Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s War Over the Sexes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#21

Post by ebola1717 »

danso wrote: post #12
johansch wrote: post #2

Wow. A balanced mainstream story on the topic.

FWIW, it's a column by Ross Douthat, regarded as one of the NYT's conservative opinion writers: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/business/media/12douthat.h... (Not that columns can't be well-reported stories in their own right)

Yeah, I mean, HN trends conservative, especially on issues of gender, race, diversity, etc. so not surprised Douthat is considered a sensible, middle-of-the-road writer here. Him and David Brooks are among the more reasonable conservatives out there, so I'm not lambasting their writing - just pointing out the biases in play.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#22

Post by AckSyn »

mpweiher wrote: post #15
freeone3000 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's calling for a reintegration of the sexes through marriage and children. While I wouldn't put words in his mouth as to "stay at home", he is for sure calling on women to raise babies. His repeated references to women as childbearers in the following paragraph don't help. The author appears to be stating that the solution to sexism is to have women marry the sexists and have their babies.

> His repeated references to women as childbearers Pardon me, but this is in(s)ane. WHO ELSE BUT WOMEN BEARS CHILDREN? Apologies, but I had to get that out of my system.

Don't worry. As soon as you call out things like biological facts, you're labeled as misogynistic or chauvinistic. No one else bears children, or replaces them very well as primary caregivers in their early prepubescent years.

May as well enjoy the decline of the social structure that once actually made sense.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#23

Post by dsfjksdf »

Barrin92 wrote: post #8

The most troubling thing about this whole issue for me is the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate. As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is , and doesn't tell us what ought to be . As such I have trouble understanding why we are approaching the issue from this angle. Instead of obsessing about biology, we should care about how we want our workplaces to look. And I would welco…

Israel is small, and they have many enemies, so presumably they simply can't afford not to have women fight, too. That they have women in the army doesn't imply that the women are capable of the same things as the male soldiers.

Other than that, sure, in my opinion everybody should be entitled to create the workplace they want. If they want 50% women, or even 100% women, their choice.

What pisses me off is when they indirectly accuse me of sexism and driving women away, just because I am male.

If they want more women, they should just say so, and not claim that they want to counter discrimination.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#24

Post by thephyber »

hsuresh wrote: post #9

At last a balanced story on the topic. The discussions online on this topic have been mind numbing - quoting out of context, ad hominem attacks, every bad form of arguments listed in PG's essay[1]. Twitter is the worst. Almost makes me want to build a better debating platform. [1] - http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

> Almost makes me want to build a better debating platform.

I'd considered this at one point. I marinated on the idea and decided it's not worth building (for me). The right structure for argument doesn't work in environments like Twitter/Facebook because the costs are asymmetric. It's very cheap to turn into a troll and very expensive to think through a thoughtful, balanced, nuanced argument. The platforms themselves don't afford or encourage the latter and incentivize the former.

I do want to build a way to database and store lots of the most useful facts I gather on all of the topics I care about from every platform I learn/work on.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#25

Post by emtel »

freeone3000 wrote: post #10
emtel wrote: post #6

> But since the usual way to reintegrate the sexes is to have them marry one another and raise kids, what Silicon Valley probably needs right now more than either workplace anti-microaggression training or an alt-right underground is a basic friendliness to family, pregnancy and child rearing. Prediction: this will be viciously misinterpreted on twitter as Douthat calling for women to stay at home and raise babies.

He's calling for a reintegration of the sexes through marriage and children. While I wouldn't put words in his mouth as to "stay at home", he is for sure calling on women to raise babies. His repeated references to women as childbearers in the following paragraph don't help. The author appears to be stating that the solution to sexism is to have women marry the sexists and have their babies.

It's an exceptionally tone-deaf and stupid paragraph, and I can't believe an NYT columnist would not realize the way people will interpret this. And I do feel there is something fundamentally icky about it. So by all means, let's criticize him.

However, his very next paragraph is about the lack of childcare on Apple's new campus and what it says about SV. I think any reasonable, charitable reader would have to infer from that that he is not expressing an interest in women leaving the workforce to raise children. My prediction is that the least reasonable, least charitable voices will intentionally misinterpret and misrepresent what he has said.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#27

Post by velodrome »

panzer_wyrm wrote: post #20
Barrin92 wrote: post #8

The most troubling thing about this whole issue for me is the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate. As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is , and doesn't tell us what ought to be . As such I have trouble understanding why we are approaching the issue from this angle. Instead of obsessing about biology, we should care about how we want our workplaces to look. And I would welco…

What percentage of Sayeret Matkal are women?

Sayeret Matkal, like all elite units, is closed to women. [1]

But it’s difficult to claim that women are equals in the IDF (even the IDF admits that less than 4 percent of women are in combat positions). Many are in “combat-support” positions that can involve anything from opening the gate of the army base to cleaning guns—and which, by the way, command a lower salary than combat positions. And tellingly, there is only one female general in the entire IDF. [1]

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/ga...

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#28

Post by ddebernardy »

Barrin92 wrote: post #8

The most troubling thing about this whole issue for me is the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate. As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is , and doesn't tell us what ought to be . As such I have trouble understanding why we are approaching the issue from this angle. Instead of obsessing about biology, we should care about how we want our workplaces to look. And I would welco…

> As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is, and doesn't tell us what ought to be

It unfortunately isn't that simple. About a century ago, one of the fathers of social psychology, no less, and an opinion leader at the time, offered the following quote:

> In the most intelligent races, as among the Parisians, there are a large number of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment; only its degree is worth discussion. All psychologists who have studied the intelligence of women, as well as poets and novelists, recognize today that they represent the most inferior forms of human evolution and that they are closer to children and savages than to an adult, civilized man. They excel in fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason. Without doubt there exist some distinguished women, very superior to the average man, but they are as exceptional as the birth of any monstrosity, as, for example, of a gorilla with two heads; consequently, we may neglect them entirely. -- Gustave Le Bon

There's more to 'the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate' than just wishing a better society into existence. There's a bias that feeds on deep cultural history that must be shed light onto and overcome.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#29

Post by Barrin92 »

DataWorker wrote: post #16
Barrin92 wrote: post #8

The most troubling thing about this whole issue for me is the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate. As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is , and doesn't tell us what ought to be . As such I have trouble understanding why we are approaching the issue from this angle. Instead of obsessing about biology, we should care about how we want our workplaces to look. And I would welco…

Did you read the thing? You have the greatest gender balance in comp sci in the least egalitarian societies. There's a body of scientific literature you could consult if you wanted the diversity you claim to want.

But that is precisely what I said! Developing countries are egalitarian out of necessity. For them economic emancipation is principally important, and just by accident lifts women and minorities up.

We have grown a little too soft it seems. Our (western) over-emphasis of freedom of choice is actually segregating us. We're giving in to our worst instincts and then claim that they are biological facts that we cannot escape from. That is not a good idea.

Re: Google’s War Over the Sexes

#30

Post by gthtjtkt »

What I find odd about all this is the apparent lack of concern for other male-dominated industries like deep-sea fishing, logging, coal mining, sanitation, construction, power-line maintenance, etc. Look at all the most dangerous, physically demanding jobs in the world and what do you see? They're all more than 95% men.

Where are all the women clamoring to get into those fields? Where are all the women wondering why women aren't clamoring to get into those fields? And where are all the people who want to spare men from having to bear the burden of all the most dangerous jobs?

Post reply on HN