[Closed] If you got fired for writing an internal memo that was scientifically correct...

11 pages. By page 7 it's just cougar, junky, kimbers and chewkw participating.

I’m rather shocked and appalled by way too many comments in this thread. There’s a miserable mix of people either agreeing that women are somehow “less fit” to work in tech or that the bigotry they face (and they do face it) doesn’t exist.

Seriously, if you can’t read back and see that, you need to open your eyes, ears and, especially, minds. 🙄

Rachel

I also don't think that it will ever be as close to social as not to matter. You cannot possible dismiss 2 million years of biology as being indifferent to the outcome.

I wouldn't dismiss the biology side (though nature/nurture isn't exactly a debate with a conclusion), I'm just not sure you can separate the two in any meaningful way in this sort of case, it's "easy" on an individual basis but, what not when it's essentially species wide.

To me the difficulty is this:

I believe in evolution.
I believe what separates us from a banana is a direct result of response to environmental stimulus.
For a very long time our environment has been social as well as physical.
For the last few hundred years it's been almost entirely social, art least in western society.
We've developed the biology we have as a result of social niche and requirements at least as much as physical.
For a very long time our society has pushed men and women in different directions.
The diversion between one and the other - if it exists - is likely as not, a direct result of that social impetus.

So to me, to suggest men and women naturally think differently is as accurate as suggesting rich people are naturally healthier than poor people.

That's where changes are needed, to make that career path more attractive to women, not trying to create diversity by having recruitment targets for women.

It's not just about making STEM careers more attractive IMHO. Where changes are needed is to allow and encourage girls to grow up believing that they can be something other than just housewives and baby factories.

I'm not saying we haven't marginalised women because clearly we have. I'm simply saying that that process is not asymmetric.

Of course it is. There are plenty of issues which affect men more than women, sure. But to conflate one with the other as if they're identical is meninist horseshit. Sorry.

Let me give you an example. You said "the vast majority of casualties in war are male". Of course it is, the vast majority of soldiers are male. If the army was 50:50 male:female, what do you think that would do to the statistics?

Now, apply that logic to other areas. Suicide due to work stress? Death when doing dangerous manual work?

Men are in a position of privilege in Western society, women are treated as inferior. Men are conditioned to be scientists and action heroes, women to be little princesses to be looked after. Generation after generation we reinforce this, right from the outset when we buy little Logan his first Action Man and little Chardonnay her first baby dolly. You can go "yeah but, testicular cancer" as much as you like but it's a straw man.

11 pages. By page 7 it's just cougar, junky, kimbers and chewkw participating.

I doubt it, I'll have banned at least one of them by that point.

(-:

Page 3. Don't think that counts as a warning though.

I've still got my money on page 11 for that.

By page 7 it's just cougar, junky, kimbers and chewkw participating.

Nah im of for a bike ride !

kimbers - Member
By page 7 it's just cougar, junky, kimbers and chewkw participating.
Nah im of for a bike ride !

Assuming it's not Lisbon to Naukan, i don't imagine it'll prevent you being back in time to join back in.

Now, apply that logic to other areas. Suicide due to work stress?

There's other issues at play with male suicide so don't equate fewer women killing themselves than men with less women in more senior roles at work

Yeah you'll have to list those data, the onus is you or you are just posting unverified opinion

For the umpteenth time, it's all there on the linked Youtube clip. I know you don't want to see it, but it's there.

There's other issues at play with male suicide so don't equate fewer women killing themselves than men with less women in more senior roles at work

Sure, but that's not what I said. "Suicide due to work stress" is 100% due to work stress, by definition. Of course there are other reasons. I'm losing the will to live reading some of the comments on here, for a start.

well you did choose to engage with sexists . What were you expecting an epiphany than shattered their bigotry?
Its not like the OP does not have a history of doing this and I like to term such folk mansturbaters- well its what the filter will let me get away with

The 20th century rumbles on.

Its not like the OP does not have a history of doing this and I like to term such folk mansturbaters- well its what the filter will let me get away with

I like to term people like you facists.

If the army was 50:50 male:female, what do you think that would do to the statistics?

This is true but fails to address the real issue which is why our armies are only populated by men and why the hard, menial and physically demanding jobs that lead to reduced life expectancy are largely populated by men.

You may find 'The Red Pill' and interesting perspective. It's made by a feminist who set out to ridicule the 'meninist' movement and ended up realising that they had a point.

well you did choose to engage with sexists

I don't believe GT is a sexist. Rather he's... ignorant, in the literal rather than pejorative sense.

I used to think the same way. Then I fell in with a new circle of friends, predominantly female, a number of whom were a bit broken in some way. It opened my eyes as to how I perceived things like feminism, equality, disability and privilege. I realised I was wrong about many things.

Primarily, I realised that "equality" and "fairness" were not synonyms.

This is true but fails to address the real issue which is why our armies are only populated by men

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-soliders-front-line-infantry-british-army-commander-tim-collins-no-place-for-woman-a7129271.html

I'll just leave this here.

OK but to what end, what point does this support?

FYI my undergraduate, in Anthropology, included a year of feminist studies. I used to consider myself a feminist but then I experienced life and I realised that while the need for equality was still very important and that much needed to be done, the issues were, as I've said, not asymmetrical.

Thanks for acknolwedging that I'm not 'sexist' and for qualifying what you mean by ignorant, but really I'm not that either. I am the kind of person who goes out of his way to both read as much as I can on a subject and I cahnge my mind if I see evidence that shows I was wrong. I believe I've demonstrated that capability on here a number of times and I genuinely mean no ill will to anyone (I also score very high on agreeableness!)

There's a point at which we end up agreeing that there is inequality everywhere, that it's not just women who are marginalised (btw did you know that women aged between 20 and 30 earn 15% more than their male counterparts), but men and many other groups and the only part we actually disagree on, is the degree to which these groups are more or less marginalised. And that is the point at which we also conclude that trying to agree who is more wronged is utterly futile and banal. It's like trying to argue who suffered more in the world wars based on how many of their citizens died.

What I am most concerned about however, is the same thing as prof. Peterson, which is the way in which the debate in the humanities gets shut down because it challenges orthodoxy even when the data says there might be somehting in it. That's intellectual tyranny and that way Fascism lies.

I like to term people like you facists.

At least you are consistently wrong and hyperbolic still that mansturbaters for you

Can I also just say that I think Chewkw's comments are simply ridiculous at best and unacceptable at worst. I do NOT share his view.

TurnerGuy - Member
Helen Greiner - cofounder of iRobot answers one of your questions.

It must be a struggle to find women leading in the software industry if you need to search through 177 years (1840 to 2017) of history for them ...

The [url= https://anitaborg.org/insights-tools/infographics/famous-women-in-computing/ ]timeline[/url] from 1840 up to 2017 in your link only listed 21 women "to lead" in software tech? I mean is that all? Some are working in team(s) and some are co-founder so how much each contributed nobody knows.

How many men have come and go by that time in software tech? 😮

If you really need to search hard to find women to lead then "Huston (woman) we have got a problem". 🙄

How long does it take for women to take the lead in software industry like those of the current ones led by men where everyone knows?

iRobot? She is not even the founder but "Co-founder" with two other men.

Now, if women really want to stand out in software tech then they need to become the founder and be household name, like all those large software tech companies. They need to start their own coz at the moment nobody knows if they are capable of becoming a successful household names.

Therefore, if women in the software tech want to present stronger arguments, that they are equal if not better, then they need to become household name. 😯

geetee1972 - Member

Can I also just say that I think Chewkw's comments are simply ridiculous at best and unacceptable at worst. I do NOT share his view.

Edit: I don't argue to support anyone but asking the obvious question where everyone seems deliberately trying to avoid.

[b]My argument is that [u]women can be as good[/u] but the [u]evidence does not match up[/u].[/b] i.e. why are most software tech companies have men as leaders at the moment?

Therefore, until you present a coherent argument to match up to that evidence, i.e. more women leaders in software, there simply is a gap in understanding why women have not started a household name software tech company.

The question is why? 😯

All equality taken into consideration in 21 century but why are women still not creating household name software? Is that the uncomfortable truth most refuse to address or do not know how to address?

why are most software tech companies have men as leaders at the moment?

Well if you listen to Peterson's arguments, you'll understand that the answer to that question has nothing to do with capability and to suggest such is pretty abhorent.

None of the arguments I or Peterson have put forward (or this Google engineer) have anything to do with IQ (which ultimately is what drives the cognitive ability needed to be a programmer). It's all about the effect of personality (specifically the big five traits) and how they result in different motivations.

But, to answer your question, have a listen to this:

There's something in this (something I chose for myeslf as well, i.e. I have chosen to let my wife's career take precidence over mine and have chosen a less demanding career path so that she can pursue hers and I can be more the primary care giver to our children).

oh, again with Prof Peterson? Odd that the ex google employee chose him to speak with, doncha think?

here's the link to his wiki page I posted on page one for folk who can be arsed to see what the good prof thinks about equality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson

Odd that the ex google employee chose him to speak with, doncha think?

Not remotely surprising and I can't see what's wrong with it or with Peterson (I trust you've listened to hime at length yes?)

I can see what is wrong with Bill C16 though and so can many transgender people that I've spoken to about the concept. The moment you start to pass laws about how people should speak you've lost the argument. That is so spookily close to Orwellian's vision of a totalitarian state as to leave me cold.

I use the pronouns my best friend and others ask me to because of love and respect, not because of some stupid law.

geetee1972 - Member
Well if you listen to Peterson's arguments, you'll understand that the answer to that question has nothing to do with capability and to suggest such is pretty abhorent.

Regardless of the arguments it is a level playing field, it's called a competition.

In the case of the software guy who got fired for having opinions, he lose out to his competitor(s) (someone wants him out) regardless of how people interpret the event. However, his opinions are not entirely illogical.

There are many things that may impede women to become the software tech leaders but that is the nature of things. i.e. they need to fight for it like anyone else. 😀

Meh. Can't be arsed.

Not remotely surprising

is that an echo chamber you're in there..?

Regardless of the arguments it is a level playing field, it's called a competition.

True.

is that an echo chamber you're in there..?

I understand what you mean, just not why you chose that as a response to that statement. Why would Peterson doing an interview with this engineer be either surprising or a problem?

Has anyone else noticed that chewkw vocabulary, grammar etc have vastly improved now they've dropped the zombie maggot bollocks?

They've clearly found being articulate gets a bigger rise out of people.

There are many things that may impede women to become the software tech leaders but that is the nature of things. i.e. they need to fight for it like anyone else.

They have been fighting against a male dominated society since year dot. Regardless of what some idiot ex-google employee(his name wasn't sheldon was it?) and geetee is trying to spin, Women have found it difficult to enter certain employment sectors in numbers due to it.

This will change. My quip about the 20th century on page 3 is pointing out that some people need to stop living there.

Regardless of what some idiot ex-google employee

You're just being ignorant. Have you read the paper? The guy has a PhD for christ's sake (I have an equivalent to an MPhil).

So come on, what level of academic attainment did you reach?

All the points raised in opposition to his random musing are on point but there is something that is often missed; how women treat and assist each other in the workplace.

I have actively witnessed the savagery of women in the workplace, they're ruthless to each other. Many times over my 20+ career I have seen women when they get to a position of authority, ensure they strengthen it by doing what they must to make sure they're the only woman at that level. The sisterhood only seems to apply when they're all at the bottom.

Christ, it's something my partner openly admits at her workplace, one of the female directors has a long track history of very subtle and intelligent positive discrimination against women. It's why my other half is leaving for another position, she knows she's not getting on the same level has her.

It would be interesting to see the stats for job applications, e.g. male / female ratio applied and ultimately employed and everything in between. You'd find it hard to criticise any company that had 5% female applicants and took on 10% regardless of the talent / experience. I have no idea what way this might show.

To extend this further I would be looking at the background of the hiring manager. Does any particular ethnicity of hiring manager favour a particular gender? Is there a candidate rating process put in place to avoid exclusion / favouritism?

I have some pretty strong opinions and I have objected to practice repeatedly in my previous employer. I wouldn't say it made a blind bit of difference but I went further than most. Note this was recruitment outside of the UK.

They've clearly found being articulate gets a bigger rise out of people.

Or it's had a software update.

Maybe a woman has taken over the account 😉

What a load of hot air! What tyres for tomorrow? Some wet water and some dry dust.

Or it's had a software update.

Sorry but irrespective of whether you do or don't agree with him/her, to refer to someone in such a deliberately dehumanised way is particularly nasty.

wwaswas - Member
Has anyone else noticed that chewkw vocabulary, grammar etc have vastly improved now they've dropped the zombie maggot bollocks?

They've clearly found being articulate gets a bigger rise out of people.

😯

geetee1972 - Member
You're just being ignorant. Have you read the paper? The guy has a PhD for christ's sake (I have an equivalent to an MPhil).

Jamie - Member
Or it's had a software update.

geetee1972 - Member

Or it's had a software update.

Sorry but irrespective of whether you do or don't agree with him/her, to refer to someone in such a deliberately dehumanised way is particularly nasty.

geetee1972 - Member

Regardless of what some idiot ex-google employee

You're just being ignorant. Have you read the paper? The guy has a PhD for christ's sake (I have an equivalent to an MPhil).

So come on, what level of academic attainment did you reach?

Not sure why you would even take someone like this seriously? He's like 27, just dipped his toe into serious research, then binned it off, and he's revealing deep truths on sociobiological gender disparities? In a pig's arse, my friend.
He has insights into what it's like working for google, sure, but that's it.

Version 2.0 perhaps

Dread to think what the alpha release was like!

dangeourbrain - Member

Version 2.0 perhaps

Dread to think what the alpha release was like!

Okay, got to go you lot have fun (got work to do).

The guy has a PhD for christ's sake (I have an equivalent to an MPhil).

So come on, what level of academic attainment did you reach?

😳

(love that its now a wuilly waving contest about whos better qualified)

Yep guy faked having a PhD, he flunked out, tells people he passed!

I think Geetee1872 might be a better username, youd a loved it back then

All kinds of right-wing types were writing manifestos, explaining why women couldnt vote, eg, their smaller brains- backed up with real science, cranial measurements ! or election day might happen as they were menstruating!!

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

thats all this is, same shit different century

I think Geetee1872 might be a better username, youd a loved it back then

Kimbers you're being so utterly ignorant; you don't know me, you've never asked me what I think or what I believe and yet on the basis of a few posts here you decide that I must be the worst kind of sexist, mysoginist right wing prat.

You are really so very ignorant, bordering on offensive but hey that's OK because you feel you have the side of rightousness. Well shame on you.

For the record:

- I voted for Corbyn at the last election and voted Labour in general in four of the last six GEs
- I've taken the back seat with my career and sacrificed my own advancement so that my wife can pursue hers; her job is the more significant and important in terms of household income and security whereas I take the lead on looking after and caring for our children.
- I believe utterly and firmly in equality of opportunity and the importance of encouraging everyone to be the best that they can be and to access the things they want to access.
- I consider myself 50% Feminist and 50% Meninist, which I guess just makes me a humanist.
- I believe that our history so far has indeed done many wrongs and injustices to women and in many parts of the world that still happens and it is wrong.
- I believe that in this country at least we are very close to parity but there is still work to be done; women need to able to choose the careers they want and men need to be able to choose to care gives if they want (currently the law still disciminates against men in this capacity and the gap in choices that genders make about their work and careers will not reduce until this is addressed).

So go ahead and label me the worst kind of woman hating 19th century dinosaur if you like, it's only your ignorance you wallow in, it's not mine.

thats all this is, same shit different century

I'm inclined to agree, to be honest I'm a bit surprised that this Google chap has been taken so seriously. These kind of arguments are routinely put forward by MRA types, and then typically ignored by the more serious scientists.

I was under the impression that the whole evolutionary psychology/pink brain blue brain stuff had been debunked years ago? I suppose that psychology as a science is still in it's infancy anyway so is a bit of a magnet for folks who like to try and "push boundaries"... ...though sometimes they try to push them backwards, rather than forwards.

I was under the impression that the whole evolutionary psychology/pink brain blue brain stuff had been debunked years ago?

Do you mean the idea that male and female brains are different? If that is the case, and if the idea of that is abhorrent, then I guess the question back would be, well why; why is the idea that there might be small but important differences across large population samples of men and women in terms of their make up be so abhorrent?

There are after all clear physiological differences and these directly affect men’s' and women’s' abilities to perform certain tasks. The fastest male 100m runners are faster than the fastest female 100m runners for instance. No one quibbles about that.

When it comes to potential differences in personality and the way that then translates to life experience, why then does that become such a problem? (Let's for a moment assume that this is irrefutable, i.e. that there are differences and that [u]some [/u] (but note NOT all) of the difference in life experiences and outcomes can be attributed to those differences in personality traits. I accept that this is still open to debate on a number of levels but this is a thought question for the moment).

Why is the idea of MRA also so abhorrent? You do know that 'MRA types' by and large don't want to try and halt or reverse the advancements in women's right, we just want to have the issues that specifically affect men (for example suicide, failing/low educational attainment, lack of parental leave rights, health care and life expectancy etc) to be recognised and addressed. Why treat that with such disdain and spite? (Note that if I met any MRA Type who was motivated to reverse the equality levels we have reached, I would disown them. I also accept that there are MRA types who are motivated like this.)

Your grasp of psychology sounds pretty basic. Mine is not much more advanced and it's true that a lot of psychology is done in a terribly plebeian way. The highest branches of the subject though use very robust methodologies to try and understand human behaviour though it is also true to say that our understanding of how the mind works is incredibly naive.