5 ms·

B isn't the argument being made by diversity advocates, that's just the strawman created by people like yourself. You can fix it by changing it to b) Men and

B isn't the argument being made by diversity advocates, that's just the strawman created by people like yourself. You can fix it by changing it to b) Men and women aren't allowed to compete based on merit and women need special consideration in order that equivalent number of men and women are hired. edit: HN comments eat double asterisks???

weberc2 9y ago
Which is demonstrably untrue; women elect into different fields. The "yeah but sexism..." argument doesn't hold water because women achieved parity in the medical and legal professions in a time of actual, blatant sexism and well before every company had million dollar diversity budgets. The strawman is much better than the actual argument.
- kaitai 9y ago
  Women elect into different fields in large part because of social factors. If a company like Google decides that it doesn't like those social factors, what's wrong with that? Why should social convention rule? A lot of clumping happens in fields. Tell me why women are better at symplectic geometry than symplectic topology (or not). Tell me why women are better combinatorists than number theorists -- I want to hear something about counting the tubers they gathered. Tell me why women are so much more suited to advanced heart failure and transplant cardiology than interventional cardiology (https://www.aamc.org/data/448482/b3table.html https://www.aamc.org/data/448482/b3table.html). I kinda love all the post hoc analysis that goes into explaining these differences, especially when you have to explain then why Portuguese and Italian women are great in algebraic geometry but French women aren't (except for the notable exceptions like Claire Voisin). Most people aren't pioneers; most people follow the pioneers into situations in which they feel mildly more comfortable than the alternative. Sexism plays a huge role, while not being the only factor. Is it really surprising that if you put up a "girls r dum" sign on a clubhouse many will find somewhere else to go? Women electing into different fields is pretty much tautological here. The question is why, and whether it's for reasons we want to support and/or perpetuate. The whole point of the memo at issue is that he figures it's built into women biologically because computers aren't cuddly and that it is thus justifiable and right to perpetuate or support the current set of social roles. I don't know that the guy should have been fired, but it's clear he's not going to be a great team player or supervisor for women.
  - weberc2 9y ago
    The "social factors" argument is pretty much bullshit, but even if it weren't, the claim I rebutted was that women are being prevented from entering the field. Nebulous social pressures don't meaningfully constitute prevention. "My parents put the video games in my brother's room so I became a lawyer instead of an engineer". Come on. Edit: "social convention" shouldn't rule--women should be free to choose whatever careers they like, even if they're preferences are shaped by a culture you and Google distain, and men should get a fair shot at the employment they want, also irrespective of Google's identity ideology.
  - imron 9y ago
    > Women elect into different fields in large part because of social factors. This article [0] presents a good argument about how and why men and women self-select in to different fields. 0: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...
imron 9y ago
> B isn't the argument being made by diversity advocates Of course it isn't because then it would expose the hypocrisy of what they advocate. It's white-knighting at its finest. > Men and women aren't allowed to compete based on merit and women need special consideration in order that equivalent number of men and women are hired. I agree there is sexism in tech, both overt and casual that discourages women from entering tech and/or causes them to leave. The question is, does increasing diversity actually fix this problem? The author of the memo specifically addresses this, and states that the focus should be on providing psychological safety for people of all groups, rather than forced diversity that may not end up addressing the problem.
AOsborn 9y ago
Do you know what causes men and women to be unable to compete based on merit? Institutionalized discrimination such as quota based hiring policies.
- orbitur 9y ago
  Waiting for more non-white non-male applicants, and actively hunting for non-white non-male applicants, does not imply or necessitate a lowered standard. It means that applying is no longer first-come, first-serve.

weberc2 9y ago

Which is demonstrably untrue; women elect into different fields. The "yeah but sexism..." argument doesn't hold water because women achieved parity in the medical and legal professions in a time of actual, blatant sexism and well before every company had million dollar diversity budgets. The strawman is much better than the actual argument.

kaitai 9y ago
Women elect into different fields in large part because of social factors. If a company like Google decides that it doesn't like those social factors, what's wrong with that? Why should social convention rule? A lot of clumping happens in fields. Tell me why women are better at symplectic geometry than symplectic topology (or not). Tell me why women are better combinatorists than number theorists -- I want to hear something about counting the tubers they gathered. Tell me why women are so much more suited to advanced heart failure and transplant cardiology than interventional cardiology (https://www.aamc.org/data/448482/b3table.html https://www.aamc.org/data/448482/b3table.html). I kinda love all the post hoc analysis that goes into explaining these differences, especially when you have to explain then why Portuguese and Italian women are great in algebraic geometry but French women aren't (except for the notable exceptions like Claire Voisin). Most people aren't pioneers; most people follow the pioneers into situations in which they feel mildly more comfortable than the alternative. Sexism plays a huge role, while not being the only factor. Is it really surprising that if you put up a "girls r dum" sign on a clubhouse many will find somewhere else to go? Women electing into different fields is pretty much tautological here. The question is why, and whether it's for reasons we want to support and/or perpetuate. The whole point of the memo at issue is that he figures it's built into women biologically because computers aren't cuddly and that it is thus justifiable and right to perpetuate or support the current set of social roles. I don't know that the guy should have been fired, but it's clear he's not going to be a great team player or supervisor for women.
- weberc2 9y ago
  The "social factors" argument is pretty much bullshit, but even if it weren't, the claim I rebutted was that women are being prevented from entering the field. Nebulous social pressures don't meaningfully constitute prevention. "My parents put the video games in my brother's room so I became a lawyer instead of an engineer". Come on. Edit: "social convention" shouldn't rule--women should be free to choose whatever careers they like, even if they're preferences are shaped by a culture you and Google distain, and men should get a fair shot at the employment they want, also irrespective of Google's identity ideology.
- imron 9y ago
  > Women elect into different fields in large part because of social factors. This article [0] presents a good argument about how and why men and women self-select in to different fields. 0: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

imron 9y ago

> B isn't the argument being made by diversity advocates Of course it isn't because then it would expose the hypocrisy of what they advocate. It's white-knighting at its finest. > Men and women aren't allowed to compete based on merit and women need special consideration in order that equivalent number of men and women are hired. I agree there is sexism in tech, both overt and casual that discourages women from entering tech and/or causes them to leave. The question is, does increasing diversity actually fix this problem? The author of the memo specifically addresses this, and states that the focus should be on providing psychological safety for people of all groups, rather than forced diversity that may not end up addressing the problem.

AOsborn 9y ago

Do you know what causes men and women to be unable to compete based on merit? Institutionalized discrimination such as quota based hiring policies.

orbitur 9y ago
Waiting for more non-white non-male applicants, and actively hunting for non-white non-male applicants, does not imply or necessitate a lowered standard. It means that applying is no longer first-come, first-serve.