The Google memo isn’t sexist or anti-diversity, it’s science
The article hides a common but incorrect assumption. Look at this paragraph:<p>> As mentioned in the memo, gendered interests are predicted by exposure to prenatal testosterone – higher levels are associated with a preference for mechanically interesting things and occupations in adulthood. Lower levels are associated with a preference for people-oriented activities and occupations. This is why STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields tend to be dominated by men.<p>The assumption here is that employment in STEM industries fundamentally and solely involves "mechanically interesting things".<p>The reality is that tech companies are composed of people and make products for people. Google themselves have found through their own research that the best managers are defined by their people skills, not their technical skills. So why aren't the management layers of tech companies composed of mostly women?<p>Strong technology is important for success, but so is leadership, market fit, team dynamics, understanding the customer, etc. The hardest question in tech companies is not "how" to build, but "what" to build. This is essentially a people-oriented problem, since customers are people.<p>EDIT: this tweet puts it succinctly:<p>> WEIRD how none of these guys ever argue that because our ladybrains are better at communication and teamwork we should be paid more<p><a href="https://twitter.com/kelliotttt/status/894770623611682818" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/kelliotttt/status/894770623611682818</a>