Google is right to focus on bias against women

We’re having the wrong conversation about women in tech. We need to decouple two very different issues that have arisen amid the commotion about diversity at Google: biological differences
between genders, and bias against females working in tech and more generally in well-paid, prestigious jobs.
Let’s start with the biology. Studies on how babies or very young children interact with the world tend to find differences on average between what girls and boys pay attention to or care about. They focus on babies because of the deep interaction between inherent traits and acquired behavior: By the age of 4, children are deeply socialized, so it’s hard to know what’s driving what they say or do (although sometimes it’s obviously just socialization).
Such studies inevitably run into a problem: There’s no objective way to measure gender differences. Consider IQ scores. People whip out distributions showing greater variability for men, as of this proved that they are the ones who get to be called geniuses. I’ve heard this countless times, from multiple colleagues and even from my own father. These were not randomly timed academic speculations. They were moments designed to make me feel small, cowardly attempts to put me in my place. This is how socialization happens on the ground.
So why IQ? It’s just a test built by man to emphasize what man thinks is important. Its results vary considerably depending on a child’s socio-economic environment or stress level.
Nonetheless, it is commonly used to forward racial superiority arguments. It should be retired. I put no more stock in IQ as a yardstick of superiority than I would in an actual yardstick—which would favor men, presumably, but be equally meaningless as a justification to pay them more.
Similarly, when people focus on narrow skills like solo programming as a way of declaring men “better on average,” the assessment is arbitrary and entirely dependent on culture. First, you need to know how to decide whose code is good, which is known to be
biased against women. Second, you need to explain why that particular skill should be valued above all else.
If you believe Yunatan Zunger, the ex-Googler who wrote a Medium piece in response to the infamous memo, empathy, flexibility, and the ability to work collaboratively are just as important.
I would add the ability to think ethically to the list. But I’m not claiming to be objectively right —I’m simply arguing that this is a subjective matter.
The upshot: Biological differences are incredibly difficult to disentangle from socialization, and almost impossible to measure in a way that doesn’t openly or secretly reflect arbitrary cultural values.
So perhaps we should set that question aside for now —to be continued if and when we’re ready for it—and instead focus on giving everyone a fair shot at good jobs. In other words, let’s address the very real and demonstrable problem of bias.
Oh, wait. That’s what Google was trying to do with its diversity initiatives. I think they’re onto something.

—Bloomberg