A number of scientists have confirmed facts stated in a controversial anti-political correctness manifesto that got a Google employee fired on the grounds of “perpetuating gender stereotypes.”
James Damore’s manifesto, which got him fired from Google, is being described as scientifically accurate by several psychologists.
The psychologists in question have basically come to an agreement that many of the claims in Damore’s ‘Google Manifesto’ are actually quite accurate on a scientific level.
Dr. Lee Jussim, Professor Geoffrey Miller from the University of New Mexico, Professor David Schmitt from Bradley University, and Dr. Debra W Soh who has written for Playboy all seem to agree that Damore’s manifesto made sense scientifically.
Together, the four professors make a compelling argument as to the accuracy of the claims laid out in Damore’s Google Manifesto.
Quillette, the website hosting the reply from the psychologists to the manifesto, has been slammed with traffic so badly since publication that the site went down…
Apologies if you can't access @QuilletteM right now, my instance CPUs have been maxed out 🙁
— Claire Lehmann (@clairlemon) August 8, 2017
Professor David Schmitt had this to say in the Quillette piece:
I think it’s really important to discuss this topic scientifically, keeping an open mind and using informed skepticism when evaluating claims about evidence. In the case of personality traits, evidence that men and women may have different average levels of certain traits is rather strong. For instance, sex differences in negative emotionality are universal across cultures; developmentally emerge across all cultures at exactly the same age; are linked to diagnosed (not just self-reported) mental health issues; appear rooted in sex differences in neurology, gene activation, and hormones; are larger in more gender egalitarian nations; and so forth (for a short review of this evidence, see here). In my view, claiming that sex differences exist in negative emotionality is not an “incorrect assumption about gender.” It is an empirically well-supported claim (at least, based on the best psychological science we have so far).
Professor Schmitt has been red-pilling people on Twitter as well:
— David Schmitt (@PsychoSchmitt) August 6, 2017
— David Schmitt (@PsychoSchmitt) August 6, 2017
Dr. Lee Jessim also thinks Damore is right:
The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right.
Dr. Jessim explains that the differences in sexes is the whole reason for having diversity:
The evolutionary psychology research on sex differences is one of the best reasons to promote sexual diversity in the workplace – and one of the best reasons to expect that there may still be some inequalities of outcome in particular jobs, companies, and industries.
Dr. Soh, a woman, doesn’t find the Google memo sexist at all:
As a woman who’s worked in academia and within STEM, I didn’t find the memo offensive or sexist in the least. I found it to be a well thought out document, asking for greater tolerance for differences in opinion, and treating people as individuals instead of based on group membership.
According to Dr. Soh, the psychological differences between men and women are legit:
Within the field of neuroscience, sex differences between women and men—when it comes to brain structure and function and associated differences in personality and occupational preferences—are understood to be true, because the evidence for them (thousands of studies) is strong. This is not information that’s considered controversial or up for debate; if you tried to argue otherwise, or for purely social influences, you’d be laughed at.
Dr. Soh thinks it’s important that we talk about these differences like Damore instead of stifling them like Google apparently wants:
No matter how controversial it is or how great the pushback, I believe it’s important to speak out, because if we can’t discuss scientific truths, where does that leave us?
Professor Geoffrey Miller would have given the manifesto an A- had it been submitted to him in a masters level course:
For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate. Moreover, they are stated quite carefully and dispassionately. Its key claims about sex differences are especially well-supported by large volumes of research across species, cultures, and history. I know a little about sex differences research. On the topic of evolution and human sexuality, I’ve taught for 28 years, written 4 books and over 100 academic publications, given 190 talks, reviewed papers for over 50 journals, and mentored 11 Ph.D. students. Whoever the memo’s author is, he has obviously read a fair amount about these topics. Graded fairly, his memo would get at least an A- in any masters’ level psychology course. It is consistent with the scientific state of the art on sex differences. (Blank slate gender feminism is advocacy rather than science: no gender feminist I’ve met has ever been able to give a coherent answer to the question ‘What empirical findings would convince you that psychological sex differences evolved?’)
Watch MILO explain why social justice makes women miserable: