4 ms·

> which, according to several scientists, they are not Good thing that's enough for a quorum. /s There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological im

> which, according to several scientists, they are not Good thing that's enough for a quorum. /s There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological imperative that prevents women from being as effective as men at software development. None. Zero. Zilch. Just about every disparity you can imagine can be categorically dismissed by upbringing and cultural side effects. It doesn't even pass the sniff test: do you really think there's something inherent to the Y chromosome that allows better rote analysis?

beaner 9y ago
> There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological imperative that prevents women from being as effective as men at software development. The memo doesn't make this claim.
- dclowd9901 9y ago
  Then in a pure meritocracy, why would they not succeed? Ergo the memo itself is a straw man.
  - beaner 9y ago
    Did you read the thing? It was very clearly about statistics. The message of the memo was not "women are biologically unfit for tech," it was, as a biological tendency, women are more likely to have traits which disincline them to have an interest in tech-related things, and therefore end up in tech. To me this says very obviously that women can and are intellectually superior to men on individual cases. But we would not expect an even 50/50 distribution of tech interest among genders. Feel free to refute that as a separate claim, but if your take from the memo was "all women are biologically inferior and cannot match or be better than men," then I would say you were not being intellectually honest when reading it.
  - zbobet2012 9y ago
    It doesn't make that argument either. It makes the argument that since less women (will on aggregate) be interested in CS then men, less women will be in CS. And that less women being interested in CS has _some_ basis in biological differences. Whether you agree with that or not (the research does support it pretty strongly, but is certainly not settled), it is a reasonable argument.
- patrickyan 9y ago
  The memo literally lists the biological/psychological traits of men and women that may have caused the gender gap in tech. (He tries to clarify that he is talking on a population level and not talking about individuals)
  - sgc 9y ago
    He is not talking about raw programming skills, but the tech environment. And then he goes on to point out how the tech environment could change so that more women would want to be a part of it, or to stay in it longer once they were in. In other words, he was saying there is something in tech culture which is inherently less palatable for the average woman than the average man. He never claimed that the culture was good and the women were deficient. Instead he said the culture should change instead of artificially trying to fill it with equal ratio hires.
alexandercrohde 9y ago
I'd just like to share, for those who didn't study psychology and don't know of the sex differences (ON AVERAGE) between men and women, it IS a scientifically established phenomenon, even at a few months of age (i.e. pre-culture). Here's a really fun example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml [requires flash though] Now I'm not going to say anything about engineering or anything like that. All I believe is that you can't rewrite science to align with your politics. Science has no political leaning.
- dclowd9901 9y ago
  Appreciate the addition to the conversation, but since it doesn't say anything about efficacy in engineering, I'm afraid it's just noise.
  - alexandercrohde 9y ago
    I don't think the author specifically claimed that men are better at engineering (if he did, I'd love if you could point me to where). I think he said that biological mental differences on average are one possible component of why engineers tend to be men.
  - renaudg 9y ago
    The memo didn't claim anything about efficacy in engineering, period. It claimed some contribution of biology to career preference on average, which is absolutely supported by research : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166361/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166361/ "We explored the contribution of sex hormones to career-related interests, in particular studying whether prenatal androgens affect interests through psychological orientation to Things versus People. We examined this question in individuals with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), who have atypical exposure to androgens early in development, and their unaffected siblings (total N = 125 aged 9 to 26 years). Females with CAH had more interest in Things versus People than did unaffected females, and variations among females with CAH reflected variations in their degree of androgen exposure. Results provide strong support for hormonal influences on interest in occupations characterized by working with Things versus People."
bitmapbrother 9y ago
Can you cite where Damore explicitly states that? Or are you just regurgitating second hand information that was processed by a blogger that didn't read the memo?
fche 9y ago
> "There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological imperative that prevents women from being as effective as men at software development." straw man when applied to individuals begging the question when applied to groups twofer

beaner 9y ago

> There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological imperative that prevents women from being as effective as men at software development. The memo doesn't make this claim.

dclowd9901 9y ago
Then in a pure meritocracy, why would they not succeed? Ergo the memo itself is a straw man.
- beaner 9y ago
  Did you read the thing? It was very clearly about statistics. The message of the memo was not "women are biologically unfit for tech," it was, as a biological tendency, women are more likely to have traits which disincline them to have an interest in tech-related things, and therefore end up in tech. To me this says very obviously that women can and are intellectually superior to men on individual cases. But we would not expect an even 50/50 distribution of tech interest among genders. Feel free to refute that as a separate claim, but if your take from the memo was "all women are biologically inferior and cannot match or be better than men," then I would say you were not being intellectually honest when reading it.
- zbobet2012 9y ago
  It doesn't make that argument either. It makes the argument that since less women (will on aggregate) be interested in CS then men, less women will be in CS. And that less women being interested in CS has _some_ basis in biological differences. Whether you agree with that or not (the research does support it pretty strongly, but is certainly not settled), it is a reasonable argument.
patrickyan 9y ago
The memo literally lists the biological/psychological traits of men and women that may have caused the gender gap in tech. (He tries to clarify that he is talking on a population level and not talking about individuals)
- sgc 9y ago
  He is not talking about raw programming skills, but the tech environment. And then he goes on to point out how the tech environment could change so that more women would want to be a part of it, or to stay in it longer once they were in. In other words, he was saying there is something in tech culture which is inherently less palatable for the average woman than the average man. He never claimed that the culture was good and the women were deficient. Instead he said the culture should change instead of artificially trying to fill it with equal ratio hires.

alexandercrohde 9y ago

I'd just like to share, for those who didn't study psychology and don't know of the sex differences (ON AVERAGE) between men and women, it IS a scientifically established phenomenon, even at a few months of age (i.e. pre-culture). Here's a really fun example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml [requires flash though] Now I'm not going to say anything about engineering or anything like that. All I believe is that you can't rewrite science to align with your politics. Science has no political leaning.

dclowd9901 9y ago
Appreciate the addition to the conversation, but since it doesn't say anything about efficacy in engineering, I'm afraid it's just noise.
- alexandercrohde 9y ago
  I don't think the author specifically claimed that men are better at engineering (if he did, I'd love if you could point me to where). I think he said that biological mental differences on average are one possible component of why engineers tend to be men.
- renaudg 9y ago
  The memo didn't claim anything about efficacy in engineering, period. It claimed some contribution of biology to career preference on average, which is absolutely supported by research : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166361/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166361/ "We explored the contribution of sex hormones to career-related interests, in particular studying whether prenatal androgens affect interests through psychological orientation to Things versus People. We examined this question in individuals with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), who have atypical exposure to androgens early in development, and their unaffected siblings (total N = 125 aged 9 to 26 years). Females with CAH had more interest in Things versus People than did unaffected females, and variations among females with CAH reflected variations in their degree of androgen exposure. Results provide strong support for hormonal influences on interest in occupations characterized by working with Things versus People."

bitmapbrother 9y ago

Can you cite where Damore explicitly states that? Or are you just regurgitating second hand information that was processed by a blogger that didn't read the memo?

fche 9y ago

> "There is absolutely no evidence that there is a biological imperative that prevents women from being as effective as men at software development." straw man when applied to individuals begging the question when applied to groups twofer