3 ms·

Calling it brainwashing is maybe overselling the point, but as an exmo it does feel similar to me to arguments around religious dogma, where people are already

Calling it brainwashing is maybe overselling the point, but as an exmo it does feel similar to me to arguments around religious dogma, where people are already 100% certain on the only outcome/position that's acceptable to them, then go find the arguments and evidence that backs that. It's clear to me that many social progressives find the idea that there may be average biological differences in personality between genders to be unacceptable. > holding the opinion of biologically driven personality eats away at the concept of free will Eh, I don't think you'll find many people who dispute that there's individual variation in personalities due to biology/genetics. Hell, "born this way" (for being gay) was practically a rallying cry on the left.

silicon2401 6y ago
The superset is "ideology" imo. Whether the topic is supernatural or physical, people who base their lives on ideology tend to behave similarly, as you've pointed out.
TaylorAlexander 6y ago
I think the problem is that people like James Damore will say that women aren’t suited for work in tech, and I don’t think that’s correct. And worse, the very idea almost provides support for the abuse women regularly feel working in tech from their male coworkers. So sure, hormone differences seem to lead to different brain chemistry. But then people draw wild and incorrect conclusions like gate keeping women out of tech. And the fact that their conclusion is wrong is more important than the fact that some differences do exist. Edit: I worked at Google when the memo came out. Personally I didn’t think the memo was that bad... until I spoke to my female friends that worked at Google. They told me a lot about how women are treated in tech. And they showed me how things said in the memo that I thought were harmless actually perpetuated beliefs that they believed did cause them harm. So the people saying I am misrepresenting the situation... are you a man? Maybe you can’t recognize the harmful statements the way women do and so you do not remember them being harmful? I certainly got a lesson in my own bias after that memo came out. My close friends sat me down and we had some difficult conversations about it. If you’ve never done that, consider what you might be missing.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  I would never say one gender simply "isn't suited" for a particular career type, but I do think it's likely that, if there are average sex differences in personality, there are almost certainly average sex differences in occupational preferences. But, that doesn't preclude there also being sexism present that needs to be dealt with.
- 13years 6y ago
  I don't believe that is what Damore said or intended. The discussion revolves around preference not capability. They are not the same thing.
- HideousKojima 6y ago
  >I think the problem is that people like James Damore will say that women aren’t suited for work in tech That's something he never said, and even explicitly said the opposite multiple times. The fact that people like you continue to repeat lies about what he said without ever reading what he said (or worse, willfully lying in spite of actually reading it) is why we can't have honest conversations about this.
  - ackfoobar 6y ago
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Most people don't have a strong enough grasp of statistics. No matter how careful one is with the wording, some can only hear what they are capable of understanding, because they lack the frame of understanding.
    - themediasucks 6y ago
      It wasn't Damore's wording that has created the view of his memo that is counterfactual, it was the reporting done by "reputable" journals, who blatantly lied in articles about what the memo said. It was journals like Wired, TechCrunch, the NYT's technology board, Ars Technica, the whole tech media came out of the woodwork to create a false narrative about what Damore wrote and succeeded in getting him terminated. They may have even ruined his life, just some random autistic engineer who accidentally violated their taboo. And Damore isn't the first person mainstream journalists have done this to, they did it with Jordan Peterson, as another example, and they'll make up all kinds of lies if it fits their ideological goals to do so. The sooner people realize that they need to consume "mainstream" journalism with the same skepticism they bring to "alt" journalism or "tabloids," the better off we'll be. In the meantime, the journalists I trust most are the ones that have seen through this game: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Andrew Sullivan, Bari Weiss, to name a few.

silicon2401 6y ago

The superset is "ideology" imo. Whether the topic is supernatural or physical, people who base their lives on ideology tend to behave similarly, as you've pointed out.

TaylorAlexander 6y ago

I think the problem is that people like James Damore will say that women aren’t suited for work in tech, and I don’t think that’s correct. And worse, the very idea almost provides support for the abuse women regularly feel working in tech from their male coworkers. So sure, hormone differences seem to lead to different brain chemistry. But then people draw wild and incorrect conclusions like gate keeping women out of tech. And the fact that their conclusion is wrong is more important than the fact that some differences do exist. Edit: I worked at Google when the memo came out. Personally I didn’t think the memo was that bad... until I spoke to my female friends that worked at Google. They told me a lot about how women are treated in tech. And they showed me how things said in the memo that I thought were harmless actually perpetuated beliefs that they believed did cause them harm. So the people saying I am misrepresenting the situation... are you a man? Maybe you can’t recognize the harmful statements the way women do and so you do not remember them being harmful? I certainly got a lesson in my own bias after that memo came out. My close friends sat me down and we had some difficult conversations about it. If you’ve never done that, consider what you might be missing.

TulliusCicero 6y ago
I would never say one gender simply "isn't suited" for a particular career type, but I do think it's likely that, if there are average sex differences in personality, there are almost certainly average sex differences in occupational preferences. But, that doesn't preclude there also being sexism present that needs to be dealt with.
13years 6y ago
I don't believe that is what Damore said or intended. The discussion revolves around preference not capability. They are not the same thing.
HideousKojima 6y ago
>I think the problem is that people like James Damore will say that women aren’t suited for work in tech That's something he never said, and even explicitly said the opposite multiple times. The fact that people like you continue to repeat lies about what he said without ever reading what he said (or worse, willfully lying in spite of actually reading it) is why we can't have honest conversations about this.
- ackfoobar 6y ago
  "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Most people don't have a strong enough grasp of statistics. No matter how careful one is with the wording, some can only hear what they are capable of understanding, because they lack the frame of understanding.
  - themediasucks 6y ago
    It wasn't Damore's wording that has created the view of his memo that is counterfactual, it was the reporting done by "reputable" journals, who blatantly lied in articles about what the memo said. It was journals like Wired, TechCrunch, the NYT's technology board, Ars Technica, the whole tech media came out of the woodwork to create a false narrative about what Damore wrote and succeeded in getting him terminated. They may have even ruined his life, just some random autistic engineer who accidentally violated their taboo. And Damore isn't the first person mainstream journalists have done this to, they did it with Jordan Peterson, as another example, and they'll make up all kinds of lies if it fits their ideological goals to do so. The sooner people realize that they need to consume "mainstream" journalism with the same skepticism they bring to "alt" journalism or "tabloids," the better off we'll be. In the meantime, the journalists I trust most are the ones that have seen through this game: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Andrew Sullivan, Bari Weiss, to name a few.