[ares2012]

This article is a great example about why there is a sexual harassment problem in technology. It's conflating two completely different things in the name of "free thinking": the facts about men and women and the severity of sexism. Are men and women different? Yes. Have those differences ever been shown to affect their ability to do the same job? No. Sexism exists because of the perceived answer to the second question, not the first.

The dismissal of Costolo's point about the urgency of addressing sexual harassment based on a false dichotomy summarizes the key flaw in the entire article. You cannot simultaneously have an intellectual debate about a topic when one of the parties involved is being actively demeaned and marginalized.

[alexandercrohde]

I'm confused by your last sentence. How else can we decide which side or sides is/are being demeaned/marginalized other than intellectual debate?

[fortythirteen]

The terms are often used specifically to end debate, by negating the opinions of the accused without having to address the content of what was said.

None of these issues will be solved until those who feel they are being demeaned find the strength to address their opposition with the dignity they demand for themselves.

[ares2012]

No, I wasn't trying to end debate. Your position is, in contrast, an appeal to motive which is a logical fallacy.

We cannot expect the people who have been discriminated against and oppressed to stand up on their own. That is not the approach of a civil society, that is placing the entire burden on the wronged party.

[fortythirteen]

We can expect people who are discriminated against and oppressed - I don't doubt this as the case - to explain why and how they were discriminated against so that it can be addressed. We can expect there to be some semblance of discourse. We can only ask that the accusations remain truthful and not go beyond what actually occurred.

Nobody changes their opinion by being badgered. One must have empathy if one expects genuine change. We have objectively failed in this as a society, as is exhibited by how divided we are.

I'm personally tired of hearing how everything is the other side's fault, from both sides. We are drowning in straw men. Until we're willing to listen to each other and understand why people feel the way they do (yes, even those with the most vile opinions), we will continue down this path.

[neuronexmachina]

> How else can we decide which side or sides is/are being demeaned/marginalized other than intellectual debate?

The problem is that "intellectual debate" often ends up just being thinly-veiled excuses for why it's ok to discriminate against the marginalized group. It's kind of like how "intellectual debate" about phrenology was used to justify attitudes about different races.

[alexandercrohde]

I notice you didn't answer my question.

[belorn]

> Have those differences ever been shown to affect their ability to do the same job? No.

Has anyone claimed that? No.

Why arguing against something for which no one is arguing for? If sexism exist because of a perceived answer to which no one is asking, then maybe it is time to stop.

[ares2012]

That was the entire argument in the Damore essay. He made a logical jump from facts about men and women to the claim that women were less capable as software engineers.

[hipcactus]

If he made that claim, then you can quote it and cite it from his document.

This article is about how he did not make that claim, while media outlets and social media accounts claimed he did.

[ares2012]

"Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business."

[kbutler]

I don't see, "less capable as engineers" stated or implied in that quote.

[yahna]

> 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.

Women are less suited for high stress jobs, i.e. leadership positions.

[prh8]

It's also possible that women are, overall, less interested in high stress jobs.

[belorn]

It is very clear you think he argue for it, but does that matter? Ask people here, is there anyone who is arguing that gender affect a person ability to do the same job? Is anyone who has voiced concern about the aftermath the Google memo affair explicit said that they think so?

Do gender affect a person ability to do the same job? No. Until you find someone who says "yes" to that question, should we not all rejoice over the fact that we all agree 100% on the answer is this question, and only disagree on the interpretation of the intentions behind an internal memo?

[synicalx]

> Have those differences ever been shown to affect their ability to do the same job? No

Just want to point out that this isn't necessarily true in a broader sense; look at all the recent coverage of women being allowed to serve in frontline combat roles in various Western militaries around the world - their drop out, and medical discharge rate has been exponentially higher than their male counterparts. So while some women can do that same job as men in that field, the vast majority physically cannot.

[threatofrain]

I think there may be a third question: Do differences between men and women, in combination with the effects of historicity, lead to different patterns of engagement or attrition with a domain? Such as teaching or child-related jobs?

[monochromatic]

> You cannot simultaneously have an intellectual debate about a topic when one of the parties involved is being actively demeaned and marginalized.

So as long as a single man is sexist, there’s no place for intellectual debate?

[ares2012]

No, that's an over simplification. Until the statistically high rate of sexual harassment and discrimination is addressed we cannot have a valid intellectual debate on whether sex influences someone's ability as a software engineer.

[monochromatic]

Why not?

[ares2012]

Because the harassment itself becomes a limiting factor on women's ability to perform the role. You cannot have objective measurements of performance with the bias introduced by harassment.

[synicalx]

I'll be willing to bet no one can answer this

[ares2012]

I just did, above. Let me know if you disagree.