3 ms·

Consider the Medium piece she cites: https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788 https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about

Consider the Medium piece she cites: https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788 https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man... Point #1: "I’m not going to spend any length of time on (1); if anyone wishes to provide details as to how nearly every statement about gender in that entire document is actively incorrect,¹ and flies directly in the face of all research done in the field for decades, they should go for it. But I am neither a biologist, a psychologist, nor a sociologist, so I’ll leave that to someone else." In other words: "I have no relevant expertise, but I just know it's wrong." We would never tolerate that from "the opposing side." I can point you to other articles that do the same. This is the rallying point for a lot of people, and it's the wrong place to take a stand. It's worth pointing out.

tptacek 9y ago
You haven't so much responded to my comment as used it as a coat rack to hang an unrelated argument on. I didn't cite Zunger's blog post and don't really understand why people like it so much. I'd prefer not to discuss it here, and thank you in advance for not demanding I do so.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- monktastic1 9y ago
  If that's what I did, I didn't mean to. I was primarily addressing your opening paragraph: > It picks out a small subset of the claims made in the document, discards the context and all the other claims, and then harangues us for having a problem with "science". I'm claiming that the reason she does this is because it is the number one point cited by many of the detractors, and it prevents us from getting into the more interesting and relevant questions.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    If you want to suggest that Debrah Soh blundered by expanding a rebuttal to Yonatan Zunger's piece into a broader defense of the very dumb "anti-diversity memo", I am prepared to stipulate that. Like I said: while I may be on the same side as Zunger, I found his blog post shrill and unpersuasive. He had the facts on his side, but didn't know where to look for them, and waved his hands instead.

tptacek 9y ago

You haven't so much responded to my comment as used it as a coat rack to hang an unrelated argument on. I didn't cite Zunger's blog post and don't really understand why people like it so much. I'd prefer not to discuss it here, and thank you in advance for not demanding I do so.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
monktastic1 9y ago
If that's what I did, I didn't mean to. I was primarily addressing your opening paragraph: > It picks out a small subset of the claims made in the document, discards the context and all the other claims, and then harangues us for having a problem with "science". I'm claiming that the reason she does this is because it is the number one point cited by many of the detractors, and it prevents us from getting into the more interesting and relevant questions.
- tptacek 9y ago
  If you want to suggest that Debrah Soh blundered by expanding a rebuttal to Yonatan Zunger's piece into a broader defense of the very dumb "anti-diversity memo", I am prepared to stipulate that. Like I said: while I may be on the same side as Zunger, I found his blog post shrill and unpersuasive. He had the facts on his side, but didn't know where to look for them, and waved his hands instead.