So, since this thread is dead and Lana isn't responding, anyone have any plans this weekend?
Oh, it's not dead. Rather, this forum has always been rather low on my list of priorities.
How so?
Of course people rejecting the idea that the causes of gender inequality are societal and discrimination in favor of citing evolution doesn't make you think of people citing evolution to excuse racism. Of fucking course.
He wasn't rejecting them, he was just saying that they weren't the only causes.
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.
Emphasis mine. He further clarifies:
I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes.
He even suggests other means of helping women to succeed in Google. Does that sound like he thinks we're inherently inferior? Besides, I always thought the idea behind diversity was the celebration of differences, not the rejection of them.
Boiling down inequality to the notion that "some people are just naturally superior" is unreasonable, no doubt. But there's a similar, more insidious lack of reason in the opposite notion: that bias and discrimination are the only reasons for societal inequality, and that even entertaining the idea that there might be other factors involved is a sign of a right-wing extremist. That kind of thinking is reductionist and downright unscientific. There's a word for believing that an idea is unassailable and that anybody who questions it is morally and/or intellectually inferior: dogmatism.
If you believe that his memo is incorrect, then why don't you approach it from a scientific point of view? See if there are any problems in his ideas. Question the underlying theory. Look at it like a scientist would. Much like how the only substance that can cut a diamond is another diamond, it takes science to tackle science.
Also, can we please talk about this without being rude or nasty?