4 ms·

> It is important to note that Pichai makes no attempt to actually debunk Damore's claims about women's biology. Why is the CEO somehow obligated to debunk the

> It is important to note that Pichai makes no attempt to actually debunk Damore's claims about women's biology. Why is the CEO somehow obligated to debunk the theory? Why are we entertaining the notion that women might be biologically less inclined for engineering? Aren't we passed this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills or went through a time machine.

abnry 9y ago
Pichai is obligated to do so because he fired Damore for "perpetuating harmful stereotypes" while at the same time "affirming" that Google values open discussion about what is true. The notion that women may be biologically less inclined toward engineering is something that can be suggested in a non-contrived way from scientific studies. I am not claiming it is true. When diversity training is based on the foundation that the totality of the gender disparity in tech is due to prejudice, and there is a possibility other important factors are at play, the resultant policies could have a negative or meaningless effect. If this assumption about the cause of diversity is shoved down people's throat through a culture of shaming and silencing, then this is a serious workplace problem /unless/ the non-biological cause of the gender disparity is demonstrated to be the only cause by Pichai.
Houshalter 9y ago
>Why are we entertaining the notion that women might be biologically less inclined for engineering? Because it's basically true and all the evidence points to it? (See my comment below.) That we aren't even supposed to talk about scientific facts for political reasons is deeply disturbing. >Why is the CEO somehow obligated to debunk the theory? Because the CEO is promoting policies that sexistly discriminate against women in favor of men and firing employees for their political opinions. The very least they could do is provide some argument for why their opinions are right.
Boothroid 9y ago
Imagine if there were a commonly held belief that women have superior communication skills? Aren't we past this? Oh hang on a minute, that belief is absolutely rife and in fact often touted by women as evidence of their superiority for certain roles. If men and women are interchangeable in potential, how is so negative a stereotype not unspeakable?

abnry 9y ago

Pichai is obligated to do so because he fired Damore for "perpetuating harmful stereotypes" while at the same time "affirming" that Google values open discussion about what is true. The notion that women may be biologically less inclined toward engineering is something that can be suggested in a non-contrived way from scientific studies. I am not claiming it is true. When diversity training is based on the foundation that the totality of the gender disparity in tech is due to prejudice, and there is a possibility other important factors are at play, the resultant policies could have a negative or meaningless effect. If this assumption about the cause of diversity is shoved down people's throat through a culture of shaming and silencing, then this is a serious workplace problem /unless/ the non-biological cause of the gender disparity is demonstrated to be the only cause by Pichai.

Houshalter 9y ago

>Why are we entertaining the notion that women might be biologically less inclined for engineering? Because it's basically true and all the evidence points to it? (See my comment below.) That we aren't even supposed to talk about scientific facts for political reasons is deeply disturbing. >Why is the CEO somehow obligated to debunk the theory? Because the CEO is promoting policies that sexistly discriminate against women in favor of men and firing employees for their political opinions. The very least they could do is provide some argument for why their opinions are right.

Boothroid 9y ago

Imagine if there were a commonly held belief that women have superior communication skills? Aren't we past this? Oh hang on a minute, that belief is absolutely rife and in fact often touted by women as evidence of their superiority for certain roles. If men and women are interchangeable in potential, how is so negative a stereotype not unspeakable?