
Google’s War Over the Sexes - kushti
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/09/opinion/google-women-memo.html
======
Barrin92
The most troubling thing about this whole issue for me is the weird fetish
about "biology" on both sides of the debate.

As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply _is_ , and doesn't
tell us what _ought to be_. As such I have trouble understanding why we are
approaching the issue from this angle.

Instead of obsessing about biology, we should care about how we want our
workplaces to look. And I would welcome a diverse workplace instead of male or
female monoculture. We can shape how our society works, we're not slaves to
nature.

I find this discussion funny in the context of say Israel having countless
women serve in the army for decades now. Someone must have forgotten to tell
them about their biological limitations. Having worked in China for a while,
where as a result of the one child policy pretty much everybody is expected to
start a fruitful career, women just worked and had children at the same time.
Someone must have forgotten to tell them that this is impossible.

~~~
mpweiher
Let me quote someone who has said it much better than I can:

"But it is crucial to distinguish the moral proposition that people should not
be discriminated against on account of their sex — which I take to be the core
of feminism — and the empirical claim that males and females are biologically
indistinguishable. They are not the same thing. Indeed, distinguishing them is
essential to protecting the core of feminism. Anyone who takes an honest
interest in science has to be prepared for the facts on a given issue to come
out either way. And that makes it essential that we not hold the ideals of
feminism hostage to the latest findings from the lab or field. Otherwise, if
the findings come out as showing a sex difference, one would either have to
say, "I guess sex discrimination wasn't so bad after all," or else furiously
suppress or distort the findings so as to preserve the ideal. The truth cannot
be sexist. Whatever the facts turn out to be, they should not be taken to
compromise the core of feminism.

[..]

The nature and source of sex differences are also of practical importance.
Most of us agree that there are aspects of the world, including gender
disparities, that we want to change. But if we want to change the world we
must first understand it, and that includes understanding the sources of sex
differences. "

\-- Steven Pinker, The Pinker/Spelke Debate
[https://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/debate05_index.htm...](https://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/debate05_index.html)

EDIT: formatting

~~~
frgtpsswrdlame
Have you read Adam Grant's piece on linkedin? I think you'd like it. Basically
the argument is that biological differences exist but are small or mostly
isolated to a few (mostly physical) domains. And that those domains have
little to do with computer science, the reason google has less women than men
is mostly a cultural problem.

[https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/differences-between-men-
women...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/differences-between-men-women-vastly-
exaggerated-adam-grant)

~~~
tracker1
But is it Google's culture that is the problem? I mean if there are only 1:5
female to male graduates in engineering/cs, then it stands to reason that if
Google has more than that ratio, they are probably fine, in terms of their own
distribution model. (Not sure what the actual ratios are in either case).

I'm more disturbed by the visceral reaction to a memo that was meant to be
internal, made enough effort to stay somewhat centrist and isn't really
calling out any individual, but mostly calling for a re-evaluation of their
processes based on empirical data. Even if his thesis may be in error, or may
have said things that bother some.

~~~
threatofrain
If Google has a disproportionate share of females coming through the hiring
pipelines, then other companies are only going to be even more lopsided.

The problem must be fixed before Google gets into the equation, not at the
Google level.

~~~
dragonwriter
> If Google has a disproportionate share of females coming through the hiring
> pipelines, then other companies are only going to be even more lopsided.

Not if Google attracts women that would not otherwise be applying at other
tech firms.

------
hsuresh
At last a balanced story on the topic. The discussions online on this topic
have been mind numbing - quoting out of context, ad hominem attacks, every bad
form of arguments listed in PG's essay[1]. Twitter is the worst.

Almost makes me want to build a better debating platform.

[1] -
[http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html)

~~~
thephyber
> Almost makes me want to build a better debating platform.

I'd considered this at one point. I marinated on the idea and decided it's not
worth building (for me). The right structure for argument doesn't work in
environments like Twitter/Facebook because the costs are asymmetric. It's very
cheap to turn into a troll and very expensive to think through a thoughtful,
balanced, nuanced argument. The platforms themselves don't afford or encourage
the latter and incentivize the former.

I _do_ want to build a way to database and store lots of the most useful facts
I gather on all of the topics I care about from every platform I learn/work
on.

------
emtel
> But since the usual way to reintegrate the sexes is to have them marry one
> another and raise kids, what Silicon Valley probably needs right now more
> than either workplace anti-microaggression training or an alt-right
> underground is a basic friendliness to family, pregnancy and child rearing.

Prediction: this will be viciously misinterpreted on twitter as Douthat
calling for women to stay at home and raise babies.

~~~
freeone3000
He's calling for a reintegration of the sexes through marriage and children.
While I wouldn't put words in his mouth as to "stay at home", he is for sure
calling on women to raise babies. His repeated references to women as
childbearers in the following paragraph don't help. The author appears to be
stating that the solution to sexism is to have women marry the sexists and
have their babies.

~~~
mpweiher
> His repeated references to women as childbearers

Pardon me, but this is in(s)ane.

WHO ELSE BUT WOMEN BEARS CHILDREN?

Apologies, but I had to get that out of my system.

~~~
criddell
You reminded me of that great scene in _Life of Brian_ where Stan wants to be
known as Loretta and wants the right to have babies.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PObBA2wH5l0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PObBA2wH5l0)

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
It is indeed symbolic of the struggle with reality.

------
hyperion2010
> This is why the new Apple headquarters, which has a 100,000-square-foot
> fitness and wellness center but no child care center, is a more telling
> indicator of what really matters to Silicon Valley

Ouch. Extremely out.

------
seaknoll
Maybe this isn't the public perception of tech jobs, but as a software
engineer at my current company I collaborate far more than I did in my
previous career as a consultant, have more opportunities to be creative, and
get an extremely flexible schedule.

Even if you accept that there are biological differences between the sexes,
the hypothesis that stereotypically female attributes/desires are not as
compatible with tech jobs strikes me as very wrong.

~~~
mpweiher
First, see Jordan Peterson's interview with James Damore, where he goes
through the memo almost line-by-line.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU&spfreload=10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU&spfreload=10)

Second, he doesn't say that "female attributes/desires are not as compatible
with tech jobs", at least not as you define them.

These are his suggestions for improving diversity:

"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. "

You are saying this is already the case at your workplace. Awesome, you
already have what he suggests. Why is what he suggest wrong-headed??

~~~
seaknoll
I'm saying that IMO, the very nature of the job is compatible with the traits
that he says are more common in women. I don't think that my company is an
outlier here.

------
DataWorker
Compromise is useful and this was on point in that regard. A good counterpoint
to Wojcicki's response. That said, compromise in this case may not be
technically correct and talk of brogrammers won't get much traction with
centrists like the original memos author who appears to be a follower of
Haidt's line of thinking. Douthat makes a good point about the precariousness
of walking this line.

------
cocktailpeanuts
What's interesting is if you read the comment section there is literally 0
comment that agrees with the author. Even the "NYT picks" are the comments
bashing on this guy.

It just shows that NYT has turned itself into an opposite of Breitbart,
instead of aspiring to become more unbiased news source. I'm actually
surprised that they even let this guy write this piece on NYT.

~~~
thephyber
"The Great Sort". Americans, the readers, are sorting themselves.

------
fageyogurtspoon
New York Times once again demonstrates its alt-right philosophy by assuming a
there are merely two gender
([https://apath.org/63-genders/](https://apath.org/63-genders/)), _in the
first sentence_.

~~~
akras14
TIL, New York Times is alt-right

------
johansch
Wow. A balanced mainstream story on the topic.

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
I'm impressed, too. Apart from the fact that it links to the crippled Gizmodo
version of the memo (they still have the guts to call it 'full' in the title)
instead of the real one
[https://diversitymemo.com/](https://diversitymemo.com/).

The references make the whole difference.

~~~
johansch
This NYT reporter filed the first article on the topic:

[https://twitter.com/daiwaka/](https://twitter.com/daiwaka/)

His report (and tweeting) was so partisan that I got really concerned with the
integrity of the NYT as a whole. This new piece restores some of my confidence
in them, even though it is just an opinion piece.'

Btw - is it just me, or is he way too friendly with the people running the
company he is assigned to report on?

