women are underrepresented in tech because of inherent psychological differences

[MineKraftCheese]

http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320

This is horrendous! I don't know where to start but I'm boiling with rage.

So many awful gender stereotypes and weird lies and biological "truths".

Another New Scientist article

Memo to all tech bros: Sexism, not biology, holds women back from 3 days ago by Lara Williams

I love it when someone more articulate than me says something sensible.

Here's another, published last year: modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-core-belief-keeping-marginalized-groups-out-of-tech

@AssassinatedBeauty You asked me what I wanted to say about “sexism, discrimination and equality” with regards to the letter. So I will now speculate as to why he wrote it and give you an answer.

I am not a scientist like @PricklyBall. However, I would hope that they would suggest we look to the simplest explanation first. The letter says it is written not against women but against the diversity programs so that would be the place to start.

I believe that there is evidence to back this up. Thanks to the structure of the legal and media systems there, when news breaks big in the US people come forward to bear witness to past behaviour. Sometimes genuine, often also false witnesses. No-one has said that this guy has a history of misogynist actions or speech only awkwardness suggesting this simple explanation works.

He quoted science and posts here have attacked it as being absent or wrong. From what I have read the science is there, it is correct and it is wrongly applied. In fact it could be so wrong as to be the case that where he says women are statistically “less likely”, that they could be “more likely”.

With the help of @MrGHardy we established that few understand the mathematics. The term “fewer” morphed into “less”. This even seemed to strike people like Yonatan Zunger, who, you would hope, could do better. His output has been picked up by journalists like the great Owen Jones (www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/08/google-sexist-memo-alt-right-martyr-james-damore). This misrepresentation grew hysterically. An ultimate illustration being from CNN “I don’t really like women anywhere near a computer” ( ).

If, as I speculate here, the author found themselves disconnected from the diversity programs then it is a serious issue for Google. The programs need engagement. The question is whether his attitude is unique? They need to ask his ex-colleagues. The challenge now is that in sacking him they have sent a message saying “we don’t want to hear the negatives”. They could have communicated a counter message “we did not take this action because the author criticised the programs” but didn't. I think the analysis in this article by Rachel Bitte is very good - fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-uber-crisis/.

An individual does not have a PR machine to ensure they say all the right things and in the right way. My speculation is that he wanted to complain about the programs, not his colleagues, and the fact that he did it badly reflects that he is human, not that he is a monster.

To finally address your question then, and in no way do I mean to preach here this is just my view, I believe that equality stems from treating everyone as individuals with respect. I believe it involves working hard to not assume what they will think or how they will act and questioning, not projecting, one’s own preconceptions. To judge them by their performance and not by your perception. For me it is something you work at your whole life. In this context then I have found this text to have created great irony in those who reacted to it, reflecting perhaps that there is little genuine desire for equality anywhere.

My speculation is that he wanted to complain about the programs, not his colleagues

You're going to have a hard time explaining why he only did his crappy 'research' about women in computer science and ignored all the other beneficiaries of the diversity programs if you don't accept that he's a sexist dick before he even started writing.

In a number of India's top universities, women outnumber men in IT related subjects. As things stand over 30% of current programmers in India are women (21% in America), with this number growing, in a country where IT is a very major industry.

It's interesting that one of my friends (who plans to study computer science at university) has never had on derogatory comment about being female and focused on that subject in India yet in this country, from supposedly educated boys, has had plenty.

One*

Sorry, still half asleep!

Damore has aligned himself quite consciously with the alt-right since being fired. He's now their poster boy.

amp.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/10/google-cancels-meeting-james-damore-memo-alt-right-gamergate

I wonder if those who thought he simply had some good points, mildly raised, are surprised at how this is playing out.

"Meanwhile, Damore debuted a new Twitter account and professional photographs of himself wearing a shirt with the slogan “Goolag”."

What exactly is this guy's issue with life? Before he shat all over his career he had every opportunity that you might want to have in life. He went to Harvard, he worked at Google which is still large prestigious organisation and certainly looks good on a CV. He would be wealthy and successful by most people's standards.

My guess is sexual rejection.

Assassinated many wealthy and educated men/boys are still incredibly misogynist.

Yes, I know, it's just so obviously ridiculous in this case. He wants men like him to have more opportunities and for women/people not like him to have less (or is it fewer?!). What the hell does he think he's missed out on in life?

The first thing that strikes me is that I don't see how you can spend time working alongside women and not be aware that professionally speaking they are just as hardworking and capable as men are. Unless of course you are going into it with a chip on your shoulder or a previous bias. That can only be sexism?

Also I'm not 100% certain of his political point either. I'm politically conservative, and I'm not shy about it either. Usually if it comes to a discussion it's just to a stalemate, but there are lots of people of either political stripe that can't really debate and communicate well. In addition you can't really debate against a position you're not willing to engage with in good faith and I think that sin goes both ways across the political spectrum, and the workplace isn't a political forum, you should really be getting on with y'know work.

A few things have happened in the US lately that betrays a left wing bias, namely the IRS scandalously crawling over the details of conservative advocacy groups and letting democratic one pass U examined, and the recent election saw an overwhelming number of donations from people working in the media to respective presidential campaigns being in Hilary's favor.

However it HAS to be pointed out whenever the right has been in political/cultural dominance it has behaved in the exact same way. This is a human foible and not a political one.

A few things have happened in the US lately that betrays a left wing bias

Like Trump winning? James Comey sinking Clinton's campaign? Trump still being in power despite everything?

Well yes actually, I think Trump hoovered up an awful lot of working class votes because he also appealed to a lot of working class voters. I think the traditional right/left divide is being eroded on a political level. In addition Hilary DID win the popular vote so her platform actually appealed to the majority of Americans.

@noblegiraffe Trying the simplest couple of explanations first again, the document rails against the gender elements of the programs as ineffective. Could it be that he thought that the gender elements of the program were the less effective element, or, because of his background in biology, that this was an area where he felt he had something to contribute?

For what it is worth I think there is a probability that he is, at least unconsciously, sexist. My thoughts though are irrelevant and prejudiced. I go back to my points that you can't sack someone on the assumption or belief or even hope that they are sexist. You can only fire them for what they actually do or say. Then secondly that the reaction has been full of prejudice (just watch the CNN anchor), which is not an appropriate response to fight prejudice - or to anything.

The challenge now is that in sacking him they have sent a message saying “we don’t want to hear the negatives”

They're also trying to send the message that they support their diversity programs and women (although they still have work to do - as do most places).

I go back to my points that you can't sack someone on the assumption or belief or even hope that they are sexist. You can only fire them for what they actually do or say

I think that a manifesto on the problems with gender diversity issues and talking about how women are (on average) not suited to be programmers rather fits the bill for evidence personally.

Could it be that he thought that the gender elements of the program were the less effective element, or, because of his background in biology, that this was an area where he felt he had something to contribute?

Well wouldn't his manifesto have been a good place to elucidate? He said neither thing. And indeed one of his Harvard classmates said that he wouldn't have got those views from his systems biology class.
"One former Harvard student, who was in the systems biology program at the same time as Damore, told the Guardian that it was not surprising to find out he was the author of the controversial manifesto, which was widely criticized for relying on shoddy science.

“His comments do not reflect the ability to read literature critically that a typical Harvard student develops over the course of actually completing a PhD,” the former classmate said.

Damore’s views, the source said, made him an outlier in the department, which values diversity.

“It’s pretty unusual someone would have those opinions and be stupid enough to voice them,” the former classmate said. “Part of me worries that he got into some dark corner of the internet.”"
www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/09/james-damore-google-memo-youtube-interviews

And of course another big bloody hint that he's a sexist dick is that he has rejected interviews with people like Wired, instead heading straight for a guy who does youtube videos called things like 'Why feminists hate men'.

Because Facebook sees what I've been reading...

recode article refuting Damore's 'argument'

Basically, there are no pink or blue brains (sorry transgenderists) and girls are equally capable as boys at STEM subjects.

If. They. Study. Those. Subjects.

This is a fascinating thread from Jez Humble who has been pretty vocal throughout on the Google Memo thing:

A thread on Damore's rhetorical technique and how to stop people like him poisoning your work environment 1/n
twitter.com/jezhumble/status/896446431115960320

My DH is in tech and senior in a Silicon Valley company and he said this guy is despised now and his views are NOT reflective of the men in the industry. What worries me is that people on the street seem to CONCUR with a lot of the tripe this guy was saying!!

his views are NOT reflective of the men in the industry.

Maybe not most senior ones, but there's more than one or two at lower levels who think it, even if they don't voice it. And some of them do voice it (apparently I can think logically because I don't have enough female hormones, according to one colleague who thought he was complimenting me.)

Where there is an issue with diversity programmes is that they are often focused primarily at women (not that diversity is just about sex,) and senior managers. The cutre that most of us experience in tech is formed by all the white men who are in non-senior techy roles. They're mostly not asked to think about why there aren't more women in IT. I asked a colleague - well, they just don't want to, he said. He's never thought about why they don't want to, nor if there are other barriers than what they want which stops them. He's also never been asked to think about how his behaviour or the words he uses or anything like that could create an environment which is hostile to women. Pretty much none of our male peers have been involved, either.

There's plenty of stuff out there if they want, be it articles, courses, whatever, but they'd have to go actively looking, whereas I get several invitations to diversity events just because I am a woman. I forward things on, but if it's not compulsory, they're unlikely to sign up, and most of the time, it's simply not something they ever think about. And until it's more on the consciousness of the people who women and other minorities in tech would be working with, things aren't likely to improve much.