No he doesn't. He argues that women tend to *prefer* more people oriented fields *on average*. This is relevant to why there are fewer women
-
-
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
than men in tech. Obviously, *by definition* it doesn't denigrate those women who *choose* tech.
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
His core premise is that women 'prefer' other professions 'on average' for BIOLOGICAL REASONS and presents little compelling evidence for it
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The idea that inbuilt *average* prefs between men & women are biological has a lot of evidence to support it. He provides some. You can
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
argue that, in fact, those prefs are the result of socialisation. But that is a long way from "women are incapable."
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
It's an academic debate, with evidence on both sides. Not a firing offence or evidence of misogyny.
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
But his is a very mainstream view. Not something he invented. He also states explicitly that certain aspects of tech culture may also
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
discourage women & those should be combated.
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @IonaItalia @VaelinVanGogh and
"I prefer to do x" is not the same as "I am incapable of doing y".
4 replies 2 retweets 7 likes -
He argues the preference is biologically-based while providing zero compelling evidence for that claim.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Well, there's not exactly a lack of it. Would you like me to give you some sources? Blank Slate book, Norwegian Gender Paradox doc etc
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.