91–100 of 232 posts
Does this mean James Damore was right? Or is there something wrong with this research?
Yonatan Zunger, a principle eng at Google and twitter, said how wrong Damore was and that: "a good number of the people you [Damore] might have to work with may simply punch you in the face" https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man... I have no idea why this guy Yonatan is still allowed to work anywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those are just two points out of a long list of actions required in a society. I don't think it really adds that much weight to the argument, even though it is true. To go back to your other comment: > Why is that a problem, and if it was due to upbringing then why that would be a problem? It would be a problem for upbringing as that is something adults have agency over. It's a bias that may not need to exist. A grea…
> It would be a problem for upbringing as that is something adults have agency over. It's a bias that may not need to exist. There's no evidence that adults are creating this bias. They are not. On average women find tech work grindingly boring. Why is it a problem? It isn't. Just let people do what they want with their lives.
No evidence of that.
> There's no evidence that adults are creating this bias. They are not.
Are you absolutely certain? It's the subject of quite a bit of research.
> Why is it a problem? It isn't. Just let people do what they want with their lives.
Kids don't know what they want to do with their lives, they get lead down various paths by their upbringing. Plenty of people end up in careers they don't like because it's what their parents wanted them to do, regardless of gender.
Please keep in mind that if really true, it is not a binary thing. It’s a distribution. There are going to be plenty of women who are more interested in things than the median man, and there are plenty of men who are more interested in people than the median woman.
I don't think anyone arguing in good faith would state otherwise. This is too obvious
The article speaks in very broad terms but there are precise preferential differences by sex. More than just working with things males tend to prefer working with tools more than building new things. Yes there are many males that are creative and only prefer creating original works, but not most. When it comes to working with things females, unlike males, tend to prefer the ideas of things, theory, more than the impl…
The definition of working with people vs. working with things doesn't seem obvious to me. As a software engineer I am working a lot with my computer. Therefore I must be working with things! But... I am just as much working with my soft skills. Scrum retros, talking to stakeholders, discussions on design with fellow engineers, testing with end-users. Some days I don't spend even a minute working with "things". I don'…
A bricklayer works with things. Daycare staff work with people. These are very clear-cut. Then there are a lot of points along that continuum -- nurses and HR reps work mostly with people. Economists a little of both. Software engineers and carpenters mostly with things. We may not agree on a complete ordering but we will get reasonably close to each other, I suppose.
> gender differences appear to be greater in societies with greater gender equality and in which people have greater economic resources I don't think this is a paradox at all. Discouraging 50% of the workforce talent pool is a wasteful luxury that only countries with abundant resources can afford. I experienced this first hand when I moved to Sweden. I had never been made to feel like a freak for being a programmer u…
Are you saying that Sweden is a sexist society? Do you mind me asking where have you been before?
Please keep in mind that if really true, it is not a binary thing. It’s a distribution. There are going to be plenty of women who are more interested in things than the median man, and there are plenty of men who are more interested in people than the median woman.
When talking about populations, this should be implicitly assumed - just like that the experiment took place on Earth and the participants were breathing air. I don't know why this isn't burned into peoples brains with a big flashing neon sign, and why someone inevitably comes up with a counterargument of 'but not all X' when these things are discussed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yonatan Zunger, a principle eng at Google and twitter, said how wrong Damore was and that: "a good number of the people you [Damore] might have to work with may simply punch you in the face" https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man... I have no idea why this guy Yonatan is still allowed to work anywhere.
[flagged]
those “preferences” are a result of history
- societies raised women to take care (take care of their family and house chores) while men went out in the wild to play, study and work.
- women had to be “empathetic” because understanding one’s mood was vital to their survival throughout history: in times where it was “ok” and even expected that women were beaten up to make them more docile or whatever.
- women were “granted permission” to certain work roles based on the time that happened. assistant roles were the most common, like secretaries (they even had a “bad reputation” because of the affairs with their executives, but it was really common an executive, a man, have a secretary as a gift). and think about how childhood education usually have more female teachers and higher education is a land of men. or nurses vs medical doctors.