3 ms·

Have YOU read it? Jesus Christ. > Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. This leads to women generally

by flatb 7y ago

Have YOU read it? Jesus Christ. > Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Yes, that does say that women are genetically worse leaders and implies that their lower salaries are at least in part because they are naturally worse negotiators. The whole section it's written on is focused on explaining how sexism is mostly a exaggeration and that sex differences can instead be explained by genetic factors. Any more questions?

manfredo 7y ago
> Yes, that does say that women are genetically worse leaders and implies that their lower salaries are at least in part because they are naturally worse negotiators. No it does not. It says that women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average. And because Google rewards assertiveness, this means women have a harder time negotiating salaries at Google. In a workplace the prioritizes agreeableness over assertiveness, women would be at an advantage. And later in the memo he says Google should better reward agreeableness. It does not claim "women are genetically worse leaders". This is a fabrication.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- flatb 7y ago
  >No it does not. It says that women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average. Please, PLEASE look up the definition of 'discrimination' in any dictionary you like, and tell me if you really believe that saying 'women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average' does not fit the definition, or that James Damore's many characterizations of women on his memo ("higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance", "women generally have a harder time leading") don't, either. If that's the case, we are simply not going to agree with each other, so we shouldn't waste our time trying.
  - username90 7y ago
    Saying "Women do on average have more of trait X" is sexism, not discrimination. Discrimination would be if you said something like "We shouldn't hire women since they have trait X" or "Since women often have trait X they need to score higher in other areas for me to hire them" or "I always make sure that women don't have trait X before hiring them". So for example "I want to hire people who don't have trait X. I give an objective test for this. More men than women pass it. Studies have shown that more men than women pass this globally, so it is as expected. Therefore, due to this test, the people I hire tend to be more men than women." is not discrimination.
    - flatb 7y ago
      >Saying "Women do on average have more of trait X" is sexism, not discrimination. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism >Definition of sexism >1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex Enough. Just believe what you want, I give up. There's no sexism on the tech industry or schools. James Damore is right and is an oppressed victim of his own bravery. Whatever.
      - username90 7y ago
        I hope people on a tech forum understand what "or" means.
        flatb 7y ago
        I hope so too. Let's check out the definition of discrimination. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination >1. prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment Hm. Let's check out the definition of sexism again. >1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex Prejudice or discrimination. And discrimination also means prejudiced or prejudicial...since I'm not a tech person like yourself I wouldn't know what 'or' means, it's too complicated for me, but I think I do know what 'and' means: for example, you are wrong about your definition of sexism, and about your definition of discrimination, and about your use of 'or'. This is great, I love learning new tech concepts on tech forums from tech experts.

by flatb 7y ago

manfredo 7y ago

> Yes, that does say that women are genetically worse leaders and implies that their lower salaries are at least in part because they are naturally worse negotiators. No it does not. It says that women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average. And because Google rewards assertiveness, this means women have a harder time negotiating salaries at Google. In a workplace the prioritizes agreeableness over assertiveness, women would be at an advantage. And later in the memo he says Google should better reward agreeableness. It does not claim "women are genetically worse leaders". This is a fabrication.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
flatb 7y ago
>No it does not. It says that women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average. Please, PLEASE look up the definition of 'discrimination' in any dictionary you like, and tell me if you really believe that saying 'women are more agreeable and less assertive, on average' does not fit the definition, or that James Damore's many characterizations of women on his memo ("higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance", "women generally have a harder time leading") don't, either. If that's the case, we are simply not going to agree with each other, so we shouldn't waste our time trying.
- username90 7y ago
  Saying "Women do on average have more of trait X" is sexism, not discrimination. Discrimination would be if you said something like "We shouldn't hire women since they have trait X" or "Since women often have trait X they need to score higher in other areas for me to hire them" or "I always make sure that women don't have trait X before hiring them". So for example "I want to hire people who don't have trait X. I give an objective test for this. More men than women pass it. Studies have shown that more men than women pass this globally, so it is as expected. Therefore, due to this test, the people I hire tend to be more men than women." is not discrimination.
  - flatb 7y ago
    >Saying "Women do on average have more of trait X" is sexism, not discrimination. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism >Definition of sexism >1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex Enough. Just believe what you want, I give up. There's no sexism on the tech industry or schools. James Damore is right and is an oppressed victim of his own bravery. Whatever.
    - username90 7y ago
      I hope people on a tech forum understand what "or" means.
      - flatb 7y ago
        I hope so too. Let's check out the definition of discrimination. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination >1. prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment Hm. Let's check out the definition of sexism again. >1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex Prejudice or discrimination. And discrimination also means prejudiced or prejudicial...since I'm not a tech person like yourself I wouldn't know what 'or' means, it's too complicated for me, but I think I do know what 'and' means: for example, you are wrong about your definition of sexism, and about your definition of discrimination, and about your use of 'or'. This is great, I love learning new tech concepts on tech forums from tech experts.