Flagged. This is just a shitstorm in a teacup. EDIT: 2 minutes in and I'm already being downvoted. Stop being sexists, stop oppressing me
Wrong Think ?
The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
11–20 of 684 posts
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#12Please don't flag the article if you simply disagree. The key to changing minds is understanding the other side. Not shutting them out of the conversation.
Things like these don't belong to a corporate forum like HN
This issue effects the entirety of technology sector which this forum represents a large group.
Simply trying to deny the debate is not how you work things out. If anything that will just annoy the group more so.
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#13This article would be a lot more worthy of a discussion if it actually discussed the actual issues.
How much is nature vs. nurture? (many of the behaviours the manifesto attributed to genetics are actually purely environmental)
Should that even matter? Shouldn't hiring processes be purely meritocratic?
The fact that the author of the memo argued for affirmative action for hiring more conservatives shows that he doesn't have anything against discrimination, as long as he profits. If he wanted a science-backed solution, he'd have supported motions to remove the topic of gender, race, political affiliation entirely from the hiring process. (Anonymous job applications can help with that).
Many of the sources were also quite misleading, or links to blogs instead of papers. The memo wouldn't pass peer review at any journal, and can, frankly said, not be called science.
As we also just had a big discussion about this topic on HN, this article is misleading and from an outlet that previously has published hit pieces on diversity policies[1], I flagged it - this discussion belongs into the recent megathread, not as its own onto the frontpage again.
[1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/will-trump-make-amer...
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things like these don't belong to a corporate forum like HN
This issue effects the entirety of technology sector which this forum represents a large group. Simply trying to deny the debate is not how you work things out. If anything that will just annoy the group more so.
[deleted]
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#15What disturbs me most about this incident is how many people's first instinct, when faced with views they strongly disagree with, is to try and suppress those views and the person speaking them. Not to engage with the argument or to try and argue against it, just to shut the other person down. It's a totalitarian kind of response.
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things like these don't belong to a corporate forum like HN
This issue effects the entirety of technology sector which this forum represents a large group. Simply trying to deny the debate is not how you work things out. If anything that will just annoy the group more so.
[deleted]
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#17[deleted]
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#18This is actually a great scientific read.
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#19Why can't the memo be both sexist and science? Arguing that there are differences between genders that make one gender unsuitable for a task can be as scientific as you want, it's still sexist. It's no different from doing the same but replacing gender with race - it's racist no matter how carefully and scientifically you worded it. It's almost as if the person writing this article believes that if the manifesto is f…
You are reading things that are not written there, take a breath and read it without bias. It talks about predisposition and how when you look into a collective you observe differences.
Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
#20Not much new here. This article is essentially just re-affirming all the scientific statements that were already made in the original memo, backed by links to scientific studies.
Only difference being that the author of this article has a PhD in sexual neuroscience (so people might have a harder time accusing her of not knowing what she's talking about) and is female (so some people might have a harder time of accusing her of sexism).