PC Principal: Get Off My Lawn

[thetruepandagod]

he said something to the tune of "maybe some women shouldn't work in tech because women are more likely to be neurotic."

But he never said this, he said that it may be a non discriminatory reason/factor for the lack of women in tech jobs.

[Yuri-G]

But he never said this, he said that it may be a non discriminatory reason/factor for the lack of women in tech jobs.

"Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."


directly from his manifesto. he didn't exactly say women shouldn't be in tech jobs, but it's certainly implied that they may be less fit for tech jobs because of neuroticism.

[Zetanio]

"Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."


directly from his manifesto. he didn't exactly say women shouldn't be in tech jobs, but it's certainly implied that they may be less fit for tech jobs because of neuroticism.

I'm not sure how you get from A to B here. He's showing a possible correlation and doesn't state it as a rule.

[Thunder]

he also says, in the beginning of the section you quoted from,

Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these
differences are “just.” 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

are you disagreeing with women on average having more neuroticism, or that more neuroticism on average in a specific population might result in that population being less represented in tech, given the way it is run currently?

[Yuri-G]

I'm not sure how you get from A to B here. He's showing a possible correlation and doesn't state it as a rule.

he's writing about why there may be non-discriminatory reasons that women are not highly represented in tech jobs, and he directly states that women are more neurotic and less able to handle stress. the leap was not far.


also this:

Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these
differences are “just.” 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

makes it pretty clear he's talking about neuroticism and inability to handle stress as potential biological reasons that women are less represented in tech jobs. I mean he straight-up says "the abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes" then goes on to talk about how women are more neurotic on average.

[thetruepandagod]

"Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."


directly from his manifesto. he didn't exactly say women shouldn't be in tech jobs, but it's certainly implied that they may be less fit for tech jobs because of neuroticism.

He also went out of his way to include graphs showing that the overlap between men and women per trait was far greater than the difference. Your leap is as big as someone claiming that since men are more prone to suicide by gun that only women should be allowed to own firearms. It's a leap that CAN be made but not one that should automatically be assumed to have been made. If someone cites the statistical fact that women owned businesses choose to work less hours than male owned businesses on average the leap could be made that female owned businesses are less productive although it may be totally irrelevant to the point at hand.

[Yuri-G]

he also says, in the beginning of the section you quoted from,


are you disagreeing with women on average having more neuroticism, or that more neuroticism on average in a specific population might result in that population being less represented in tech, given the way it is run currently?

I would assume the latter is more likely.


anyway, I have work to do. you can all disagree with my interpretation of what he said, I don't have time to refute three people point by point right now.

[Thunder]

they aren't mutually exclusive so I'm assuming you mean to say that you disagree with women on average having more neuroticism?

[Yuri-G]

they aren't mutually exclusive so I'm assuming you mean to say that you disagree with women on average having more neuroticism?

yes, I do. if women are neurotic it is likely due to a series of social factors and highly unlikely to be due to inherent neurological biases. men and women's brains are different, but not that different, and anxiety does not know gender boundaries. this smacks of the "women have all the feels, men are stoic" bullshit that has been passed around for millennia, and I ain't buying.

[dasva]

"Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."


directly from his manifesto. he didn't exactly say women shouldn't be in tech jobs, but it's certainly implied that they may be less fit for tech jobs because of neuroticism.

1. That's similar but not the same

2. IT's fucking true with a ton of evidence to back it up which he put in there. If you disagree find your own sources and/or disprove his not rant about his paraphrasing of actual scientific studies

[Headspace]

Pretty crazy he doesn't talk about characteristics in which women are stronger than men and how that might improve the culture and productivity of the workforce. But instead focuses on negative attributes like their ability to handle stress(?).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dasva]

Pretty crazy he doesn't talk about characteristics in which women are stronger than men and how that might improve the culture and productivity of the workforce. But instead focuses on negative attributes like their ability to handle stress(?).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It wasn't really necessary to the point. He wasn't saying boys rule girls drool. Just that there are actual non discriminatory factors that can contribute to why men are higher represented and so you shouldn't automatically assume sexism and with that force parity

[Thunder]

whoah... he does exactly do that.

It's under
Non discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap
that's page 5

edit, ill just post the relevant part

Spoiler: show

● Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things
○ We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming
and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how
people-oriented certain roles at Google can be and we shouldn't deceive
ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get
female students into coding might be doing this).
● Women on average are more cooperative
○ Allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive. Recent updates to Perf may
be doing this to an extent, but maybe there's more we can do.
○ This doesn't mean that we should remove all competitiveness from Google.
Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn't
necessarily disadvantage those that have them, like what's been done in
education.

That memo may as well have been protesting a culture-wide lack of critical reading and critical thinking skills tbh.

what is going on here

are people here getting fooled by the heavily edited versions or reading other people's interpretations of it?
Here's a good link to it, unedited, afaik
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...ho-Chamber.pdf

technically it's 10 pages but reads much faster because of pleasant formatting and thoughtful syntax

[Kaelan?]

yes, I do. if women are neurotic it is likely due to a series of social factors and highly unlikely to be due to inherent neurological biases. men and women's brains are different, but not that different, and anxiety does not know gender boundaries. this smacks of the "women have all the feels, men are stoic" bullshit that has been passed around for millennia, and I ain't buying.

Neuroticism is the correct scientific term for one of the "Big 5" personality traits - Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness, Neuroticism and Concientiousness. This is basic, mainstream evolutionary psychology my dude. Sex differences in personality are pretty well documented.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3149680/

Neuroticism

Neuroticism describes the tendency to experience negative emotion and related processes in response to perceived threat and punishment; these include anxiety, depression, anger, self-consciousness, and emotional lability. Women have been found to score higher than men on Neuroticism as measured at the Big Five trait level, as well as on most facets of Neuroticism included in a common measure of the Big Five, the NEO-PI-R (Costa et al., 2001). Additionally, women also score higher than men on related measures not designed specifically to measure the Big Five, such as indices of anxiety (Feingold, 1994) and low self-esteem (Kling et al., 1999). The one facet of Neuroticism in which women do not always exhibit higher scores than men is Anger, or Angry Hostility (Costa et al., 2001).

[Yuri-G]

My wife used to be in tech and he's basically become the face of every guy who just ripped on her because she was a woman in tech. She isn't working in her loved field anymore because she got sick of the sexist shit being thrown around like it was nothing.

I'm just going to quote this and leave the thread until this blows over. A bunch of straight dudes getting all triggered because a straight dude got fired for saying women, on average, might not be as fit for tech jobs as men - that's just not on my list of approved bullshit to deal with today. Women in STEM are massively underrepresented and instead of focusing on the problem, this guy would rather talk about why maybe that's ok. Women are more neurotic in the tech sector? No fucking shit, you would be too if you dealt with the misogyny they dealt with on a daily basis. And even if they are neurotic, why does that make them worse for tech jobs? Every other programmer I know is a loopy basket case, it comes with the territory. Tech people are fucking weird.


Yea, he makes some good points. Yea, he is pro-diversity here and there. But he clearly thinks women are not as fit as men for tech jobs and if you don't see that, it's probably because you agree with him but aren't man enough (see what I did there) to cop to it. Instead, you cling to every logical loophole you can find to prove that maybe, just maybe, he wasn't being a misogynistic asshat.


Spoiler alert: he was.


Y'all let me know when we're back on the Steven Crowder/Lauren Southern level of hilariously retarded discourse, and I'll see you on the other side.

[Karbuncle]

Yes it's everyone else agreeing with their biases here. Not me no sir. I'm simply right.

[NynJa]

yes, I do. if women are neurotic it is likely due to a series of social factors and highly unlikely to be due to inherent neurological biases. men and women's brains are different, but not that different, and anxiety does not know gender boundaries. this smacks of the "women have all the feels, men are stoic" bullshit that has been passed around for millennia, and I ain't buying.

So because you disagree, it must be wrong?

[dasva]

More like it's a few people here basically proving that guy right and putting their own words into things.

A bunch of straight dudes getting all triggered because a straight dude got fired for saying women, on average, might not be as fit for tech jobs as men -.

he didn't exactly say women shouldn't be in tech jobs, but it's certainly implied that they may be less fit for tech jobs because of neuroticism.-.

Also you should really make up your mind

[thetruepandagod]

yes, I do. if women are neurotic it is likely due to a series of social factors and highly unlikely to be due to inherent neurological biases. men and women's brains are different, but not that different, and anxiety does not know gender boundaries. this smacks of the "women have all the feels, men are stoic" bullshit that has been passed around for millennia, and I ain't buying.

Congratulations you are in direct opposition to decades and decades of medical and psychological research in the field. It is academic consensus the level of which is similar to those of climate change scientists.

It wasn't really necessary to the point. He wasn't saying boys rule girls drool. Just that there are actual non discriminatory factors that can contribute to why men are higher represented and so you shouldn't automatically assume sexism and with that force parity

I'm pretty sure you got whooshed as a result of not reading his document? Because he does exactly what headspace said. Or mayhaps I am the whooshee

I'm just going to leave the thread

Par for the course once you feel even the slightest bit defensive ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Kaelan?]

Women in STEM are massively underrepresented and instead of focusing on the problem, this guy would rather talk about why maybe that's ok.

Women are also massively underrepresented in construction and truck driving, and overrepresented in nursing and teaching. Is that actually a problem? Shouldn't people just be free to choose whatever occupation they want?