The research the post cites strongly implies women would be better qualified for other roles. That suggestion was (and is) both inaccurate and inappropriate to send in a workplace.
How is the statement in a general population inaccurate? I agree it can make people uncomfortable but it looks pretty accurate to me
um, because there is no credible science behind his assumptions. Many of the researchers he cites dispute his conclusions.
I'm not ignoring his argument, I'm saying it's a really bad argument with almost no evidence to support it.
What "conclusions" are disagreed?
Can you really not see how this would apply in real life with personality differences? It seems obvious and intuitive not even mentioning the science, women are more social on average, men more into things that make a whirring noise. What data am I missing?
You are proving my argument. Nonsense like this has prevented women from feeling like equal participants (and equally capable) in many fields for decades.
How does that prove anything for you? You haven't shown anything except that you disagree, that doesn't give us anything except your opinion and definitely won't convince people who know the science also... The personality differences between men and women are not edgy science. I have a degree in psychology and I'm pretty confident you have no legit science (and haven't even give logical reasons) to back your claims but feel free to post something different
You also seem to have a lot of misinformation in this thread. Calling his memo a manifesto... Mixing neurotic with neuroticism... Basic facts you are smearing... You aren't giving people a reason to believe any of what you say so maybe you should think about why you have such an extreme view