I think the biggest mistake he makes is about magnitude of those effects and the specific outcomes. We don't really know how much of a difference those biologi

I think the biggest mistake he makes is about magnitude of those effects and the specific outcomes. We don't really know how much of a difference those biological differences make. There is a lot of research that show women (on AVERAGE) are more people oriented. But the percentage and distribution of women vs men that are thing vs people oriented isn't well settled. We have some data on outlooks in adults but that is obviously _not_ pre-culture. When looking at [research on the matter](http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Men-and-things-women-and-people-A-meta-analysis-of-sex-differences-in-interests.pdf http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Men-and-thing...): Therefore, from the inter-individual perspective,the individuals who pursue STEM careers are more likely to be male than female. For example, assuming that individuals within the highest 25% of a population interest distribution are likely to make occupational choices consistent with an interest type, the number of women entering the engineering occupation, then, is only 19.5% of the number of men entering the field. This percentage is very similar to the actual female–male ratio of individuals employed in engineering. In science and mathematics interest distributions, the female–male ratios in the upper 25% asymptote are 0.60 and 0.64, respectively. However, the actual female–male ratio of individuals employed in the field of physical sciences is only about 0.40 and, in mathematics, it is about 0.45. This discrepancy between interest data and real employment composition indicates that there may be reasons other than sex differences in interests that can account for gender disparity in science and mathematics. Considering Google pulls a lot from the Science and Mathematics fields (Dalmore is one such individual), I would expect Google's 83% male to 17% female engineering composition is somewhat skewed by sexism.