3 ms·

> The anti-science bias in this explanation has two faces, both well-meaning but both untrue. First, the science of gender difference is not gender stereotypin

> The anti-science bias in this explanation has two faces, both well-meaning but both untrue. First, the science of gender difference is not gender stereotyping but, in fact, real, as the sources above will prove to any executive or person who studies them. Second, even if someone felt like that gender trait difference constituted untrue gender stereotypes, there is no hostility in the science. Hostility is, by its very nature, a violent attack on a person or group. Damore was not hostile nor violent; he was measured and scientifically accurate. Similarly, Larry Summers was not hostile, nor were Barbara Annis, my coauthor and I, in Leadership and the Sexes. The whole idea that we have to dress up a topic in well-meaning white lies because feelings might get hurt is what has been making me less and less receptive to certain messages and points of view.

TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
I may be missing something in that quote. What are the white lies in that paragraph?
- mpweiher 9y ago
  "both well-meaning but both untrue" The way I understood it is that the paragraph talks about white lies, not that the paragraph itself tells white lies.
ordu 9y ago
The more I hear about feeling hurted by ideas or mere words, the more I believe that feelings is not something that we should take into consideration when speaking. Or even further, we need to hurt feelings deliberately, it is called desensetization (I go through such an experience and now I cannot find any idea that can hurt my feelings. There are ones I agree of, ones that I disagree of, I'm not sure about others and totally indifferent to the rest, but there are no ideas which is painful to think of). Everyone should learn how to not being hurt by words or ideas. Those who cannot should shut up and feel free to use custom filters while using internet. It seems unheartful and even cruel, but I see no way how society can solve its problems without ability to talk about those problems. Funny thing, but when I think about Russia's law that can charge for hurting religious feelings, I see the reasons behind that. It is not that I agree with it, but it is a perfectly rational thing to make society more religious and more governable, to create a society of obedient slaves, by promoting The Orthodox National Idea, instead of The rotten Communist National Idea. I can hardly believe that it'll lead to a good end, but at least we can see, that those who behind this promoting think at least one step ahead. When I think about feminists fighting science, I see no rationality in their behaviour, it is counter-productive way to deal with problems. Their behaviour seems for me as just emotional reaction where thinking used only to find clever rationalizations for emotions. ) I'm not totally agree with Damore, I belive that he misses some important points, so it is arguable is his opinion is the science, but the point is his loudest opponents just reject all science Damore referred to.

TheAdamAndChe 9y ago

I may be missing something in that quote. What are the white lies in that paragraph?

mpweiher 9y ago
"both well-meaning but both untrue" The way I understood it is that the paragraph talks about white lies, not that the paragraph itself tells white lies.

ordu 9y ago

The more I hear about feeling hurted by ideas or mere words, the more I believe that feelings is not something that we should take into consideration when speaking. Or even further, we need to hurt feelings deliberately, it is called desensetization (I go through such an experience and now I cannot find any idea that can hurt my feelings. There are ones I agree of, ones that I disagree of, I'm not sure about others and totally indifferent to the rest, but there are no ideas which is painful to think of). Everyone should learn how to not being hurt by words or ideas. Those who cannot should shut up and feel free to use custom filters while using internet. It seems unheartful and even cruel, but I see no way how society can solve its problems without ability to talk about those problems. Funny thing, but when I think about Russia's law that can charge for hurting religious feelings, I see the reasons behind that. It is not that I agree with it, but it is a perfectly rational thing to make society more religious and more governable, to create a society of obedient slaves, by promoting The Orthodox National Idea, instead of The rotten Communist National Idea. I can hardly believe that it'll lead to a good end, but at least we can see, that those who behind this promoting think at least one step ahead. When I think about feminists fighting science, I see no rationality in their behaviour, it is counter-productive way to deal with problems. Their behaviour seems for me as just emotional reaction where thinking used only to find clever rationalizations for emotions. ) I'm not totally agree with Damore, I belive that he misses some important points, so it is arguable is his opinion is the science, but the point is his loudest opponents just reject all science Damore referred to.