Once again I find myself shaking my head, amazed that in 2017 we still have to explain to men that women can actually be great engineers, mathematicians, physicists, chemists, presidents, CEOs, and the list goes on.
Once again someone — in this particular case a young man, former Google engineer James Damore — felt like he could classify all women into a series of feminine traits that proved that they could not possibly be as good as men at developing products for Google.
Before I go much further, let's just state for the record the "personality differences" he claims make women not as good or as valuable to Google in engineering positions:
- "Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas."
- "Women also generally have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing)."
- "Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness."
- "Also higher agreeableness," resulting in "women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up and leading."
- "Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."