3 ms·
Then in a pure meritocracy, why would they not succeed? Ergo the memo itself is a straw man.
by dclowd9901 9y ago
Then in a pure meritocracy, why would they not succeed? Ergo the memo itself is a straw man.
- beaner 9y agoDid 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 agoIt 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.