The problem being, there’s no scientific controversy about this at all

In one of the most inflammatory sections, Damore wrote that women, on average, have “higher levels of neuroticism”,

Using neuroticism as the scientists do it’s one of those things generally accepted as being true rather. In fact, all rather akin to people complaining about economists and rationality. The word is just being used in a specific technical sense, not the wider and more general one.

17 thoughts on “The problem being, there’s no scientific controversy about this at all”

  1. This left wing chemist at my work’s UK office told me maintaining the narrative is more important than scientific truth. A fucking scientist said that.

  2. The article sums up a problem many geeks have – they’re high on the autism spectrum, so while they can analyse things they aren’t particularly good at knowing about when to be blunt, and when not.

    And if he’s unemployed, it’s because he’s applying to too many companies with HR departments, instead of startups that are 100% male. His CV on LinkedIn suggests he would be hired in a matter of days if he applied to the right places.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    Dongguan John – “This left wing chemist at my work’s UK office told me maintaining the narrative is more important than scientific truth. A fucking scientist said that.”

    Par for the course where race and gender are concerned.

  4. “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

    Is the CEO of google actually as so thick as shit he doesn’t understand normal distribution or is he a being a disingenuous cunt?

  5. From what I remember of the ‘memo’ the guy was at pains to say that the individual women working at google were there on merit but the reason they only made up 20% of the technical workforce was because “on average” women aren’t as suited to the job as men (i.e. the normal distribution curve for women and coding ability is shifted to the left of the men’s).

  6. My senior Aunt would have been of the view that neuroticism in women arose from having to deal with men.

    The only way you could think that is if you’ve never seen women deal with each other.

  7. This left wing chemist at my work’s UK office told me maintaining the narrative is more important than scientific truth. A fucking scientist said that.

    He’d brand you a denier for doubting him too.

  8. More women neurotic, more men psychotic. Our so I remember the psychology books of the sixties reporting. Just as they reported more men very clever, fewer women very stupid.

  9. Just as they reported more men very clever, fewer women very stupid.

    It follows from the population of men having a slightly higher standard deviation the population of women, on almost every measure of performance. More Mozarts and Einsteins, and also more James Holmeses and John Allen Muhammeds.

  10. Golly, that would never have occurred to those sixties authors. Why not pop into a time machine and tell ’em?

  11. “From what I remember of the ‘memo’ the guy was at pains to say that the individual women working at google were there on merit but the reason they only made up 20% of the technical workforce was because “on average” women aren’t as suited to the job as men”

    Nah. What he said was that men and women had different preferences for styles of jobs, and that if you wanted more women to pick coding for a career, you needed to restructure the job to be more appealing to women. (e.g. more ‘social’ teamwork programming practices, more use of language skills, more observation, etc.)

    You use each sex to contribute what it’s best at, and tailor the job conditions to the psychological preferences of the workers, whatever makes them most effective. It would probably make sense to use both male and female styles, in different departments.

    The problem was it violates the belief that men and women are mentally identical, and only differ because of the way society treats them. Brains, they say are all nurture, no nature.

  12. @ Dongguan John
    One of the reasons why Autistic people are mostly unemployed is that they habitually tell the truth instead of what HR want to hear (and when they struggle to tell lies they are unconvincing).
    Damore told most of the truth but it didn’t conform to HR’s script. Damore went out of his way to placate women in Google by claiming (contrary to observations) that women are in general as good as men at programming [not true – many women are good at programming but, on average, men are better, just as they are, on average, better at maths]. His problem was that, being Autistic, he did not understand how irrational HR staff would react to a rational analysis, with appropriate bows to feminist doctrine, of their behaviour.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *