He didn’t say “one third”. He didn’t commit to any number, which is professionally astounding for someone working at Google. Even if he did claim a 1/3 bias, an off the charts numbers beyond the wildest claims of any extremist biological determinists, it would lead to an expectation that 33% of technical employees at Google should be female; in 2015 it was half that. So all he would have done is prove how broken the system is. At some point while writing the ten pages, this must have occurred to him, and rather than stop, he just skipped the numbers. What I see here is nothing but distractions aimed to delay change.
Your point about what an engineers needs to be is powerful, because our ranting author has implicitly defined what aptitudes he claims are more male, and claims them as the necessary to be a successful engineer, so even before we get to consider his claims about male superiority, claims he didn’t actually substantiate, we are asked to conceed that all engineers should be the same, and the model should be him. Man, he has made me angry.
