Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube Responds to Google Memo

He wasn't arguing that women have smaller brains or are somehow biologically inferior to men, thus are not in leadership/tech positions. As I read it he was making the point that current positions select for personality traits more common in men. And that you can't talk about this without getting fired.

He makes the (valid?) point that perhaps you should fix the core issue of the innate job selection bias rather than trying to implement your own selection bias while recruiting.

I thought it was an OK read and made some sense, and couldn't understand the big fuss. Did anyone else feel this way, or am I misunderstanding it? Please correct me if so, it's open to interpretation but I think the tagline "due to biological differences in women" is a bit disingenuous.

I also thought firing him was a bit extreme and kind of proved some of his points.

Why is everyone appealing to emotions and producing red herrings?

No one refers to any points other than those which they interpret to be oppressive and offensive (mostly points having to do with female/male differences which are real and exist). The hypothesis put out are there to further the discussion, not to be taken as facts (there are words like "may", "in part" all over the place yet we interpret "may" as "is", and "in part" as "mostly").

What about Google's unscientific, hidden, irrational methods of fixing bias?

Unconscious bias training is unscientific yet they practice it. It does not work, or at worst it is harmful. Facebook does it too.

These methods come from one of the hardest fields of science - psychology. We know how much the studies aren't reproducible, repeatable, some results even depend on time (more known the methods the less they work).

Why is no one looking at those points?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU

Watched the interview above and cannot believe how media and almost every individual responding put this individual in some kind of aggressive, oppressive, racist frame.

Given the peer-reviewed sources in the video description of the interview no one sane enough could believe that the guy was being malevolent.

The real guilt goes to the leaker, the dramatizer and the reactionist.

I'm officially stopping with the tracking of this topic. It frustrates me that so many brilliant individuals become ideologues and witch hunters incapable of continuing the discussion. It saddens me that "discussion" has turned into calling this an "anti-diversity" memo and silencing.

Appealing to emotion throughout and not tackling any of the questions that the memo raised, I am left feeling disappointed.

So she taught her daughter to stop asking questions and just take an authority figure's word at face value?

Wonderful, that's definitely going to encourage her to pursue a career in STEM /s

If this is her takeaway,she should be fired.