Log in

No account? Create an account

Some ideas are now too sacred to be honestly discussed!

A Google employee has confirmed that he has been dismissed for perpetuating gender stereotypes. The mere fact that saying men and women are different is, apparently, a sacking offence at Google. His original statement was  “…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.”

A Google CEO said the memo violated the internal Google code of conduct and perpetuated gender stereotypes.

The real conflict today is between science and political correctness, which is the dogma of the age. No matter what science says, it is not permitted to believe men and women are different.


I think the thing is that they clearly don't explain the difference in tech - the person who is recognised as the first computer programmer in history is Ada Lovelace, and computer programming was seen as a 'woman's job' in the sixties, seventies and eighties.

Men only really became interested in it as a career after that - and then pushed women out. And not because they were 'more suited' to it but because it quickly became a 'boys' club' thing where they did their best to make the women feel uncomfortable.

As for leadership roles - a recent report showed that top companies where the CEO is female were actually outperforming those with male CEOs - so it is not something about the Y gene that makes people leaders, either.

Women tend to be belittled in their achievements - so, for example, Florence Nightingale is seen nowadays as 'an angel with a lamp' drifting around wards in a ladylike fashion - when in fact she was a highly efficient leader, changed the face of medical care in hospitals generally, introduced the concept of trained and qualified nurses more or less single handed, and was also an expert in public health and the first person to use diagrams and graphs to illustrate relationships between environment and disease, and a major force in sanitation improvements in Britain and India. A pretty capable leader I'd say.
I suspect that this person simply speculated that maybe different preferences and abilities among men and women in general explains why more men are found in tech firms or more women in the likes of nursing and child-care. Statements like this now seem to be verboten in more and more parts of our society.
Interestingly I have read the whole ten pages. Whilst the site where I read it calls it an 'Anti-diversity screed' some of the points the writer makes are quite true - but his arguments are quite often self contradicting when he tries to prove that there are genetic reasons for some roles being less suited to women.

He says, for example, that men are socially driven to be competitive whereas women are not socialised to this and are encouraged to co-operate - in other words even if it is that clear-cut it is nurture rather than nature.

He then goes on to say that since tech and leadership 'are seen as high status activities, men disproportionately want to be in them' and concludes that as these are the jobs more men apply for there will be more men doing them.

But the jump to then assume that this is because they are inherently better in these roles because they are male is illogical as he has just explained that men are socialised to be more competitive (not that it is inborn, by the way) and also says that men value competitiveness in others, so once the jobs are seen as highly desirable causing a lot of men to apply for them, if the person in the management role is currently male he will pick the person showing most of what he sees as valuable, and so appoint another man - so it self-perpetuates.

What he was complaining about was Google making attempts to break this chain by encouraging value to be placed on co-operation, and to value people who prefer to also have a life outside the workplace (seen as a female trait by the writer of the article) as much, or more, than those who insist on working 18 hour days (which he sees as inherently male) - because those apparently dedicated workers tend to burn out, or have trouble relating what they are working on to real life and the end user.

I think that the assumption that women are naturally best in caring roles, as you say, may also turn out to be simply based on 'nurture'; during my time as a nurse, somewhere around 10% of my staff and colleagues were male - and I would say that around 10% of the best nurses were also male. In other words the men were, on average, neither better nor worse in this caring role than the women.
Thanks for you clarifications, but do you think it warranted a dismissal?
Personally, no, not on its own.

It depends very much on whether this was him trying to justify not having engaged female applicants even when they were as well qualified as the male ones; it did give that impression.

In which case the company may well have already had him on a warning for breaking company rules, or been aware of him as 'a bad influence' and been very glad of a reason to dismiss him. I think it is often the case that someone who is dismissed for what appears to be a trivial reason has been storing up 'black marks' for a while and the final, publicised, reason is that last small weight in the pan that tips the scale.
I went to a STEM college (STEM: Science Technology Engineering Math) and it seemed there were apparently quite a few women studying those fields.

There are biological differences between men and women; the ability to learn and enjoy science isn't one of them. To claim that it is actually IS sexist.
the women who have responded have given you the answers needed

however, i have problems with your last statement

No matter what science says, it is not permitted to believe men and women are different.

men and women are different anatomically.
some men and some women have different abilities based on their individual capacities
this is not a universal gender based differentiation
men and women differ as individuals
science does not make a sweeping statement like that

i will respond on a personal level
NO! just NO
because i have breasts and have given birth does not determine my intellectual and leadership capacity!
And yes, i have experienced sex discrimination
it is still embedded in our patriarchal culture

and it can not be part of the organizational culture of a major company
such thinking is counter to the aims of the company and detrimental to progress
he can think whatever he wants but statements like that inhibit the growth of the company and the culture and image it wants to promote
His original statement was a little more than your selective quotation. And a lot more damning.

(And as an aside, he wasn't entirely honest about his qualifications.
You should be allowed to wonder whether nature has a place in explaining the differences between the sexes.

You should not be sacked for speaking this thought out loud.

The ‘nature vs nurture’ question is a massive one. Damore was basically sacked for asking the question and tilting towards nature.

The Google CEO has stated that many of the comments were certainly matters for open discussion.

However he was sacked for violating the company's code of conduct by suggesting that some employees due to their sex are less competent.
"suggesting that some employees due to their sex are less competent".

Is that idea so sacred that it cannot be honestly discussed?
Suggesting that Jews shouldn't be employed because they are less competent.

Suggesting that blacks shouldn't be employed because they are less competent.

Suggesting that women shouldn't be employed because they are less competent.

Fine, hold these ideas in your own life, as wrong as they are. Express them in public and I would prefer they would have to defend them in court for defamation.

But express them in a workplace that already has a stated code of conduct?
if they are less than competent it is not their gender
it is their training - their knowledge - their job performance
tcpip is right!
it is the same as saying
"jews or black are incompetent"
yes some women are more adept at computer science that others - so are some men
some men are better nurses
some women are better musicians
is this gender based? - no
talent is not based in gender - it can appear in both men and women
training can be biased based

So the question CAN be discussed - but not in Google.
if you are an employee it is not wise to undermine the policy of your company