3 ms·
> See the link in the previous comment. That really doesn't describe a threat to the "white heterosexual Christian" identity. In fact, you're free to be a whit
by mike10010100 8y ago
> See the link in the previous comment.
That really doesn't describe a threat to the "white heterosexual Christian" identity. In fact, you're free to be a white heterosexual Christian at Google or anywhere else for that matter.
> Being fired for expressing a political viewpoint is a classic example of discrimination.
Again, the viewpoint on women and minorities was an intolerant one. Please study the Paradox of Tolerance.
> He never said that (I’ve just downloaded the memo and searched), nor anything similar to that.
You're right, he made a much more broad statement about the gender gap in the tech industry. Although there is this section:
> Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing).
>○ These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics.
He's regurgitating the idea that biology, rather than society, is what is holding women back in the tech industry. This is an intolerant viewpoint, as it suggests that there is something inherent about being female that makes them inferior at participating in the tech industry.
- Const-me 8y agoThe quotes you’ve copy-pasted are about statistically significant gender difference in interests and preferences. The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. Huge difference between the two.
- mike10010100 8y ago> The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. This is the conclusion the author of the memo reaches as well. His suggestions are not to fix the culture surrounding these preferences, but instead to simply "give women what they prefer", which inherently limits their experience and makes an implicit claim on their ability without that compensation.
- _Tev 8y agoHe makes observation of women's preferences, based on data. You claim he is "suggesting" something that is not there (seems like projection). Is this really the best argument for Damore's "intolerance" (in the memo) you can make?
- mike10010100 8y ago> He makes observation of women's preferences, based on data. He then prescribes things based on that generalization that make implicit claims about the ability of women to work without said compensation.
- _Tev 8y agoQuote them. Seriously. Because you really sound like making stuff up, just to confirm your bias against Damore. The whole memo was about something else, yet you claim that because: > He then prescribes things based on that generalization that make implicit claims about the ability of women to work without said compensation. (whatever that actually means) he is: > He's regurgitating the idea that biology, rather than society, is what is holding women back in the tech industry. That's gross hyperbole at best, and, considering you have not provided single citation (even after being called out), seems like random baseless belief you hold. Frankly, now your two liner applies wonderfully: > You are free to believe whatever you want. Just be prepared for your ideology to be called out for what it is if you choose to publicly stand for it.