Except it is. Damore himself cites a study by David Schmitt at Bradley University, indicating that women had certain personality traits across cultures. What did Shmitt have to say about Damore, when interviewed?

> “It is unclear to me that this sex difference would play a role in success within the Google workplace (in particular, not being able to handle stresses of leadership in the workplace. That’s a huge stretch to me.)”

For more, check out the citations on this article: https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/16/16153740/tech-diversity-p...

Finally, even if the facts were true that women on averaged perform worse in tech, how do you want to use that information? Cancel all the sensitivity programs designed to solve other very real problems in tech? Or are you saying not only that biology "plays a role", but that _nothing else does_ so we should just completely ignore this as an issue?

> It is unclear to me that this sex difference would play a role in success within the Google workplace (in particular, not being able to handle stresses of leadership in the workplace. That’s a huge stretch to me.)

In other words, "that's not the kind of question we ask."

Also I looked at the citations, neither of the metastudies looks at differences in sensory perception which imho are the most interesting of the sex differences. But even ignoring that, looking at the statistical significance of certain population traits doesn't tell you anything about their clinical significance. E.g. if you look at two groups of 100 people and one group is 100% alive and the other group is 99% alive, there isn't a significant effect size, but there is a big difference to that one person.

> You're making stuff up.

Hey, let's keep things civil. Please consider Hanlon's Razor in this case.

How about something like, "I don't think you're correct about the consensus. Citations please?"

Fair, edited my comment.