6 ms·

She's not wrong. He shared a manifesto about gender differences in the workplace. In it, he calls women neurotic. Whether people's read on the manifesto is re

She's not wrong. He shared a manifesto about gender differences in the workplace. In it, he calls women neurotic. Whether people's read on the manifesto is reductive of his overall argument isn't the point. He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace. He should not have played the part of expert gender/psychology expert. A researcher he cites specifically disagrees with his takeaways. There are productive ways to have these kinds of conversations, he chose to go to the opposite wrong end of that spectrum. Women have enough BS to deal with in tech, the last thing they need is a tech bro mis-using uncertain psych research to justify telling them they should find more appropriate roles.

manigandham 6y ago
Google has always had a very open culture with lots of political discussion and encouraged these kinds of internal debates. This was a memo written specifically for a private internal forum that was focused on that specific discussion. The widely shared version was leaked and edited, but never meant for a public audience. Saying that men and women tend to have different preferences doesn't make a statement about their capabilities, nor is it really that controversial. The pursuit of a 50/50 ratio is counter-productive to free and open choice. Encouragement and opportunity should be the goal, not a forced ratio outcome.
- magic5227 6y ago
  The research the post cites strongly implies women would be better qualified for other roles. That suggestion was (and is) both inaccurate and inappropriate to send in a workplace.
  - reroute1 6y ago
    Less interested/"qualified" compared on average to males by virtue of their interests and biology not their intelligence. Ignoring this is like sticking your fingers in your ears to the argument How is the statement in a general population inaccurate? I agree it can make people uncomfortable but it looks pretty accurate to me
    - magic5227 6y ago
      "How is the statement in a general population inaccurate?" um, because there is no credible science behind his assumptions. Many of the researchers he cites dispute his conclusions. I'm not ignoring his argument, I'm saying it's a really bad argument with almost no evidence to support it.
      - reroute1 6y ago
        Actually it's pretty basic biology and psychology. What "conclusions" are disagreed? Can you really not see how this would apply in real life with personality differences? It seems obvious and intuitive not even mentioning the science, women are more social on average, men more into things that make a whirring noise. What data am I missing?
        magic5227 6y ago
        "...men more into things that make a whirring noise." You are proving my argument. Nonsense like this has prevented women from feeling like equal participants (and equally capable) in many fields for decades.
        reroute1 6y ago
        How is it nonsense though? You just saying it doesn't make it so sorry... It's a pretty obvious observation made over and over you are going to need to give some data or reasoning why this is wrong, because science and logic both say these are the gender norms in a general population How does that prove anything for you? You haven't shown anything except that you disagree, that doesn't give us anything except your opinion and definitely won't convince people who know the science also... The personality differences between men and women are not edgy science. I have a degree in psychology and I'm pretty confident you have no legit science (and haven't even give logical reasons) to back your claims but feel free to post something different You also seem to have a lot of misinformation in this thread. Calling his memo a manifesto... Mixing neurotic with neuroticism... Basic facts you are smearing... You aren't giving people a reason to believe any of what you say so maybe you should think about why you have such an extreme view
dgrin91 6y ago
What is a productive way to have this discussion? I can't think of any plausible way to have a discussion in this realm without serious risk of being ostracized.
koheripbal 6y ago
Calling it a "manifesto" is trying to give reader here some bias against it. Like he was some alt-right madman. He wrote a post. Not a manifesto. "There are productive ways to have these kinds of conversations" Well obviously there aren't when posting a comment in an internal company forum gets you fired.
- magic5227 6y ago
  There obviously ARE more productive ways, because most people aren't fired for having discussions at work.
- jashmatthews 6y ago
  He skipped over classical liberal and very quickly gave interviews to prominent alt-right figures like Stefan Molyneaux.
  - hckr_news 6y ago
    He also tweeted during the middle of this, "The KKK is horrible and I don't support them in any way, but can we admit that their internal title names are cool, e.g. 'Grand Wizard'?" So...shrugs
    - FeepingCreature 6y ago
      I mean. He's not wrong.
    - implements 6y ago
      He sounds like he may be on the autistic spectrum, which if treated as a form of social disability would (or should, IMO) grant him some leeway. If his intent wasn’t sexist then his failure to perfectly negotiate the complex social way those points have to be expressed isn’t a moral failing on his part. Edit: I’d rather posters took the time to argue against rather than downvote. My point is just that ‘socially colourblind’ people probably shouldn’t be punished for lacking perceptual and expressive subtlety. It doesn’t mean they can’t be corrected or educated, of-course.
forgot_again 6y ago
But women in general are more neurotic. This is well established. And given that small average differences between Gaussians equal large differences at the tails, the relatively small difference in average male/female neuroticism translates to large differences in gender representation at the tails.
- axelfontaine 6y ago
  I don't have any beef in this discussion, and am not educated in this field, but out of curiosity I had a quick look at what Wikipedia says, and it seems to at least somewhat agree with this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism
vmception 6y ago
It was a draft. Have the conversation. Address the flaws. Find a common ground, you don't have to be a conservative Manchurian candidate infiltrating the bay area to acknowledge where tech companies are failing on inclusivity goals in ways that stretch the imagination of being out of touch. Big Tech's contrived and readjusted and out of touch practices have been written about in NY Times, Wapo, even freaking SFGate ad nauseum. Adding some points that overlap with misogynist communities means address the misogyny in isolation, and also factor in the points.
alexpetralia 6y ago
> He calls women neurotic. Neurotic, as he uses it, is not the same way it is used in everyday parlance. Neurotic is part of the Big 5 personality traits, for which there is substantial academic evidence. The traits are: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. He is using "neurotic" in the psychological and clinical sense. I believe he specifies as much in his actual paper.
- spangry 6y ago
  Quite so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Gender_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Ge... "A study of gender differences in 55 nations using the Big Five Inventory found that women tended to be somewhat higher than men in neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The difference in neuroticism was the most prominent and consistent, with significant differences found in 49 of the 55 nations surveyed."
- judofyr 6y ago
  > He is using "neurotic" in the psychological and clinical sense. I believe he specifies as much in his actual paper. Eh. He's using the psychological/clinical definition, but then draws conclusions on no scientific basis. This is what he said in the memo: > [Women, on average, have more] neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance): This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs. And this is a quote from the person who actually did the meta-analysis which Damore cites (emphasis is mine): > These sex differences in neuroticism are not very large, with biological sex perhaps accounting for only 10 percent of the variance. > It is unclear to me that this sex difference would play a role in success within the Google workplace (in particular, not being able to handle stresses of leadership in the workplace. That’s a huge stretch to me), [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-damores-google-memo/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-...
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
    Regardless of the correctness of his overall argument, he wasn't saying "women are neurotic" in the colloquial sense, which was a common condemnation against him. Also, and fact check me on this, does accounting for 10% of variance (aka 0.1 * sig^2) mean accounting for sqrt(0.1) * sig, aka 32% of the standard deviation?
Udik 6y ago
> In it, he calls women neurotic. No, he says that on average they score higher on "neuroticism", one of the Big Five personality traits. [1] And it is an empirical fact. [2] If you say "he said women are neurotics" it means you didn't understand neither the language nor the logic of what you were reading, something that should give you pause. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism [2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00320.x# https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-9004....
james_s_tayler 6y ago
>He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace Probably doesn't help being autistic.
yeetman21 6y ago
damn bro, i hope she sees this

manigandham 6y ago

Google has always had a very open culture with lots of political discussion and encouraged these kinds of internal debates. This was a memo written specifically for a private internal forum that was focused on that specific discussion. The widely shared version was leaked and edited, but never meant for a public audience. Saying that men and women tend to have different preferences doesn't make a statement about their capabilities, nor is it really that controversial. The pursuit of a 50/50 ratio is counter-productive to free and open choice. Encouragement and opportunity should be the goal, not a forced ratio outcome.

magic5227 6y ago
The research the post cites strongly implies women would be better qualified for other roles. That suggestion was (and is) both inaccurate and inappropriate to send in a workplace.
- reroute1 6y ago
  Less interested/"qualified" compared on average to males by virtue of their interests and biology not their intelligence. Ignoring this is like sticking your fingers in your ears to the argument How is the statement in a general population inaccurate? I agree it can make people uncomfortable but it looks pretty accurate to me
  - magic5227 6y ago
    "How is the statement in a general population inaccurate?" um, because there is no credible science behind his assumptions. Many of the researchers he cites dispute his conclusions. I'm not ignoring his argument, I'm saying it's a really bad argument with almost no evidence to support it.
    - reroute1 6y ago
      Actually it's pretty basic biology and psychology. What "conclusions" are disagreed? Can you really not see how this would apply in real life with personality differences? It seems obvious and intuitive not even mentioning the science, women are more social on average, men more into things that make a whirring noise. What data am I missing?
      - magic5227 6y ago
        "...men more into things that make a whirring noise." You are proving my argument. Nonsense like this has prevented women from feeling like equal participants (and equally capable) in many fields for decades.
        reroute1 6y ago
        How is it nonsense though? You just saying it doesn't make it so sorry... It's a pretty obvious observation made over and over you are going to need to give some data or reasoning why this is wrong, because science and logic both say these are the gender norms in a general population How does that prove anything for you? You haven't shown anything except that you disagree, that doesn't give us anything except your opinion and definitely won't convince people who know the science also... The personality differences between men and women are not edgy science. I have a degree in psychology and I'm pretty confident you have no legit science (and haven't even give logical reasons) to back your claims but feel free to post something different You also seem to have a lot of misinformation in this thread. Calling his memo a manifesto... Mixing neurotic with neuroticism... Basic facts you are smearing... You aren't giving people a reason to believe any of what you say so maybe you should think about why you have such an extreme view

dgrin91 6y ago

What is a productive way to have this discussion? I can't think of any plausible way to have a discussion in this realm without serious risk of being ostracized.

koheripbal 6y ago

Calling it a "manifesto" is trying to give reader here some bias against it. Like he was some alt-right madman. He wrote a post. Not a manifesto. "There are productive ways to have these kinds of conversations" Well obviously there aren't when posting a comment in an internal company forum gets you fired.

magic5227 6y ago
There obviously ARE more productive ways, because most people aren't fired for having discussions at work.
jashmatthews 6y ago
He skipped over classical liberal and very quickly gave interviews to prominent alt-right figures like Stefan Molyneaux.
- hckr_news 6y ago
  He also tweeted during the middle of this, "The KKK is horrible and I don't support them in any way, but can we admit that their internal title names are cool, e.g. 'Grand Wizard'?" So...shrugs
  - FeepingCreature 6y ago
    I mean. He's not wrong.
  - implements 6y ago
    He sounds like he may be on the autistic spectrum, which if treated as a form of social disability would (or should, IMO) grant him some leeway. If his intent wasn’t sexist then his failure to perfectly negotiate the complex social way those points have to be expressed isn’t a moral failing on his part. Edit: I’d rather posters took the time to argue against rather than downvote. My point is just that ‘socially colourblind’ people probably shouldn’t be punished for lacking perceptual and expressive subtlety. It doesn’t mean they can’t be corrected or educated, of-course.

forgot_again 6y ago

But women in general are more neurotic. This is well established. And given that small average differences between Gaussians equal large differences at the tails, the relatively small difference in average male/female neuroticism translates to large differences in gender representation at the tails.

axelfontaine 6y ago
I don't have any beef in this discussion, and am not educated in this field, but out of curiosity I had a quick look at what Wikipedia says, and it seems to at least somewhat agree with this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism

vmception 6y ago

It was a draft. Have the conversation. Address the flaws. Find a common ground, you don't have to be a conservative Manchurian candidate infiltrating the bay area to acknowledge where tech companies are failing on inclusivity goals in ways that stretch the imagination of being out of touch. Big Tech's contrived and readjusted and out of touch practices have been written about in NY Times, Wapo, even freaking SFGate ad nauseum. Adding some points that overlap with misogynist communities means address the misogyny in isolation, and also factor in the points.

alexpetralia 6y ago

> He calls women neurotic. Neurotic, as he uses it, is not the same way it is used in everyday parlance. Neurotic is part of the Big 5 personality traits, for which there is substantial academic evidence. The traits are: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. He is using "neurotic" in the psychological and clinical sense. I believe he specifies as much in his actual paper.

spangry 6y ago
Quite so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Gender_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Ge... "A study of gender differences in 55 nations using the Big Five Inventory found that women tended to be somewhat higher than men in neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. The difference in neuroticism was the most prominent and consistent, with significant differences found in 49 of the 55 nations surveyed."
judofyr 6y ago
> He is using "neurotic" in the psychological and clinical sense. I believe he specifies as much in his actual paper. Eh. He's using the psychological/clinical definition, but then draws conclusions on no scientific basis. This is what he said in the memo: > [Women, on average, have more] neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance): This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs. And this is a quote from the person who actually did the meta-analysis which Damore cites (emphasis is mine): > These sex differences in neuroticism are not very large, with biological sex perhaps accounting for only 10 percent of the variance. > It is unclear to me that this sex difference would play a role in success within the Google workplace (in particular, not being able to handle stresses of leadership in the workplace. That’s a huge stretch to me), [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-damores-google-memo/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-...
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
  Regardless of the correctness of his overall argument, he wasn't saying "women are neurotic" in the colloquial sense, which was a common condemnation against him. Also, and fact check me on this, does accounting for 10% of variance (aka 0.1 * sig^2) mean accounting for sqrt(0.1) * sig, aka 32% of the standard deviation?

Udik 6y ago

> In it, he calls women neurotic. No, he says that on average they score higher on "neuroticism", one of the Big Five personality traits. [1] And it is an empirical fact. [2] If you say "he said women are neurotics" it means you didn't understand neither the language nor the logic of what you were reading, something that should give you pause. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism [2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00320.x# https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-9004....

james_s_tayler 6y ago

>He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace Probably doesn't help being autistic.

yeetman21 6y ago

damn bro, i hope she sees this