You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] cyclops1771 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

As usual, the press gets it wrong. He didn't say that "women are biologically less likely to succeed in tech." He stated that DUE TO BIOLOGICAL REASONS, the pool of women to men is lower who are geared towards tech. Therefore, since it is a smaller pool than the whole, the ones geared for success are a smaller % than the whole (20% rather than 50%, for example.)

Anyone who actually read that thing all the way through, with an open mind, and not pre-conditioned to go batshit crazy (neurotic? ha!) based on buzzwords, would see that it was a reasonable argument, even if it may have been wrong. He even said that more women in tech is better, but just didn't like using discrimination to do it. (Did not argue the efficacy of the argument, just the manner in which it was being enforced.) He even provided other ways, besides direct discrimination vs males, to improve the job, job prospects, and job satisfaction of women at Google.