The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science • Hacker News Board

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#131

Post by sandov » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:45 PM UTC

52-6F-62 wrote: post #65

Ajedi32 wrote: post #20

Not 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 accusi…

I personally never called it out for sexism. I called it out for regressive-thinking as a solution based on plain fact. I can only be brief right now, but it's starting to get to me how so many people in an innovative sphere seem to have such a hard time with this. To me, it seems like it shouldn't be a second thought. If the main argument is that women do not [by nature of our scientific understanding] have minds tu…

>If the main argument is that women do not [by nature of our scientific understanding] have minds tuned to engineering prowess to the extent that men do for whatever cause, then just how does that itself prescribe that we should stop pushing for an expansion there?

That's not the main point. We need to establish truth first, then act on it.

What is discussed here is the underlying truth, not how we should act on this truth.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#132

Post by mistermann » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:45 PM UTC

52-6F-62 wrote: post #65

Ajedi32 wrote: post #20

Not 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 accusi…

I personally never called it out for sexism. I called it out for regressive-thinking as a solution based on plain fact. I can only be brief right now, but it's starting to get to me how so many people in an innovative sphere seem to have such a hard time with this. To me, it seems like it shouldn't be a second thought. If the main argument is that women do not [by nature of our scientific understanding] have minds tu…

You are advocating for gender based discrimination, while (I think) saying and likely thinking you are not. To me, this is a very scary precedent as it will likely spread.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#133

Post by sp332 » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:45 PM UTC

Jabanga wrote: post #123

sp332 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was an attack on women, even if it used "science" as corroborating points.

This is just dogma. Making a scientifically supported argument against a position of postmodernists and feminists doesn't equal an "attack on women". The lack of intellect and integrity displayed by the attacks on the fired Google employee is really disturbing.

Nope. But the original memo defends discrimination against women and makes recommendations for future discrimination. Implementing these suggestions would be literally illegal for Google (subject to EEOC), and in fact Google is already in a lawsuit defending their alleged discrimination.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#134

Post by monktastic1 » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:46 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #101

This defense of the "manifesto" is flawed just like the others. It picks out a small subset of the claims made in the document, discards the context and all the other claims, and then harangues us for having a problem with "science". I could argue "water is composed of two hydrogen molecules and one oxygen molecule, so women are bad at software development", and my argument would just be a difference of degree worse…

Consider the Medium piece she cites:

https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...

Point #1: "I’m not going to spend any length of time on (1); if anyone wishes to provide details as to how nearly every statement about gender in that entire document is actively incorrect,¹ and flies directly in the face of all research done in the field for decades, they should go for it. But I am neither a biologist, a psychologist, nor a sociologist, so I’ll leave that to someone else."

In other words: "I have no relevant expertise, but I just know it's wrong."

We would never tolerate that from "the opposing side." I can point you to other articles that do the same.

This is the rallying point for a lot of people, and it's the wrong place to take a stand. It's worth pointing out.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#135

Post by mistermann » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:46 PM UTC

blusterXY wrote: post #105

52-6F-62 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally never called it out for sexism. I called it out for regressive-thinking as a solution based on plain fact. I can only be brief right now, but it's starting to get to me how so many people in an innovative sphere seem to have such a hard time with this. To me, it seems like it shouldn't be a second thought. If the main argument is that women do not [by nature of our scientific understanding] have minds tu…

> just how does that itself prescribe that we should stop pushing for an expansion there? You are the only one being "prescriptive". If a class of people doesn't prefer (in aggregate) to do the kinds of work you want them to do, what right do you have to insist that it is better for them if they are forced to do this work? When did it become feminist to lecture women about the sort of work environment they should wan…

We know where he doesn't get the knowledge.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#136

Post by mousa » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:46 PM UTC

riffraff wrote: post #99

verulito wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My company has an anonymous internal forum and I don't even like asking simple HR questions on there! I once complained about my disuse of my dependent care FSA going unnoticed. That's as far as I'm willing to go. A touchy subject like this from someone with a technical background to a large group of people... I guess Google has a lot of employees and it was bound to happen eventually but seriously, how do you hit se…

AFAIU, but I cannot reference, this was sent to a limited group of people, got forwarded and then became viral.

The way it was published does not lead me to believe that story. The link to the document riffed on documents whose authors want all Googlers to read them and fix their broken ways.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#137

Post by stevenwoo » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:46 PM UTC

peoplewindow wrote: post #62

danpalmer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I could tell from the coverage (I couldn't get past the first few paragraphs of the memo), it asks for more diversity in terms of right-wing/conservative thinking, and for Google to stop encouraging women to apply. On the surface – that's asking for both more and less diversity, however Google rejects the idea that conservative views (that are compatible with Google's HR policies) are discouraged, which wou…

It's very odd that you admit you didn't actually read the document. Does it cause you physical pain or something? You then judged it based on a bunch of re-tellings, believe it says something it doesn't and that this is somehow virtuous and worthy of proclamation. Kind of discouraging. It didn't say Google should stop encouraging women to apply. That's simply not true. It did say it should stop giving women specific…

There is an interview type where gender (or even attractiveness/height/race which can bias folks) is not taken into consideration - when orchestras have auditions with the candidates that perform behind a curtain. Obviously there is some component of interviewing for a technical position where one is attempting to assay the candidates suitability for the work environment that is not compatible with this, but it's a pretty foolproof method (if no one is cheating) of making sure the interview process is gender/race blind at that stage. Off the top of my head, this lead to more women being hired for orchestras.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#138

Post by revmoo » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:47 PM UTC

sethish wrote: post #118

ainiriand wrote: post #6

Firing this guy was just a PR move in order to keep things under control. The memo was accurate and I know that Google is going to learn from it even if the guy has been sacrified.

Private companies are not free speech zones. Not firing this person would have been a Title VII violation and opened them to lawsuits.

It was ten pages, please read the whole document we're discussing before commenting about it.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#139

Post by chourobin » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:48 PM UTC

52-6F-62 wrote: post #65

Ajedi32 wrote: post #20

Not 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 accusi…

I personally never called it out for sexism. I called it out for regressive-thinking as a solution based on plain fact. I can only be brief right now, but it's starting to get to me how so many people in an innovative sphere seem to have such a hard time with this. To me, it seems like it shouldn't be a second thought. If the main argument is that women do not [by nature of our scientific understanding] have minds tu…

"He used science to reason out a way to revert to a state of community where he stands to gain more."

This is spot on right here and the main difference between the memo and this article. The memo might have cited real science but it arrived at grossly inappropriate conclusions.

Re: The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science

#140

Post by Jabanga » Wed, Aug 09, 2017, 2:48 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #133

Jabanga wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just dogma. Making a scientifically supported argument against a position of postmodernists and feminists doesn't equal an "attack on women". The lack of intellect and integrity displayed by the attacks on the fired Google employee is really disturbing.

Nope. But the original memo defends discrimination against women and makes recommendations for future discrimination. Implementing these suggestions would be literally illegal for Google (subject to EEOC), and in fact Google is already in a lawsuit defending their alleged discrimination.

It does not defend discrimination against women. That's absurd. Quote me a single section that "defends discrimination against women". Incredibly harmful false accusations like this seem to be par for the course anytime someone goes up against postmodernist/feminist dogma.