore's defenders can say "he never actually said that" even though it's obvious what the ultimate messages and meanings are.

 

[Shamylov]

So we can say "there is no difference between male and female brains" even if it's not true?

I never said innate disinterest (and wouldn't). We're talking about population trends, not individuals. They overcame low computer availability by working for the government in jobs related to the first computers. In the case of the ENIAC, the women who became programmers were working during WWII calculating ballistics trajectories. I'm sure you've seen Hidden Figures and seen an example of how women became programmers during the space race. There was definitely sexism involved as well. Programming was seen as low value work. As availability increased the general population could be better matched with their interests. Of course, those are heavily shaped by socialization.

You can say it but shouldn't there be a caveat that the differences are insignificant? Otherwise it seems you're agreeing with Damore's memo.

So women being the predominant programmers before was purely socialization and the particular circumstances of the time, but the disparity now is mostly just from differences in interest and that's as much as we need to know as it relates to the memo?

 

[PataHikari]

Also I love how people thinkk he is a sexist and his opinion is garbage even though he backs it all up with scientific evidence while the other ones just try to explain how wrong he is with feelings....

He is a sexist and his use of sciene was Garbage like I already pointed out.

And man, don't you dare try and use the fact that people get emotional as a way to dismiss their arguments. That's a transparent method privileged jerks use to undermine and ignore the concerns of the disadvantaged.

 

[finowns]

Seriously? You can't figure out why I would get the idea that the memo is saying that? I genuinely don't know if you are being serious. I've already explained this; the writing in the memo is proof and I shouldn't have to translate it for you.

EDIT: this post seems a lot more snarky than I meant it to be and I want to apologize if my previous ones seem that way too. Please just understand that I am truly confused here.

I think you should take his argument at it's strongest and refute it from there. What would you say of the memo if you were 100% sure Damore wasn't a sexist or racist? The memo is an easy read and easily criticizable without all the bs, you can disagree with Damore without labeling him a sexist/racist/Nazi/etc.

 

[PataHikari]

I think you should take his argument at it's strongest and refute it from there. What would you say of the memo if you were 100% sure Damore wasn't a sexist or racist? The memo is an easy read and easily criticizable without all the bs, you can disagree with Damore without labeling him a sexist/racist/Nazi/etc.

If he wasn't a bigoted manchild he wouldn't have written the memo.

The memo is white male privilege in distilled form. It would not have been written by a woman, or a minority, or anybody who had ever had real struggle in their life.

Stop this "attack the argument not the man" tripe. The argument is sexist garbage. The man who made it is sexist garbage.

 

[finowns]

If he wasn't a bigoted manchild he wouldn't have written the memo.


The memo is white male privilege in distilled form. It would not have been written by a woman, or a minority, or anybody who had ever had real struggle in their life.

See this is a good example. Just constant BS and rhetoric.

 

[PataHikari]

See this is a good example. Just constant BS and rhetoric.

Why are you so eager to defend someone who's called the KKK cool, and called for removing empathy from decisions?

 

[Shamylov]

How do you explain the fact that women in 3rd world countries or countries with less equality laws rather go into tech while women in countries like sweden which are even getting a ton of programs to bring women in these type of male dominant jobs really struggle because women there rather want to work in more "traditional" jobs. Or better jobs with more social contacts? MY explanation would be, that they do not feel that they have to fight for their rights anymore and they can do what they want while in 3rd world countries they constantly have to fight and this is also a way to fight this.

Also I love how people thinkk he is a sexist and his opinion is garbage even though he backs it all up with scientific evidence while the other ones just try to explain how wrong he is with feelings....

Maybe women in developing countries see it as a way to secure a good income, I don't know. There are many issues that could be involved there. However, even if you remove the need for good and stable jobs, that doesn't mean that society is not influencing women and their choices in different ways.

What's your explanation for why women in developed countries wanting better jobs with social contacts aren't then overwhelmingly becoming politicians, CEOs, leaders in media companies, etc?

Lastly, he's not backing up the sexist and trash portions of his memo with scientific evidence. I already explained why his memo is nonsense and that if the conclusion that science reaches is merely "women don't like it as much" then that's shallow and inappropriate.

That's the reason why dogwhistles and coded language are used so much. By not directly saying it merely imply it with the subtly of a bullhorn Damore's defenders can say "he never actually said that" even though it's obvious what the ultimate messages and meanings are.

I am truly perplexed as to what they are understanding from the memo then. Because if they're not agreeing with Damore then what are they defending?

 

[Dunki]

He is a sexist and his use of sciene was Garbage like I already pointed out.

And man, don't you dare try and use the fact that people get emotional as a way to dismiss their arguments. That's a transparent method privileged jerks use to undermine and ignore the concerns of the disadvantaged.

when we are talking about scientific facts you can not argue with feelings to counter this. This is not how it works...

I am also getting very emotional but that does not mean i will ignore biological facts. Emotions are the most valued thing we have has human beings but it should not hinder your understanding of science....
And I also do not believe that women at a disadvantage in our countries. US or Germany as example: Quite the opposite see. Women outclassing men in education, are better prottected by laws etc.

We are equal but different and there is nothing wrong with this. I am all for support each child individually based on her/his interests. But I am totally against women only support programs because gender should not matter. And by starting with these programs you already ackknowledge that gender matters....

 

[cubicle47b]

You can say it but shouldn't there be a caveat that the differences are insignificant? Otherwise it seems you're agreeing with Damore's memo.

So women being the predominant programmers before was purely socialization and the particular circumstances of the time, but the disparity now is mostly just from differences in interest and that's as much as we need to know as it relates to the memo?

The differences in preferences for people vs things are significant so in that regard, I agree with Damore's memo.

No, I think there are multiple factors at play, including sexism. However, population-level differences in interest didn't have a chance to play out until availability increased. I don't know what the natural split should be because sexism and gendered socialization exist.