“A diverse mix of voices leads to better discussions, decisions, and outcomes for everyone.”-Sundar Pichai, CEO, Google
James Damore, we hardly knew ye. It turns out writing a benign, slightly-left-of-center, well-reasoned, fact-based intra-company memorandum with all of the necessary qualifiers, questioning Google’s practices regarding “diversity and inclusion”, is beyond the pale. Who knew? Simply pointing out that, “At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases” and that, “Google has several biases and honest discussion about these biases is being silenced by the dominant ideology”, which creates an echo chamber and an environment hostile to different views and opinions, is cause for Google doing exactly what Damore, a software engineer at Google, feared: “Our shaming culture [creates] the possibility of being fired” for daring to question the prevalent orthodoxy. This possibility was realized swiftly and resolutely by the company, with Damore axed more or less instantaneously once his identity was revealed.
The reactions to Damore’s memo spoke volumes about where we are as a society. The memo has been called “inflammatory” and “sexist” and “anti-diversity”. I would be willing to venture the vast majority of those, including those in the company, reacting to the memo either haven’t read it, or have lost the plot so badly that the mere suggestion of chromosomal or biological differences sends them into a conniption. The guy was obviously well-intentioned and he clearly cared about the company he worked for, enough to take the time write and circulate a well-researched memo that shared his views on why there might be sex and race disparities within the company; he also offered a number of solutions to help rectify said disparities, particularly between the sexes, beyond the blatantly discriminatory programs and policies the company currently practices, with proactive measures that would emphasize women’s relative strengths, including more collaborative and “out-facing”, customer relations-based work.
It wasn’t good enough. It never is. The relentlessly virtue-signaling eunuchs and cucks rushed to the defense of these women who are so empowered they need…men to come to their aid? New Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance (yes, evidently that’s a real position), Danielle Brown informed her triggered colleagues that, of course Google is committed to, “Building an open, inclusive environment [which] means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions”. Did Damore feel safe enough, even with his stated reservations about the possibility of being fired for voicing a dissenting viewpoint, or was his commitment to Google just that deep that he willingly sacrificed himself, knowing his anonymity wouldn’t last if the memo went public?
Just as a point of reference, let’s take a look at the sex and racial break-down of Google, to see how this whole “inclusivity agenda” is playing itself out:
· Male: 69% (81% of technical positions)
· Female: 31% (19% of technical positions)
· White: 59%
· East Asian: 32%
· Hispanic: 3%
· Black: 2%
· “Other”: 4%
Women are a little over half of the U.S. population; as Middle Eastern and Arab-Americans are oddly classed as white by the U.S. Census Bureau, the rest of the Asian continent accounts for 5.6% of the population. Now, again, just as a point of reference, let’s look at IQ break-down between sexes. Men are 1.438 times more likely to have an IQ over 120 than women; 2.525 times more likely to have an IQ over 140; women, however, are far less likely to have lower-end IQs—they’re much more clustered at the center of the IQ Bell Curve. In general, men are more task-oriented and score higher in spatial reasoning involving “things” (“systematizing”), whereas women prefer people (“empathizing”) and aesthetics. Men also have lower levels of neuroticism and have a greater propensity to work more hours, seek advancement as a sign of status in order to find a mate, et cetera, et cetera. All stuff anyone who’s lived on this planet for five seconds knows.
Now for a run-down of average IQs and median income of some of the major races in the United States:
· Ashkenazi Jews: IQ 110, Median Income $97,500
· East Asians (including Mongolians): IQ 105, Median Income $76,260
· Whites: IQ 100, Median Income $60,256
· Mestizos/Hispanics: IQ 90, Median Income $42,491
· “African-American” Blacks: IQ 85, Median Income $35,398
Other races’ average IQs (median incomes unknown):
· Pacific Islanders: 85
· Arabs: 85
· Sub-Saharan Africans: 70
· Australian Aborigines: 62
· NOTE: Mental retardation is defined as having an IQ of seventy or below.
Now do we think, in light of both the evidence presented and Damore’s memo, which I’m going to link to below, that it’s possible biology might have at least a little to do with the sex and race disparities at Google, in tech, and in STEM more broadly? Is there a correlation between IQ and earning potential? I never hear anyone kvetch about the fact that three-quarters of humanities degrees are conferred on women, or that over 20% of the black population works for the government. Does equity of outcome, like multi-culturalism, only work one way?
If you haven’t, check out my article “The Unbearable Whiteness of Being”, where I explore these and other Great Mysteries of Our Time.
“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”-James Damore
The memo: http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/googles-ideological-echo-chamber/#!