This information is critical if you want to understand the "rage of a privileged class". There is a "large" population, in terms of raw numbers, of very bright black people. However because the black population is relatively small, that number is minuscule in relation to the population as a whole:... So here's the thing. If you are one of those black people who are on the far right side of the IQ distribution you are a rare bird (statistically speaking). However, it is likely you also interact with many other rare birds. Because of this you likely think that there are more of you than is represented in the population. Because of this, the following chart burns you up inside:The same thing applies to the reaction to the GM, there are many bright women who do high level tech as competently as their male counterparts, but statistically they are a small group (just as the men who do this work, more on that later). Furthermore, most women who are THAT bright choose to do other things with that intellect (as seen in where women gravitate to in terms of advanced degrees and career choices) that siphons them off from CS fields which further impacts their numbers. This is all known stuff. But a certain victim/siege mentality has taken hold of modern Western women where we get nonsense like the following (linking to Steve Sailer 'cause he's always worth reading):
For instance, what if we replaced the word “women” in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author? … I thought about all of this, looked at my daughter and answered simply. “No, it’s not true.”It's one thing to lie about some fat white man who crawls up and down chimneys (some of which simply don't exist) with a impossibly small [often] black bag for the amount of toys he allegedly has, and places these presents under a decorated tree and takes the time necessary to eat cookies and drink milk while keeping a schedule where there is about 5 hours of darkness to cover the entire globe. It is one thing to lie to your kid about some fairy that comes to their bedroom with whatever currency is in circulation and plops one under their pillow and retrieves whatever tooth is there. But lying to your kid about a known and verifiable scientific fact because you're too chicken shit to tell them how biology and the world actually works is diarrhea level of parenting. At some time in the near future this girl, should she be at all bright, will find out her mother is a grand level liar and may well lose a lot of respect for her. But let's address the epic level straw man argument offered here:
For instance, what if we replaced the word “women” in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author?Firstly there is hardly "universal calls" for swift action against Damore. The only way you can think that such an environment exists is if you live in a rather opaque bubble. However to the point here, the same argument made by Damore in regards to gender diversity at Google can in fact be made about Non-Asian minorities in the technology field. I've discussed this multiple times already:
That's very few people getting top level PHD's in computer science. I'm sure that they are in high demand as well. According to that paper. CS BS degrees awarded topped out in 2003 with around 22k degrees awarded. when we look at the ethnic and racial breakdown of those awarded said degrees we find that "Black or African-Americans" get 4.6% of those degrees [Pg 7]And from another post of mine:
Whites take 64.8% and Asians 15.3% When we look at gender we find that women take 29.5% of Masters to 70.5% for men. When we look at Master's degrees by race and ethnicity we find: Black or African-American: 2.6%
Non-resident Alien 50.4% (Why is "Non-resident Alien" recorded with ethnicity?) When it comes to Phd level degrees, Men hold 80.2% of the degrees to women's 19.8% Black or African-American's hold 1.4% of PhD level CS degrees
Nonresident Alien 49.6% (again why is this in the ethnicity section and WHO is it hiding?)
Look. If HARPO Studios, created by none other than Oprah Winfrey herself cannot manage to employ 60% African-Americans at her studio why the hell should anyone be mad at Google or LinkedIN? Someone ought to send the EEOC to Harpo studios and get them to explain why a black company apparently cannot find qualified black staff. I mean how is it that Oprah Winfrey could not find a BLACK CEO to run her company?Why all this disparity?