Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 3:10 AM UTC

kevinwang wrote: post #752

droopybuns wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This section struck out to me too. what I realized is that I am older, more world wary and far more cynical about anyone looking out for me than your average young millennial. I think the dividing line is in that cynicism. I have never felt like anyone looked out for me. "How do I prove myself to people one way or another?" I have stopped trying to prove myself. I do what I think is right and am very wary of external…

>"How do I prove myself to people one way or another?" I don't think this was about generic proving-to-others. I think it's about being prejudged by others at first glance which minorities in tech get in every interaction they have. I think that it's valid to say that's a significant struggle. I have no expertise in this field of social ethics, so I'm hesitant to critique your comment when I'm as uninformed as anyone…

Post by im3w1l » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 3:12 AM UTC

Blackthorn wrote: post #156

nicolashahn wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the correct way to handle it is to drop another refutational evidence bomb attacking his primary points instead of picking the low hanging fruit of claiming it's "too confrontational," "poorly written," "naive," or whatever other secondary problems exist (this is aside from wilfully misrepresenting his claims, which is definitely a bigger problem). Plenty of far more aggressive articles and essays have been writ…

> Then the correct way to handle it is to drop another refutational evidence bomb attacking his primary points instead of picking the low hanging fruit of claiming it's "too confrontational," "poorly written," "naive," or whatever other secondary problems exist (this is aside from wilfully misrepresenting his claims, which is definitely a bigger problem). This was addressed in the article. This burden has fallen on w…

Post by dymk » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 3:14 AM UTC

Danihan wrote: post #234

dreta wrote: post #151

All i got from the memo, besides the echo chamber part, which google, and others managed to prove almost immediately, was that the author thinks there are biological differences between men and women, which lead to women being less interested in the field, thus being under-represented, and that google's sexist practices won't change that, only make people resent the diversity hires. Was i reading the wrong memo? Beca…

Yep, the vast majority of things in this article that the interviewees said they "disagree with" are things the author never said.

Post by dymk » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 3:16 AM UTC

mastazi wrote: post #185

So the takeaway is: you should become extremely proficient at writing memos and back them up with vast amounts of research, or be fired. But all of the above applies only if your memo expresses conservative ideas. I don't consider myself a conservative but I find all of this disturbing.

Post by hellopier » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 3:17 AM UTC

Lon7 wrote: post #709

studentrob wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the author said women are less suited to being good engineers... Where was that stated? DAMORE: "I'm simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership." EDIT: also https://youtu.be/TN1vEfqHGro?t=30m13s

And I think it's important to point out here that this argument is probably wrong. It is one of the many examples where Damore cites research, but puts his own spin on it. One of the researchers Danmore cited is David P Schmitt. Here [0] David states: "But it is not clear to me how such sex differences are relevant to the Google workplace. And even if sex differences in negative emotionality were relevant to occupati…