It's on the memo itself. You can read it here, among many other places: https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-di...

On a section dedicated to offering alternative explanations to sexism for the gender gap in tech, James writes:

>Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. This leads to 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.

The implication is that it's partly natural that women do worse and get lower salaries at tech. In case there's any adoubt, the section it's written in is titled "Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech", in the subsection "Personality differences".

You don't see it because it's not there.

People make these leaps of fiction on their own from usually well meaning but confused stances.

No, it's not there, it's on the memo itself, in his own words, in a section literally titled "Non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech" if you'd like a more reliable source than Wikipedia.

>Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading.

Do you see it? The part where he says women are genetically worse leaders, and have worse salaries because they're genetically worse negotiators? Remember, the section is titled "Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech", implying that women are paid less because it's natural, not because of sexist bias.

At any rate, I appreciate the patronizing "making well meaning but confused leaps of logic" pat in the head.

No, it does not say that women should be paid less than men. It says that just because there are differences in average pay between men and women there isn't necessarily discrimination. And he offers suggestions to help close this gap later on in the memo.

Yes, your are making an unsubstantiated leap from what was actually written to claiming that Damore write that his female coworkers should be paid less than men for the same work.

He said it was a possible explanation, not that it was necessarily true or that the current situation is fair. The memo was a response to the very common fallacy "Women are underrepresented in X, this is proof that women are discriminated against".

It is a leap on your part.

Statistics are all we have to go on in this regard, and they are in Damore's favor.

The truth is not bigoted.

"White men can't jump" is generally true.

Personality traits are like most things on a spectrum, and women tend to have less of the traits which have until now been perceived to be necessary for "negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading"

There are leaders that are women, see AMD.