Diversity programs at Google discriminatory, says engineer's anti-diversity manifesto

[Malcolm Tucker]

And my question was what 'things' mean men are better suited in Google-type jobs than women?

Are you saying if you worked in IT you'd have some kind of biological advantage over every woman there? Seems your talents are being wasted mate.

[Stagflation]

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/goog...tists-respond/

[Stagflation]

Originally Posted by Malcolm Tucker

Are you saying if you worked in IT you'd have some kind of biological advantage over every woman there? Seems your talents are being wasted mate.

It's not really about advantage, as it is about preference. Women are already over represented at university except in STEM subjects. Of course the feminist nutcases will say it's all 'gender reinforcing culture' that explains it...

[Enoch Powell]

Originally Posted by Stagflation

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/goog...tists-respond/

Excellent.

Craig?

[Stagflation]

Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems.

Stating things like that goes against the equality dogma, it's great that this has been highlighted.

[Malcolm Tucker]

Originally Posted by Enoch Powell

Excellent.

Craig?

I think it’s really important to discuss this topic scientifically, keeping an open mind and using informed skepticism when evaluating claims about evidence. In the case of personality traits, evidence that men and women may have different average levels of certain traits is rather strong. For instance, sex differences in negative emotionality are universal across cultures; developmentally emerge across all cultures at exactly the same time; are linked to diagnosed (not just self-reported) mental health issues; appear rooted in sex differences in neurology, gene activation, and hormones; are larger in more gender egalitarian nations; and so forth (for a short review of this evidence, see here.)

But it is not clear to me how such sex differences are relevant to the Google workplace. And even if sex differences in negative emotionality were relevant to occupational performance (e.g., not being able to handle stressful assignments), the size of these negative emotion sex differences is not very large (typically, ranging between “small” to “moderate” in statistical effect size terminology; accounting for less than 10% of the variance). So, using someone’s biological sex to essentialize an entire group of people’s personality would be like operating with an axe. Not precise enough to do much good, probably will cause a lot of harm. Moreover, men are more emotional than women in certain ways, too. Sex differences in emotion depend on the type of emotion, how it is measured, where it is expressed, when it is expressed, and lots of other contextual factors.

That's the crux of my question. We can debate differences between the sexes all day and I doubt anyone believes men and women are literally identical, but what, specifically means men are better at working in somewhere like Google than women? This particular scientist seems to be saying they'd actually be irrelevant and should have no bearing on the person's ability to do the job. He even pays attention to a claim someone has probably made that women tend to get too emotional over stuff. Men do as well, just in different ways for different reasons. Still not objective enough to make either sex 'better' in that environment.

[Chuckles]

site is down because it's been slashdotted over reddit and breitbart links

[Malcolm Tucker]

Originally Posted by Chuckles

site is down because it's been slashdotted over reddit and breitbart links

its basically a response from a group of scientists with good credentials about psychology and stuff, their replies are interesting but they're not the endorsement enoch thinks it is for the stuff he is coming out with, i.e that men are superior to women in places like google and in 'most other ways' - but it wouldn't surprise me if enoch hasn't read all the replies in full

basically the best defence for the memo is rowing back a little bit and widening the debate to not being afraid of acknowledging there's genuine differences between men and women, and eagerly attacking people who seem disagree with this idea and therefore imply that there's no differences at all does nobody any favours and isn't backed up by science. Each scientist's reply makes this general point and I think they'd be hard pushed to find many people who disagreed with that premise

this isn't the same though (and one of the scientists keeps the debate relevant to the actual google workplace) as claiming men are objectively better than women at working in google, he goes on to explain there's no real evidence to show the traits between the genders have any real impact on the ability to work in a place like google

[Chuckles]

Yeah I managed to get it on archive.org and read it in the end.

You're right, they aren't all unanimous in their views and offered different opinions - one was in favour of affirmative action so the Breitbart claim that these 4 scientists have "spoken out against" is obviously not true.

Fair play for reading all in the 9 minutes between Stag posting it and you replying though Enoch. Took me a fair bit longer to read the whole thing properly

[capitalist]

Originally Posted by Malcolm Tucker

Did you mean 'thought' processes?

No I meant what I said.