Panel: Damore's gender-focused memo was "discriminatory, constituted sexual harassment." – Ars Technica/Infamous Google memo author shot down by federal labor board
Was James Damore's memo discriminatory and a form of sexual harassment? To move towards an answer, first read the Memo (not someone else's summary of it!). Then read the National Labor Relations Board’s Response. Here are the links.
- James Damore’s Memo: Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber
- The National Labor Relations Board’s Response: Advice Response Memo
I have concluded that the author of the NLRB Response Memo, Jayme Sophir, either didn't read the Damore's actual Memo or simply didn't understand what she read. Take this page 5 paragraph of the Response:
"The Charging Party’s use of stereotypes based on purported biological differences between women and men should not be treated differently than the types of conduct the Board found unprotected in these cases. Statements about immutable traits linked to sex—such as women’s heightened neuroticism and men’s prevalence at the top of the IQ distribution—were discriminatory and constituted sexual harassment, notwithstanding effort to cloak comments with “scientific” references and analysis, and notwithstanding “not all women” disclaimers. Moreover, those statements were likely to cause serious dissension and disruption in the workplace. ... Thus, while much of the Charging Party’s memorandum was likely protected, the statements regarding biological differences between the sexes were so harmful, discriminatory, and disruptive as to be unprotected."
A few points:
- Damore did not use stereotypes in his memo. A stereotype is a “widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing”. What Damore wrote was that many gender differences are "small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions." Also, there is nothing in Damore's memo to suggest that traits linked to sex are "immutable".
- Sophir's reference to "purported" biological differences between women and men reveals her ignorance of the extensive scientific literature on the subject. That males are over-represented at both the lower and upper extremes of intelligence is well-established. See, for instance, Arden and Plomin, 2016; Makel, ai, et al., 2016 (full references below). That just about all personality traits show significant and substantial genetic influence is the stuff of college textbooks, e,g, Behavioral Genetics, now in its 7th edition. That gender differences in cognition and personality are partly influenced by biology is well-accepted by scientists who study these differences, such as Louann Brizendine, author of The Female Brain and The Male Brain.
- The NRLB distinguishes between the "protected" portions of Damore's memo that suggest certain changes in company policy and the "unprotected" portions that address gender differences. But the unprotected parts are an essential part of the rationale for the policy suggestions in the first place.
- Google employees and job applicants took offense at Damore's memo because they misinterpreted it. That is their problem.
Finally, Douglas Moran in his blog A Pragmatist's Take has made some excellent points about the NRLB's Response to the Google Memo. You really should read his entire post.
References:
Arden, R. and R. Plomin (2006). "Sex differences in variance of intelligence across childhood." Personality and Individual Differences 41(1): 39-48.
Behavioral Genetics, 7th Edition (2016) Valerie S. Knopik, Jenae M. Neiderhiser, John C. DeFries, and Robert Plomin. Worth Publishers ISBN 10: 1464176051
Brizendine, L. The Female Brain. Morgan Road/Broadway Books. 2006. ISBN 978-0-7679-2009-4.
Brizendine, L. The Male Brain. Three Rivers Press/Crown Publishing. 2010. ISBN 978-0-7679-2754-3.
Makel, M. C., J. Wai, et al. (2016). "Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: An update and cross cultural extension." Intelligence 59: 8-15.