4 ms·

Is there really a difference if you believe the reason women "wind up" lacking the skills for X is due to biology? Asserting biology makes it essentialist, it's

Is there really a difference if you believe the reason women "wind up" lacking the skills for X is due to biology? Asserting biology makes it essentialist, it's the same as saying "women are worse at X."

ThrustVectoring 9y ago
Yeah, there is. "Women are worse" implies that there's a gendered difference after applying the "is an engineer" filter. "Fewer women gain entry into the class of engineers" doesn't imply anything about ability afterwards. And for what it's worth, James Damore explicitly called out this distinction, saying that he was not making a claim about any sort of skill differential between male engineer and female engineers. Like, male and female high jumpers that make it over a certain height of bar are approximately as good at jumping. There's more men in that category. This all might be playing semantics, but I think there's a real thing here to disentangle, and it'd be nice to say one without implying the other.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  >Yeah, there is. "Women are worse" implies that there's a gendered difference after applying the "is an engineer" filter. ...No it doesn't. That's just something you're adding to preserve the distinction. >Like, male and female high jumpers that make it over a certain height of bar are approximately as good at jumping. There's more men in that category. This all might be playing semantics, but I think there's a real thing here to disentangle, and it'd be nice to say one without implying the other. Yes yes but the problem comes with Damore's reasoning for why there are more men in that category - biological determination of better programming ability.
  - ThrustVectoring 9y ago
    >Yes yes but the problem comes with Damore's reasoning for why there are more men in that category - biological determination of better programming ability. Whether or not the representation gap is biological is an important factual matter that should be discussed on the merits. It'd do women no good to try to get their best sprint times up to men's by fixing society to be more accepting of female sprinters. There are real biological differences between the sexes, and trying to fix downstream effects of them by making up sociological causes and attacking them is very quixotic.
    - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
      You think sociological explanations for why women are under-represented in tech are made up?
      - ThrustVectoring 9y ago
        I didn't say that, and I don't have an opinion on that. I used sprinting as an example for a reason; the reason why women are under-represented among top sprint times is clearly biological, and I was hoping to point at the impossibility of fixing it through changing the sociological structure of track-and-field to be more accepting to women. I think a sociological explanation for any biological phenomena has to be made up. This is why we need to have an honest discussion about the merits of biological explanations, so that we can figure out the root causes and spend our efforts effectively.
- pnw_hazor 9y ago
  And he made a few suggestions that he thought may improve the situation by taking into account the differences between men and women and their respective motivations.
moduspol 9y ago
He didn't say he believed that. He said he believed it's possible it's one of several factors, and only at a macro level ("generally, women prefer not to do X", not "women are worse at X."). He also suggested that if the goal is for Google to become more inclusive toward women, that perhaps the roles should be adjusted to appeal more to women than to stick our heads in the sand and pretend the problem is Google's patriarchy. If you run a burger place and want more women to eat there, you start serving salads. That doesn't mean you're a sexist for thinking women can't eat burgers. Some do. But generally speaking, women eat salads at higher rates than men. You will not be as successful by trying to market the same burgers to women.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  >("generally, women prefer not to do X", not "women are worse at X."). You're sneaking in your "prefer" with your "generally". Damore didn't speak just to preference, he also spoke to ability. >If you run a burger place and want more women to eat there, you start serving salads. That doesn't mean you're a sexist for thinking women can't eat burgers. Some do. But generally speaking, women eat salads at higher rates than men. You will not be as successful by trying to market the same burgers to women. Great analogy. So in terms of burgers/salads & men/women Damore is saying that there are biological reasons to believe that women prefer salads to burgers and that there are biological reasons to believe that men are better at eating burgers. So now let me ask you, do you think women prefer salads because of biology, or do you think that women prefer salads because of culture? You can say both but if so maybe you could say which one you think is the larger influence and by how much. Also, do you think that men are biologically better at eating burgers? Is this the reason they are more likely to order a burger? I think the analogy exposes exactly the problem with Damore's memo.
  - moduspol 9y ago
    > You're sneaking in your "prefer" with your "generally". Damore didn't speak just to preference, he also spoke to ability. Ability follows as a result of preference. I am a terrible architect because I chose to become a software engineer. That does not mean that if I had chosen to become an architect, I would be terrible at it. If most of the people from my hometown made the same choice, then most of us would be less good at architecting due to that preference. > So now let me ask you, do you think women prefer salads because of biology, or do you think that women prefer salads because of culture? You can say both but if so maybe you could say which one you think is the larger influence and by how much. Personally I think it's almost entirely culture. I couldn't say how much is what, but it makes no difference. The point is that it undermines the incumbent narrative, which is that sexism and oppression are the only significant causes. > Also, do you think that men are biologically better at eating burgers? Is this the reason they are more likely to order a burger? No, but I do think if you're running a burger place and refuse to acknowledge the possibility that different groups of customers prefer different things, you're going to be out of business soon. Fortunately restaurant menu choices haven't been politically charged--yet.
lurr 9y ago
If you don't believe biology is the reason then it's a big difference.

ThrustVectoring 9y ago

Yeah, there is. "Women are worse" implies that there's a gendered difference after applying the "is an engineer" filter. "Fewer women gain entry into the class of engineers" doesn't imply anything about ability afterwards. And for what it's worth, James Damore explicitly called out this distinction, saying that he was not making a claim about any sort of skill differential between male engineer and female engineers. Like, male and female high jumpers that make it over a certain height of bar are approximately as good at jumping. There's more men in that category. This all might be playing semantics, but I think there's a real thing here to disentangle, and it'd be nice to say one without implying the other.

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
>Yeah, there is. "Women are worse" implies that there's a gendered difference after applying the "is an engineer" filter. ...No it doesn't. That's just something you're adding to preserve the distinction. >Like, male and female high jumpers that make it over a certain height of bar are approximately as good at jumping. There's more men in that category. This all might be playing semantics, but I think there's a real thing here to disentangle, and it'd be nice to say one without implying the other. Yes yes but the problem comes with Damore's reasoning for why there are more men in that category - biological determination of better programming ability.
- ThrustVectoring 9y ago
  >Yes yes but the problem comes with Damore's reasoning for why there are more men in that category - biological determination of better programming ability. Whether or not the representation gap is biological is an important factual matter that should be discussed on the merits. It'd do women no good to try to get their best sprint times up to men's by fixing society to be more accepting of female sprinters. There are real biological differences between the sexes, and trying to fix downstream effects of them by making up sociological causes and attacking them is very quixotic.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    You think sociological explanations for why women are under-represented in tech are made up?
    - ThrustVectoring 9y ago
      I didn't say that, and I don't have an opinion on that. I used sprinting as an example for a reason; the reason why women are under-represented among top sprint times is clearly biological, and I was hoping to point at the impossibility of fixing it through changing the sociological structure of track-and-field to be more accepting to women. I think a sociological explanation for any biological phenomena has to be made up. This is why we need to have an honest discussion about the merits of biological explanations, so that we can figure out the root causes and spend our efforts effectively.
pnw_hazor 9y ago
And he made a few suggestions that he thought may improve the situation by taking into account the differences between men and women and their respective motivations.

moduspol 9y ago

He didn't say he believed that. He said he believed it's possible it's one of several factors, and only at a macro level ("generally, women prefer not to do X", not "women are worse at X."). He also suggested that if the goal is for Google to become more inclusive toward women, that perhaps the roles should be adjusted to appeal more to women than to stick our heads in the sand and pretend the problem is Google's patriarchy. If you run a burger place and want more women to eat there, you start serving salads. That doesn't mean you're a sexist for thinking women can't eat burgers. Some do. But generally speaking, women eat salads at higher rates than men. You will not be as successful by trying to market the same burgers to women.

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
>("generally, women prefer not to do X", not "women are worse at X."). You're sneaking in your "prefer" with your "generally". Damore didn't speak just to preference, he also spoke to ability. >If you run a burger place and want more women to eat there, you start serving salads. That doesn't mean you're a sexist for thinking women can't eat burgers. Some do. But generally speaking, women eat salads at higher rates than men. You will not be as successful by trying to market the same burgers to women. Great analogy. So in terms of burgers/salads & men/women Damore is saying that there are biological reasons to believe that women prefer salads to burgers and that there are biological reasons to believe that men are better at eating burgers. So now let me ask you, do you think women prefer salads because of biology, or do you think that women prefer salads because of culture? You can say both but if so maybe you could say which one you think is the larger influence and by how much. Also, do you think that men are biologically better at eating burgers? Is this the reason they are more likely to order a burger? I think the analogy exposes exactly the problem with Damore's memo.
- moduspol 9y ago
  > You're sneaking in your "prefer" with your "generally". Damore didn't speak just to preference, he also spoke to ability. Ability follows as a result of preference. I am a terrible architect because I chose to become a software engineer. That does not mean that if I had chosen to become an architect, I would be terrible at it. If most of the people from my hometown made the same choice, then most of us would be less good at architecting due to that preference. > So now let me ask you, do you think women prefer salads because of biology, or do you think that women prefer salads because of culture? You can say both but if so maybe you could say which one you think is the larger influence and by how much. Personally I think it's almost entirely culture. I couldn't say how much is what, but it makes no difference. The point is that it undermines the incumbent narrative, which is that sexism and oppression are the only significant causes. > Also, do you think that men are biologically better at eating burgers? Is this the reason they are more likely to order a burger? No, but I do think if you're running a burger place and refuse to acknowledge the possibility that different groups of customers prefer different things, you're going to be out of business soon. Fortunately restaurant menu choices haven't been politically charged--yet.

lurr 9y ago

If you don't believe biology is the reason then it's a big difference.