>He is clarifying what he meant, to no apparent effect. It's not hard to find a clip of an interviewer asking whether he thinks women are inferior. He, predicta

>He is clarifying what he meant, to no apparent effect. It's not hard to find a clip of an interviewer asking whether he thinks women are inferior. He, predictably, says he believes nothing of the sort. And then this gets printed in the Times. We'll probably just go in circles about this. The content of the memo, as a whole, does not reflect the harmless statement that "not everything is purely cultural" ... To suggest that biology might be even a significant factor in the lopsided representation is a mistake. Not just politically, but I believe factually too. And it is a bad one because it happens to overlap with the general stream of biases and impressions people already have about women in tech. And now they must also deal with people maybe believing their own interpretation of this memo. I think he should have been far more careful and specific in his terms. Also, he could believe his views are not demeaning to women, and be wrong. It is hard to see our own biases. I feel I have shown much of my own in writing about this but life is short!