> This is probably because women are expected to have a high degree of self doubt and there is no assumption that they are defective if they admit to it.
A simpler explanation is that there is a perceived need to increase the number of women in management positions.
That would imply that women aren't deserving of the promotion, and that aggressive posturing is somehow a requirement for the job (and women get a free pass).
However, if the book is any indication, Tanya is a great staff engineer, probably among the best of any gender.
This of course begs the question: could it be that discriminating against men who don't display the stereotypical behaviors is detrimental to diversity? And increasing the number of women may actually help here: they may be able to empathize with people who don't fit the traditional mold.
It’s not clear that people incapable of being assertive or direct would make naturally more effective managers.
And assuming that women drawn to management positions will be more empathetic to the neuro diverse is a gigantic reach. I have no idea why that would be the case.
A simpler explanation is that there is a perceived need to increase the number of women in management positions.