Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#981

Post by stevenwoo » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 8:30 PM UTC

peoplewindow wrote: post #931

stevenwoo wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was my first thought on the male childcare thing,too Could not make it past the first 30 minutes, felt so much empathy for Mads' situation and anger at the teacher/administrator for assuming guilt immediately. The fact that the director/writer gave us an omniscient view point with the sex acts happening in front of the child at home sort of forced one into Mads' corner right away.

Another example: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/no-man-th... No man 'in their right mind' would go into teaching, says geography teacher cleared of rape Becoming a teacher is like buying a high-risk lottery ticket and solution is for men "only to teach boys", says Kato Harris He believes that he would struggle to return to teaching, even if he had any intention to do so. “I can go back to teaching…

When I (male) told my high school teachers that I was thinking about going into education they strongly recommended I not do it - in 1984.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#982

Post by weberc2 » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 9:19 PM UTC

hacknat wrote: post #844

hedgew wrote: post #21

Many of the more reasonable criticisms of the memo say that it wasn't written well enough; it could've been more considerate, it should have used better language, or better presentation. In this particular link, Scott Alexander is used as an example of better writing, and he certainly is one of the best and most persuasive modern writers I've found. However, I can not imagine ever matching his talent and output, even…

The memo suffered from a lack of 2nd order thinking. If Google really is using its diversity programs to "lower the bar", that's what should have been proven and addressed, whether men and women have innate differences in talent for certain occupations is irrelevant. It's Google's perogative/obligation to find and retain the best talent. I suspect that's what the purpose of their diversity programs are for. If they'r…

The purpose wasn't to prove that Google is using its diversity programs for nefarious purposes; only to raise the question that Google's diversity aims might be misguided and even potentially harmful per their stated goals. He supports his argument by pointing to studies that suggest men and women may be differently interested, in which case we shouldn't expect 50/50 distribution.

Perhaps whether or not Google's diversity programs are lowering the bar is the more important question; it's also one he likely wasn't well-positioned to tackle (it requires a lot more resources to prove/disprove bar-lowering compared to writing a memo to express a concern).

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#983

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

corndoge wrote: post #625

Frances: ...if I remain silent, that silence could be mistaken for agreement. I should not be forced into that kind of debate at work. And then Frances: ...I’m also disappointed that the men I know, including most of my male colleagues, remained silent on the topic. Frances: ...Many powerful men in Silicon Valley have huge bases of social media followers. By remaining silent on this topic or tweeting support for Damo…

[deleted]

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#984

Post by hippich » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 10:27 PM UTC

foobar_femme wrote: post #791

As a longtime female engineer at fintech startups, there was absolutely nothing new in Damore's memo. The only thing that gave these tired arguments any cachet at all was Google's name. And I really wish Google hadn't fired Damore. Special projects exists?! For years I have worked with and continue to work with guys who think just like this. In fact, thanks to Twitter, I now know all of my followers who also follow D…

I am male engineer and I often get same treatment. I consider myself quite experienced, often more experienced than people getting preference. What I lack often is ability (and willingness nowaday) to prove myself in the eyes of others. Solution to that - side projects, businesses (which are still being dismissed by majority of people I know,) etc. If anything - it made me more resilient (but also pissed off often :))

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#985

Post by hippich » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 10:30 PM UTC

Tehnix wrote: post #879

Please note that this is a comment on a specific remark, and is not meant to make it seem as though that invalidates the rest of the text - I’m mainly interested in the subconscious reason why things are the way they are. > I wish more successful men in tech thought deeply about the advantages they’ve had I think the reason many take annoyance with this particular opinion (at least I do), that men had it easy, is roo…

I had pretty much same experience, minus socialization skills. So you are definitely not alone in your experience. And I observed similar from (very) few friends in the same situation.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#986

Post by inopinatus » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 10:39 PM UTC

jblow wrote: post #887

jblow wrote: post #885

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's false and nasty. I was thinking the same thing ... quite objectively. There were at least two discussions that I thought were very reasonable, and they got flagged into oblivion very quickly. So I don't know why the YC link gets to be the exception. It feels wrong. Maybe it is due to the users, but if that is so, it feels wrong enough to give me a pretty big loss of faith in the dynamics of the com…

It occurs to me, maybe this is another instance of the left engaging in silencing tactics and maybe that is a weakness in the flagging algorithm. I can't vote "don't flag this". So if there are approximately two sides to a discussion, and one side wants to flag it to silence the discussion, then the discussion is going to get flagged no matter what. So the side that wants to silence just selectively silences the opin…

I've personally flagged far more articles on this topic than I usually do. However I am not "on the left". I consider my politics to be slightly right of centre. I have expressed no public view on the content of the Damore memo. But there's been so much sound and fury that only the strongest signal is now welcome in my feed. I did not flag this YC posting; it is, by contrast, very low noise.

I thought you can repudiate a flagging, isn't that the "vouch" control? I'm not familiar with exactly when it is or isn't offered.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#987

Post by weberc2 » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 10:59 PM UTC

chisleu wrote: post #841

hedgew wrote: post #21

Many of the more reasonable criticisms of the memo say that it wasn't written well enough; it could've been more considerate, it should have used better language, or better presentation. In this particular link, Scott Alexander is used as an example of better writing, and he certainly is one of the best and most persuasive modern writers I've found. However, I can not imagine ever matching his talent and output, even…

Most importantly to me, it was written directly as a response to a request for comments on the subject. People made it out to be a rant someone just threw out there, but it wasn't. It was also published a month before, and internal polls at Google found it to be non-offensive. That doesn't stop people from whipping up mass hysteria about it.

Personally, I like how the criticisms have shifted from outrage over statements Damore never made (and contexts in which he never posted) to sharp criticisms of his "unprofessional delivery" as though a post on a discussion board needed to be better than most published academic content. I can't frankly imagine a more conciliatory delivery. Of course, we mustn't blame the folks who are cultivating faux outrage; this is clearly James' fault... /s

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#988

Post by PeanutCurry » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 11:30 PM UTC

hacknat wrote: post #936

PeanutCurry wrote: post #916

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the correlation between diversity programs and retaining the best talent. Not because diversity isn't important, or because it's a negative thing, but because in general diversity programs function by more closely examining/attracting a subset of a larger total population of workers. You could still of course find the best talent within those subsets, but the implication is still that you could just as ea…

Why is it binary? I'm pretty sure you can focus on both. Also, it's not hard to get candidates that are non-diverse, almost by definition the status quo favors their hiring, hence the diversity programs.

I didn't mean to imply that both can't be done at the same time. I thought you meant that diversity programs were an inherent part of finding the best talent when you wrote

> "It's Google's perogative/obligation to find and retain the best talent. I suspect that's what the purpose of their diversity programs are for."

To me this meant that to find the best talent it's more effective to focus on subsets of the total talent pool, which didn't make sense to me.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#989

Post by dguaraglia » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 11:48 PM UTC

micahbright wrote: post #798

dguaraglia wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just refer to the women in the article: > Assuming that it’s true that women on average are more likely to have trait X, why should any woman have to overcome the additional barrier of proving that she’s not like other women, or that if she IS like other women, that the trait has no bearing on her job performance?

I'm sure you can come up with a better argument. Assuming men are sexist and that you have to prove yourself to them is plainly hypocritical.

First, it's not my argument. As I said it was copied verbatim from the article.

Second, I do find interesting that you feel offended at the thought that women might assume men are sexist, but from your comment history you seem to be OK with Damore's memo which ascribes a number of traits to women.

Don't you think that is a bit hypocritical in itself?

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#990

Post by weberc2 » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 1:42 AM UTC

technologia wrote: post #962

hedgew wrote: post #21

Many of the more reasonable criticisms of the memo say that it wasn't written well enough; it could've been more considerate, it should have used better language, or better presentation. In this particular link, Scott Alexander is used as an example of better writing, and he certainly is one of the best and most persuasive modern writers I've found. However, I can not imagine ever matching his talent and output, even…

I agree that we need to treat James as a human being who is allowed to be flawed, but there's something to be said about why he added the biology component to his argument that wasn't necessary and simply distracted from the core argument. I would simply say that if he had cut that portion out, the conversation that is happening right now might become more productive and focused on hiring practices outside of Google.…

> there's something to be said about why he added the biology component to his argument that wasn't necessary and simply distracted from the core argument. I would simply say that if he had cut that portion out, the conversation that is happening right now might become more productive and focused on hiring practices outside of Google.

I'm not sure I agree. First of all, the article by Scott Alexander referenced in this post makes mostly the same arguments, and the post praises its content for being better presented. I can't tell much of a difference in presentation; certainly not one that justifies praise for Alexander and crucifixion for Damore. Secondly, 99% of Damore's critics are outraged about things he never remotely said; it was only after their accusations were thoroughly debunked that they shifted their criticism to his presentation. I seriously doubt any of the outrage is sincere; it seems far more likely that Damore made a suitable target for folks projecting their insecurities or even their legitimate victim experiences.