3 ms·

> Please quote the memo section that you are referring to when you say "Turns out". That was obviously tongue-in-cheek. Damore doesn't have any solid evidence,

> Please quote the memo section that you are referring to when you say "Turns out". That was obviously tongue-in-cheek. Damore doesn't have any solid evidence, just an "intuition" (read: bias) based on some articles he's read. At least he's honest enough to admit he's not infallible. You, on the other hand... > Maybe if you researched the matter you'd be surprised that your arguments aren't as strong as you thought. Please, correct my wrong assumptions. You seem to be well informed in the subject, seeing as you are telling me I'm wrong. So far, you've been incapable of answering the simplest of questions: what is the number of women who are not interested in engineering because of biological causes? > But don't bother to link to the study, the line/page in the memo, or any aspect of its debunking? This is the study: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222673203_Sex_Differences_in_Human_Neonatal_Social_Perception https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222673203_Sex_Diffe... Here's some critique on methodology: http://www.thetutorking.com/2014/08/criticisms-of-connellan-baron-cohen.html http://www.thetutorking.com/2014/08/criticisms-of-connellan-.... Google for more, it's not that hard. As an aside, notice that the split in the study doesn't correlate with the 80/20% gender divide at Google. So even if the study was correct, Damore's point would still be bullshit. > You flip out over the Rosa Parks metaphor, but have no problem with saying Awe, look at you! Trying to do the old alt-right "by pointing out someone else's racism you are the real racist" switcharoo! It would be cute, except for the unfortunate events in Charlottesville that reminds us that racism is alive and doing great in the US. Yes, I do flip at people trying to use dubious "biological" causes to explain away clear societal issues. You, my friend, are one of them.

Chris2048 9y ago
> You, on the other hand... Ad-hom? > Please, correct my wrong assumptions I've asked you to quote the memo, or provide citations. How can I correct your assumptions, if I don't know how you came to those conclusions? Do you want me to guess the ways you might have come to those conclusions, or which parts of the memo you might have misread? I'm not going to speculate if you aren't going to substantiate your assertions. > You seem to be well informed in the subject The subject in this case is "What the google memo says", we've yet to advance from there. Given the tone of your posts, I'm not inclined to enter into a general discussion on the topic. But you've misrepresented Damore's memo, And I think this should be corrected. > This is the study.. Which paragraph of the memo cites the study? And where did you source your version of the memo? > Google for more, it's not that hard. No, it's your burden. And Google is not research. > what is the number of women I think I made myself clear. I'm not answering your questions until you rescind or substantiate your assertions. And this question isn't one you want answering, you are just asking it to imply it's relevant to the content of the memo, which it isn't. > switcharoo Problem is "pointing out someone else's racism" requires "someone else's racism". You flipped out because you don't want to conflate Damore's situation with Parks', but you'll happily conflate it with that of racists of the same era. You asked "what has [the memo] got in common with Jim Crow" in disgust, but now you're equating google engineer writing a cited memo about gender differences, to exactly that. > racism is .. doing great in the US So far as the events in Charlottesville are representative of the entire country - which they aren't. > You, my friend, are one of them. In your opinion. And you opinion is informed by a severe lack of comprehension, in both the contents of the memo, and my own posts. So long as you are not arguing in good faith, I doubt this will change.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  Wow man, you managed to write a whole reply, line by line, without stating a single thing about what you agree with in the memo. Not surprised.

Chris2048 9y ago

> You, on the other hand... Ad-hom? > Please, correct my wrong assumptions I've asked you to quote the memo, or provide citations. How can I correct your assumptions, if I don't know how you came to those conclusions? Do you want me to guess the ways you might have come to those conclusions, or which parts of the memo you might have misread? I'm not going to speculate if you aren't going to substantiate your assertions. > You seem to be well informed in the subject The subject in this case is "What the google memo says", we've yet to advance from there. Given the tone of your posts, I'm not inclined to enter into a general discussion on the topic. But you've misrepresented Damore's memo, And I think this should be corrected. > This is the study.. Which paragraph of the memo cites the study? And where did you source your version of the memo? > Google for more, it's not that hard. No, it's your burden. And Google is not research. > what is the number of women I think I made myself clear. I'm not answering your questions until you rescind or substantiate your assertions. And this question isn't one you want answering, you are just asking it to imply it's relevant to the content of the memo, which it isn't. > switcharoo Problem is "pointing out someone else's racism" requires "someone else's racism". You flipped out because you don't want to conflate Damore's situation with Parks', but you'll happily conflate it with that of racists of the same era. You asked "what has [the memo] got in common with Jim Crow" in disgust, but now you're equating google engineer writing a cited memo about gender differences, to exactly that. > racism is .. doing great in the US So far as the events in Charlottesville are representative of the entire country - which they aren't. > You, my friend, are one of them. In your opinion. And you opinion is informed by a severe lack of comprehension, in both the contents of the memo, and my own posts. So long as you are not arguing in good faith, I doubt this will change.

dguaraglia 9y ago
Wow man, you managed to write a whole reply, line by line, without stating a single thing about what you agree with in the memo. Not surprised.