This article is arguing against four straw men. Damore's memo was not arguing that women have any less ability. Nor did it state that men and women are vastly different. It pointed out where statistically measurable differences exist.
It also acknowledges that culture does influence what careers women are interested in and offers some ideas on changing the culture in order to include more women. So Damore and this professor agree?
The memo was imperfect and jumped to conclusions many of which are probably incorrect, but I am really tired of it being mischaracterized.
This professor's piece is intentionally misleading.
> It pointed out where statistically measurable differences exist.
> So Damore and this professor agree?
No, they don't agree. Grant is arguing that the statistics don't bear out Damore's argument 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."
Hopefully this will stem the tide of "but muh freeze peach" sentiment on HN and elsewhere. Damore's views are not only wrong but harmful, and companies in the USA are entitled to terminate people who cause them harm, intentionally or not.
Technically Damore did not do the company wrong. He posted on a private, internal discussion board at Google. Someone else leaked it to Gawker, doing the actual harm to the company.
Also, his memo is concerned with what he believed potentially illegal practices at Google and so he may be protected by whistleblower laws.
Yes employment is at will in the US, however the legal analysis I've seen indicates he has above average chance of winning a suit against Google, if they don't just reach into their very deep pockets to settle out of court. He may walk away from this a millionaire.
5 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 19.5 ms ] threadIt also acknowledges that culture does influence what careers women are interested in and offers some ideas on changing the culture in order to include more women. So Damore and this professor agree?
The memo was imperfect and jumped to conclusions many of which are probably incorrect, but I am really tired of it being mischaracterized.
This professor's piece is intentionally misleading.
No, they don't agree. Grant is arguing that the statistics don't bear out Damore's argument 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."
Also, his memo is concerned with what he believed potentially illegal practices at Google and so he may be protected by whistleblower laws.
Yes employment is at will in the US, however the legal analysis I've seen indicates he has above average chance of winning a suit against Google, if they don't just reach into their very deep pockets to settle out of court. He may walk away from this a millionaire.