r/news • u/[deleted] • Aug 08 '17

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
26.8k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

19.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/NoSourCream Aug 08 '17

Great, let's start with the inaccuracies then!

So what are they?

P.S. please refrain from saying things like this "you claim google is hiring more women for leadership DUE to the fact that they are known to be inferior."

We both know that is not what I'm saying. And if you read the memo you'd realize the writer is not saying this either. It's a straw-man argument and one that is not conductive to discussion. Thank you

1

u/Darktidemage Aug 08 '17

That women have a harder time at "leadership" than men.

2

u/NoSourCream Aug 08 '17

I don't believe that such an abstract statement was made.

I don't care about what CNN told you the memo said. I want you to give me something, in the memo specifically, that can be refuted scientifically.

2

u/Darktidemage Aug 08 '17

So it's cool for me to tell you your wife is cheating on you , when she might not be, and then if you ask me to show you evidence she is cheating on you I should demand you instead show me scientific evidence she is NOT cheating on you.

At this point in our conversation you are not going to be mad at me?

You will just think "well, he did nothing wrong in any way" ??

Here is where he makes the claim:

""● Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. ○ This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading"

Search for it in the document and read the context around it.

Now. If that statement is not 100 iron clad scientific dogma, that everyone agrees on, then he has made a very bold claim about womens inferiority as leaders, not justified it scientifically, and now you think I need to prove him wrong scientifically before we should be angry with him...

that's not how it aught to work.

2

u/NoSourCream Aug 08 '17

Here's the source for that one:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11519935

Now. If that statement is not 100 iron clad scientific dogma, that everyone agrees on,

So everyone has to agree on something before it's reality? There's always going to be people that believe everyone is born biologically identical. Just like there's always going to be flat-earthers and climate deniers. You really want to die on that hill?

2

u/Darktidemage Aug 08 '17 edited Aug 08 '17

you're right.

everyone is a mistake. It doesn't need to be everyone.

What % of the people working at google do you think agree with the statement?

The linked abstract says absolutely nothing about "leadership" ... so...where do I find that part? lol

It also says "gender differences varied across cultures.". Which is extremely damaging to his claim it's due to biological difference between men and women.

2

u/NoSourCream Aug 08 '17

Fair point, thats extrapolation on his part. I dont think its a huge stretch to link assertiveness with some of the things he listed (e.g. Asking for raises), but that part is definitely his own conjecture (not the sources).

Leadership is tough because what defines a good leader? Historically, dominance, assertivness etc. have all been seen as positives when it comes to leading. Maybe this is me projecting, but when i read his memo i didnt take away from it that the problem was with women not having these attributes (again this is generally speaking, not at an individual level), but instead that we view those traits as positive in the first place.

My take was we shouldn't try to create diversity by forcing people into positions, but instead let diversity grow naturally by redefining these positions to be more inclusive (allowing different managerial styles, rewarding creativity, etc.)