that is starting a class action against google.

I looked up his memo and it doesn’t really seem particularly bad to me, at no point doesnt he suggest that a woman cannot do a guys job but social media has crucified him as if he has said that.

Based on programming for nearly 30 years, his analysis seems pretty good to me. I like the way he uses distributions to counter stereotypes, which is how I like to think about race and stereotypes, having seen my mum become a bit of a bigot whilst working at a school.

Anyway here is the link in case it is of interest:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Sounds like Google is a bit messed up internally if this is true.

Name me a modern tech company that doesn’t have some kind of systemic internal problem.

TurnerGuy – Member

Anyway here is the link in case it is of interest:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Here’s the TL;DR of the memo – men and women are different, treat people as individuals. To encourage more women to work in tech consider treating them differently in order to optimize their potential, as opposed to postive discrimination which google was attempting covertly. Oh and google is a left wing, ideological echo chamber that suppresses any opinions that don’t fit.

But you can’t say men and women are different, especially if you use the term “neurotic” when differentiating between men and women’s typical psychological traits, despite the fact that Damore was correctly using the term, and not using it as a pejorative.

But there’s no point posting the link. Just post links to news stories where people who didn’t read the memo automatically assume (or deliberately misrepresent) the memo as deeply misogynist and hateful towards women and anyone who agrees with Damore is alt-right and therefore a nazi. Which is exactly what happened when Geetee started a thread about it.

it went to 6 pages last time….

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/if-you-got-fired-for-writing-an-internal-memo-that-was-scientifically-correct/page/6

Knuckle draggers
Snowflakes
Neanderthals
Hand wringers
Straw man
Logical fallacy

End of thread

Knuckle draggers
Snowflakes
Neanderthals
Hand wringers
Straw man
Logical fallacy

End of thread

You forgot ‘virtue signalling’

it went to 6 pages last time….

sorry – I did a search on his name, but then again this thread also would come up for that search ! Doh!

guardian link

Decent article from the Gruniad, which accurately summerises the issues and speaks with some of the people Damore referenced in his paper

Meanwhile Binners is promoting a programme about the alientation of ‘white working class men’ on another thread.

You forgot ‘virtue signalling’

Also “nice place to be” and “hateful”. Oh, this isn’t a thread about cars?

Can I chip in with “confirmation bias” yet?

You forgot ‘virtue signalling’

Now you’re just whatabouterry.

Scot, you forgot Godwins law.

Decent article from the Gruniad, which accurately summerises the issues and speaks with some of the people Damore referenced in his paper

That link appears to be broken. I read it when it was originally posted. It’s interesting that they basically admitted there was some validity to the paper but that there was no expert consensus on the quesitons raised.

Fill your boots
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ1JeII0eGo[/video]

but that there was no expert consensus on the quesitons raised.

I think (if its the same one I read) the experts he sourced disagreed with how he quoted their research too

Geetee, sort of. I’m on a mobile perhaps one of the nice mods will fix the link. The article points out that some things he said were accurate, but badly referenced not nuanced particularly well, and certainly ill advised, which Damore has accepted himself.

There’s another analysis in Wired:
https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-damores-google-memo/

TLDR:
“The science in Damore’s memo is still very much in play, and his analysis of its implications is at best politically naive and at worst dangerous. The memo is a species of discourse peculiar to politically polarized times: cherry-picking scientific evidence to support a preexisting point of view. It’s an exercise not in rational argument but in rhetorical point scoring. And a careful walk through the science proves it.”

I found some articles that said the opposite but I’m not posting them.

cherry picking

I found some articles that said the opposite but I’m not posting them

LOL

LOL

Whooosh!

at no point doesnt he suggest that a woman cannot do a guys job but social media has crucified him as if he has said that.

That seems to be how it is nowadays. It’s pish but it’s rife and seems to be effective in shutting down any debate you don’t want to take place.

I think (if its the same one I read) the experts he sourced disagreed with how he quoted their research too

yes, but you don’t really know if they they did disagree, or are just saying it now because of pressure to be seen to be pc.

I found some articles that said the opposite but I’m not posting them.

post the links, and then we can report your post to the mods and tweet some virtue signalling about how you posted the links.

It’s a very weak and pathetic way of “winning” an argument. Avoid actually debating the point in an open minded and considered way and instead smear the other side into submission.

It’s a very weak and pathetic way of “winning” an argument. Avoid actually debating the point in an open minded and considered way and instead smear the other side into submission.

Donald! Is that you?

He’s done for when President Oprah takes the helm.

Unless she’s completely oblivious to Damore’s behaviour like she was with, er, I dunno Harvey Weinstein? 😆

Fill your boots

watched a lot of that.

Like how nothing is being done to address the issue that there are more female nurses than male.

Also the comparison to McCarthyism.

Like how nothing is being done to address the issue that there are more female nurses than male.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/men-offered-cash-to-train-as-nurses-28m2hqmtb

So has anyone else actually read his paper other than the OP?

Synthesis of his argument is as follows:

Are there stastical differences in measured personality and motivational traits between men and women when you look at populations as a whole?

Yes there are, unequivocally.

Might these differences account for some of the variance we see in the choices that men and women make in their careers?

It’s a resonable hypothesis but it’s not conclusive on its own. We should probably look into it more.

If they account for at least some of the variance, is it more or less likely that it accounts for a substantial part of or even all the variance?

No it’s very unlikely; the differences in underlying gender traits cannot be seen to account for all the variance and almost certainly culture and bias accounts for some of the variance also.

Does that mean we should still work to address this imbalance?

yes it does

Does that mean it’s reasonable or even desirable to aim for a perfect 50/50 split?

No, this would be try and engineer a false outcome that would be inefficient and ineffective; we should accept that there will always be small differences in representation given that there are also small differences in the motivation and personality traits of men and women

I read it all.

He is arguing that there is an inherent difference between men and women that can be proven scientifically, and therefore we should accept it.

It’s not scientific for many of the reasons previous very similar arguments made regarding race aren’t scientific.

I think many people put the arguments to you on the previous thread?

I think many people put the arguments to you on the previous thread?

They were ill informed arguments based in bigotry and ignorance.

The Guardian and Wired both acknowledged that there is evidence to support what was suggested even if they also pointed out it was an ill judged argument. The data does show small differences; you can’t argue against that so you’re just plain wrong in your assertion buddy.

What is open for debate is how much those variances can be used to account for societal differences; how much difference do they really make. That’s a hypothesis.to sugggest it’s all down to this I think is wrong though I can’t prove it.

The only reason the argument was ill judged is because of ignorance and politicking. When the world no longer wants to ask questions because they don’t like the possible implications of what’s rally going on, or can’t resoove those arguments without resorting to bigotry and prejudice, you’re in serious trouble.

So has anyone else actually read his paper other than the OP?

yes, I have.

The Guardian and Wired both acknowledged that there is evidence to support what was suggested even if they also pointed out it was an ill judged argument.

As has Damore

What is open for debate is how much those variances can be used to account for societal differences; how much difference do they really make.

while some suggest that he’s made a decent stab at writing about their research, most of the meta data suggests that the difference isn’t that great*, and that software engineers would do well to not rattle the cages of Google with psychological research literature that is controversial (within it’s own field) at best; and would be misunderstood wilfully or otherwise, although there doesn’t seem to be any indication that Damore was victimised before he wrote the piece, by large numbers of people without particular knowledge of the field. Especially when using words that have different meanings in common usage than in psychology.

In summary, Damore himself has admitted that he probably wrote a piece that was only really going to have one response.

*Hyde is the author of a widely cited review of 46 meta-analyses of gender differences, which found that men and women are in fact similar on most, but not all, psychological variables, and concluded overinflated claims of gender differences (my bold) “carry substantial costs in areas such as the workplace”. She adds: “There’s every reason to think these gender differences in interests are caused by socialisation factors.”

Apologies if it’s been posted before, but the Economist’s suggested rebuttal of Damore’s memo was rather good.

Software engineering requires a broad mix of skills involving both “people” and “things”. Teamwork, in particular, is important—the stereotypical image of the geek working alone in his basement is far from reality. Senior engineers must manage teams—and by your own reasoning that should mean that women, with their greater empathy and interest in people, should be over-represented at that level, compared with their numbers in more junior jobs. That they are not should have given you pause.

Am I the only one thinking that google were looking for an excuse to get rid and the lawsuit is further proof that he’s a bit of a knobber ???

let’s face it google have the cash for better lawyers, it will be a drawn out process that will probably end in an out-of-court settlement..

http://uk.businessinsider.com/conservative-google-employees-are-blacklisted-lawsuit-alleges-2018-1?r=US&IR=T

Google managers kept blacklists of conservative employees — and one manager even considered holding ‘trials’, alleges a new lawsuit

The frog chorus on Twitter are doing their collective nut.

edhornby – Member

Am I the only one thinking that google were looking for an excuse to get rid and the lawsuit is further proof that he’s a bit of a knobber ???

You’re probably not the only one, but you’re still wrong. If Google wanted rid of him they wouldn’t have invited him to “off the record” talks on diversity or asked him to contribute a think piece. If they did, and deliberately admitted illegal discriminatory practices to get him to bite, that seems extremely Machiavellian.

Anyway here are four scientists reactions to the memo. People who actually work in the field and are qualified to comment agree with Damore. There is nothing controversial in what he wrote, scientifically speaking. What is controversial, is stating the science facts about men and women being different.

From the link

As a woman who’s worked in academia and within STEM, I didn’t find the memo offensive or sexist in the least. I found it to be a well thought out document, asking for greater tolerance for differences in opinion, and treating people as individuals instead of based on group membership.

Within the field of neuroscience, sex differences between women and men—when it comes to brain structure and function and associated differences in personality and occupational preferences—are understood to be true, because the evidence for them (thousands of studies) is strong. This is not information that’s considered controversial or up for debate; if you tried to argue otherwise, or for purely social influences, you’d be laughed at.

Sex researchers recognize that these differences are not inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex. It is only because a group of individuals have chosen to interpret them that way, and to subsequently deny the science around them, that we have to have this conversation at a public level. Some of these ideas have been published in neuroscientific journals—despite having faulty study methodology—because they’ve been deemed socially pleasing and “progressive.” As a result, there’s so much misinformation out there now that people genuinely don’t know what to believe.

No matter how controversial it is or how great the pushback, I believe it’s important to speak out, because if we can’t discuss scientific truths, where does that leave us?

Here is an interview with Dr. Debra Soh, quoted above who has a Phd in sexual neuroscience which covers the issue quite well.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVwH3um-G5E&t=335s[/video]

If you can’t be bothered to listen, the bullet points are that Damore was right, and that academics working in the field are afraid to speak out because they are also employed in University institutions that are also left wing ideological echo chambers (like Damore was). You will not engage in wrong think or you will be ostracized.

Hopefully none of you would even dare to be so deeply and horribly misogynist as to disagree with a female who has a Phd in STEM and is expert in this exact area of study 😉