« Dell EMC World 2017: ScaleIO 3.0! | Main | Making 2 go to 1: Choosing simplification in Vblock/VxBlock. »

June 01, 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Do you believe that X and Y chromosomes determine the sex of the species? And isn't there only two sexes? Male or female? So how do you explain that science fact with the spectrum analogy? Bill Nye had a show in the 90's explaining X and Y chromosomes, and now that show has been removed and replaced with his Netflix version. I guess science was wrong in the 90's? Thoughts?


Hey @Leo, Are you suggesting that the Kinsey Scale is scientific observation regarding genetics? What I know of the Kinsey experiments is that they were studies in the social aspects of Human Sexuality, not the genetic. Moreover, the nature of his experiments were to explicitly remove the effect of the X or Y pairing of chromosomes on a person's non-procreative sexual preference.

Thanks for the thoughts :)

EMC Employee

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them...That is funny considering the author states this is open dialog.

There is nothing more silencing in the work place than when your leader uses his platform to forward an agenda that disregards the laws of nature, the traditions of a country, the teachings of nearly all major religions, and the historical foundations of the family. This has nothing to do with technology and is utterly disturbing and sorrowful. Why can't we just love one another regardless of race, sex or any number of things? Why do we have to celebrate what most consider moral depravity?

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Chad Sakac

@Leo, yes, XX and XY chromosomes are one of the determinant of physical sex in humans. It's much more complex than that - and there is a TON of research in this area that has moved far since the 1990s. As a reminder, in the 1990s, the Internet was just arriving into the mainstream. We used flip phones :-). It's actually sections on the XY chromosome pairing that are the primary determinant of physical sex, and there are much more complex sequences being studied (not conclusive at all yet) about sexual preference (which seems to be distinct from identity, which also seems to be distinct from physical elements). Google it. Read as much as you can (including differing opinions). That's what I do. RECOMMENDATION: be selective for science vs. belief (there are lots of sponsored links). Look for people who bring data, and filter out those who bring opinion. Thanks for the comment!

@EMC Employee - although of course, the email you used isn't an EMC one - so you could, or could not be who you say you are. I understand that you might be afraid - but you don't need to be. Nevertheless, let's assume you are!

1) The comments are only moderated because I get an INSANE amount of spam that I need to filter through (the built in filters let a lot through). I never filter a comment based on content - as I haven't here.

2) Your comment (at least to me) seems conflicted. Yes - as you say - why can't we just love one another regardless of those things? We'll, because many try to restrict people from doing that. Secular societies have come to the conclusion that you are right - people should. This is why the laws of the land (and as far as I know, the US is still a place where the law of the land is the rule) have been shifting. Religious arguments have been used for many years to say why people of different beliefs, different races should or shouldn't be able to love who they love. Personally, I'm glad that the world is moving forward. Progress is good, understanding is good.

I like this this biblical quote personally:

"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye" -Mathew 7:1-5

Thank you for the comment - and I welcome all, including those that have the courage to share their point of view, especially those who are open minded. If you **are** an employee - I welcome you to call me, and let's discuss!

Non-EMC Employee ;)

Yikes!! Alfred Kinsey's data is flawed and his conclusions proven statistically incorrect. Using the Kinsey reports as the foundation for this article is irresponsible at best. I'm shocked this has not been mentioned.

I have no problem with the overall diversity message, but for someone espousing the value of science in his comments, this seems pretty reckless. I'll make my own "RECOMMENDATION:" do your own research and do not rely solely on this blog.

Erik Smith

@Leo I would point out that from a genetic point of view, a persons "true" sex is not quite so simple as male or female. I found http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html to be pretty insightful and I believe it supports the argument that sex should also be treated as a spectrum.

@EMC Employee, I agree we should "love one another regardless of race, sex or any number of things".

Chad Sakac

@Non-EMC Employee - thanks for the comment. I second your recommendation - this is a personal blog, no more, no less. I recommend that EVERYONE do their own research :-). Note that I recommend that exact same thing, and to select for those that bring data, bring evidence, not opinion.

I would like to make a correction to your comment. Please note that I don't refer to the Kinsey studies as the basis for diversity - rather that they were the my first exposure as a teen to the idea that sexual preference may not be binary, and triggered a thought of what that would mean to individuals who didn't neatly fit into gender + preference in binary ways that were considered the social norm, and made me personally re-frame this question in my own mind as a question of fairness.

Would love for you to follow up with a link to a study that has debunked the Kinsey studies. Not saying you're wrong, but rather that in good debate and dialog, each of us should bring things that support our arguments.

There is a TON of much more recent scientific study (Erik supplied another link, and the WHO studies are quite balanced and scientific) that people can start their research if they have a passion for the topic.

Thank you!

Charlie Dellacona

Chad, re:Kinsey validity/flaws, you can just google the subject. The Wikipedia article has a good section on criticism of his reports. Serious statisticians and even psychologist Abraham Maslow called his sampling biased and flawed.

Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports

You can read what one of his co-authors, Gebhard, said in an interview about Kinsey's methods. He calls some of the sampling flawed and claims other parts are solid. He also disavows and regrets publishing the famous 10% number.

Here: http://www.pbs.org/fmc/interviews/gebhard.htm

It must be acknowledged that much of the criticism of Kinsey is morally/religiously, not scientifically, motivated. You must ignore this stuff. Poor critique always has the unintended consequence of bolstering the target!

Kinsey was important for being a pioneer, but his conclusions do not stand up because his of flawed methods, my opinion.

Chad Sakac

@Charlie - thanks for the addition to the dialog, and citations. It adds to the dialog!

I'll reiterate that I'm not using the Kinsey studies as the pillar of my support of the issue - rather that it was the intial trigger for my passion on the topic - which is now fueled by a motivation of "fairness", and "don't hurt those that aren't hurting you". Beyond that - it was the 1940s/1950s - a lot of work has been done on the topic - though there hasn't been (to my knowledge) anything conclusive on genetic cause. That said - genetic cause is somewhat secondary to me ("fairness" doctrine).

Hope you're doing well!

Greg Salintias

"Being LGBT+ isn’t a choice, isn’t a lifestyle.."
LOL ,, May want to ask NY Mayor de Blasios wife about that one. Seems to be a choice after all.



I would say it's pretty clear that Chad is making the point that being unable to live openly *as yourself* is substantially more silencing than having a leader express tolerance for other people living their lives openly as they believe they need to.

If you find this post utterly disturbing and sorrowful, consider the sorrowful *fact* that suicide rates are FOUR times higher* for LGB youth than straight youth. It's intolerance that makes that happen.

If you consider people living as they are as "moral depravity", I feel sorry for you.

*CDC. (2016). Sexual Identity, Sex of Sexual Contacts, and Health-Risk Behaviors Among Students in Grades 9-12: Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Amir Safayan

Hi Chad,

I met you briefly at VMworld 2016 in San Francisco. I recognized you, stopped you very briefly and told you how much of an inspiration you were to me. Given the attendance, don't be concerned if you don't remember me!

I'm so curious about how people develope their belief systems. I was born in Iran and raised in Indiana. Indiana was not exactly a hotbed of open mindedness.

Perhaps this blog is not the correct place for you to provide that backdrop of your life and certainly don't think I'm making you out to be a saint or the perfect man. But I've seen you in person and I've read your various technical commentary over the years and as I've described you before " you are the embodiment of intelligent positivity".

Can you please start a church and I will gladly join and - once and for all - regularly attend and tithe! : )

Joking aside, your family is so fortunate to have you as their father / husband and your IT teams are fortunate to have you as their leader.. Your approach to discourse is very refreshing and allows others with differing opinions to ponder ideas in a way that is non-threatening. I'm describing myself as I have never had a strong inclination to be pro LGBT. Nor have I had a strong inclination to be anti-LGBT. But your ideas and really more importantly the way you present them by clearly stating that you encourage dialog is awesome.

I don't care where someone falls on the political spectrum. If they dround out opposite opinions and will not allow opposite opinions to even be spoken or heard - my life is to short to even bother with them.

Just as I said when I introduced myself to you at VMworld 2016, Thank you Chad!

The comments to this entry are closed.

  • BlogWithIntegrity.com


  • The opinions expressed here are my personal opinions. Content published here is not read or approved in advance by Dell Technologies and does not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Dell Technologies or any part of Dell Technologies. This is my blog, it is not an Dell Technologies blog.