People who defend Mr/ Damore's memo by saying saying Google shouldn't have fired him just because he hadn't a different opinion seem to missing the fact that he didn't state an opinion. He claimed there was an actual biological difference between men and women that precluded the ability for women to do the same work men do. That's not an opinion, that is a fallacious statement. Which Mr. Damore was trying to use as a reason for discrimination. That is a totally different thing. What if he made that statement about Blacks? Or Jews? Or Bosnians, for that matter? If you don't recognize the discriminating attitude and call it what it is, how are you ever going to stop it?
11
This isn't a culture war, as the far-to-middle Right-wing has no "culture" outside of tax cuts, budget cuts, and suppressing anyone who isn't them.
This isn't a First Amendment issue, as the First Amendment protects you from the Government -- not your employer, your spouse, your friends, or general mockery. If you say something stupid at work, your worth better be greater than the stupidity of what you said; if it isn't, goodbye. Just like a Senator or Congressman can be called out by their constituents for doing something foolish -- I.e., supporting Trump -- so too can an employee or executive be called out for doing something foolish -- i.e. publicly supporting Trump or mansplaining gender inequity. As for the "Liberal Bias" of Silicon Valley, hogwash: Half those goofballs, like Gates& Hastings, are pouring billions into Charter Schools -- as big a middle finger as you can give to the idea of equality & fairness -- and the other half are neither Right nor Left but Rich, and the collaboration between Tech Bros & MBA Fratboys is disastrous. (Uber's 'disruption' was simply screwing the Taxi Driver's Union; Air BnB's 'disruption' dodging municipal Hotel taxes, Amazon's 'disruption' just killing local bookstores) Silicon Valley's sheer amount of money gives them a distorting influence on politics in America, and don't be fooled into thinking that Silicon Valley is "progressive" -- it's often just standard rich-dude nonsense wrapped in a black turtleneck or deep-blue shirt.
This isn't a First Amendment issue, as the First Amendment protects you from the Government -- not your employer, your spouse, your friends, or general mockery. If you say something stupid at work, your worth better be greater than the stupidity of what you said; if it isn't, goodbye. Just like a Senator or Congressman can be called out by their constituents for doing something foolish -- I.e., supporting Trump -- so too can an employee or executive be called out for doing something foolish -- i.e. publicly supporting Trump or mansplaining gender inequity. As for the "Liberal Bias" of Silicon Valley, hogwash: Half those goofballs, like Gates& Hastings, are pouring billions into Charter Schools -- as big a middle finger as you can give to the idea of equality & fairness -- and the other half are neither Right nor Left but Rich, and the collaboration between Tech Bros & MBA Fratboys is disastrous. (Uber's 'disruption' was simply screwing the Taxi Driver's Union; Air BnB's 'disruption' dodging municipal Hotel taxes, Amazon's 'disruption' just killing local bookstores) Silicon Valley's sheer amount of money gives them a distorting influence on politics in America, and don't be fooled into thinking that Silicon Valley is "progressive" -- it's often just standard rich-dude nonsense wrapped in a black turtleneck or deep-blue shirt.
7
If Mr. Damore had expressed his opinions on his own social media page, and not via a corporate memo, there wouldn't have been any problem. There are a lot of people in Silicone Valley with many different viewpoints. They should be free to express those viewpoints but should also remember that the workplace is not Hyde Park.
4
Google is a company, not a country. It has no 'First Amendment'.
Hobby Lobby went all the way to SCOTUS to ensure that they could impose their religious beliefs on their employees.
If Google wants to lean left, then so be it.
Hobby Lobby went all the way to SCOTUS to ensure that they could impose their religious beliefs on their employees.
If Google wants to lean left, then so be it.
4
This case is getting bigger than it is. In the most true and simplest terms, Google fired a guy who wrote something that
A. Contributes to a hostile work environment for many employees.
-and-
B. Damages the brand of the company.
You can debate freedom of speech, culture wars, and everything else, but ultimately nobody can be expected to continue employment for disparaging your fellow colleagues and damaging your company's branding. The reason why corporations are social 'liberals' isn't culture or ideology as much as sound business practice -- making all its employees and customers from any gender, nationality, race, creed, etc. feel welcome and valued. And that is it!.
A. Contributes to a hostile work environment for many employees.
-and-
B. Damages the brand of the company.
You can debate freedom of speech, culture wars, and everything else, but ultimately nobody can be expected to continue employment for disparaging your fellow colleagues and damaging your company's branding. The reason why corporations are social 'liberals' isn't culture or ideology as much as sound business practice -- making all its employees and customers from any gender, nationality, race, creed, etc. feel welcome and valued. And that is it!.
8
Well, somebody didn't get the memo. This was the subhead for this story in the "Today's Headlines" email sent to me by the Times: "After Google fired an engineer who wrote an anti-diversity manifesto, the tech industry is under the microscope for penalizing dissenting opinions."
Damore actually very clearly expressed his opinion that diversity in the workplace is a good thing. He also referenced non-controversial scientific studies which have been ignored by most of his critics.
And as I understand it, the memo--on an internal (and private to Google) forum--was sitting there for a month not causing any problems. Once it was leaked, Google acted rather quickly. Of course, Google can fire him for parting his hair on the wrong side, but it's too bad you can be fired for leaks, and bad PR.
Damore actually very clearly expressed his opinion that diversity in the workplace is a good thing. He also referenced non-controversial scientific studies which have been ignored by most of his critics.
And as I understand it, the memo--on an internal (and private to Google) forum--was sitting there for a month not causing any problems. Once it was leaked, Google acted rather quickly. Of course, Google can fire him for parting his hair on the wrong side, but it's too bad you can be fired for leaks, and bad PR.
2
Comments here do a pretty good job of validating Damore's thesis. "My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that
don’t fit a certain ideology."
don’t fit a certain ideology."
6
Daphne,
Voltaire and Orwell need to become required reading in high schools and college campuses again, as much as advocates of "multiculturalism" would detest this.
Voltaire and Orwell need to become required reading in high schools and college campuses again, as much as advocates of "multiculturalism" would detest this.
2
This is an extremely simple conflict to resolve.
Quite simply, there is no reason for controversy.
Why?
Statistics don't apply to individuals.
Hypothetical situation: Society eliminates every single form of gender bias, and creates a perfect ideal where nobody felt discouraged from taking whatever job was best for them.
A hundred years later, there is still a 60/40 ratio of men to women in tech.
What does that mean?
Answer: Nothing.
The "Nature vs. Nurture" arguement is irrelevant. Statistical distributions are irrelevant. The whole point of eliminating stereotypes revolves around the fundamental truth that individuals cannot be defined by the statistics that define the subgroups they belong to.
If we created a world where nobody was harmed by having stereotypes applied to them falsely, the statistical distribution of the outcomes is academic, and irrelevant to the solution by definition, because the problem is already solved.
The stink of all this is, this engineer spent at least half of the word count in his manifesto qualifying and moderating the language, specifically trying to make this same point about stereotypes - that statistics, however valid or invalid, should never be used to judge individuals.
If the countless media outlets covering this circus had acknowledged that fact, the memo would probably never have gone viral, and this giy would probably still have a job.
Quite simply, there is no reason for controversy.
Why?
Statistics don't apply to individuals.
Hypothetical situation: Society eliminates every single form of gender bias, and creates a perfect ideal where nobody felt discouraged from taking whatever job was best for them.
A hundred years later, there is still a 60/40 ratio of men to women in tech.
What does that mean?
Answer: Nothing.
The "Nature vs. Nurture" arguement is irrelevant. Statistical distributions are irrelevant. The whole point of eliminating stereotypes revolves around the fundamental truth that individuals cannot be defined by the statistics that define the subgroups they belong to.
If we created a world where nobody was harmed by having stereotypes applied to them falsely, the statistical distribution of the outcomes is academic, and irrelevant to the solution by definition, because the problem is already solved.
The stink of all this is, this engineer spent at least half of the word count in his manifesto qualifying and moderating the language, specifically trying to make this same point about stereotypes - that statistics, however valid or invalid, should never be used to judge individuals.
If the countless media outlets covering this circus had acknowledged that fact, the memo would probably never have gone viral, and this giy would probably still have a job.
2
Yes, Google had the right to fire someone for any reason, but that does not mean the company isn't ailing from an equality problem. The idea that the sexes are equal is profoundly ignorant, and based on politically motivated pseudoscience. The west has yet to understand that its academia is run by insecure children, and not to be trusted.
The Trump administration should investigate these cases, and draft penalties for companies that create cultures of equality where they don't belong.
The Trump administration should investigate these cases, and draft penalties for companies that create cultures of equality where they don't belong.
1
"The idea that the sexes are equal is profoundly ignorant" .. please explain.
3
Me: "Guess what, honey? Tomorrow, I'm going to write a divisive memo at work claiming all members of a minority community have inferior skills. These assertions will be made based on my own personal experiences, and of course analyzed through my own personal lens."
Spouse: "...Ugh, gee, sweetie... Do you think that's such a good idea at work? I mean, it would be very disruptive (and not in a good way) to the company. And really, how could you get anything done anymore? Who would trust you and want to work with you? And by the way... I kinda disagree with you, too, and am now a little mad."
Me: "Hmmm... maybe you are right. Thanks! You just saved me from exhibiting really bad judgment!"
Too bad Mr. Damore didn't have a useful filter - a friend's if not his own.
Spouse: "...Ugh, gee, sweetie... Do you think that's such a good idea at work? I mean, it would be very disruptive (and not in a good way) to the company. And really, how could you get anything done anymore? Who would trust you and want to work with you? And by the way... I kinda disagree with you, too, and am now a little mad."
Me: "Hmmm... maybe you are right. Thanks! You just saved me from exhibiting really bad judgment!"
Too bad Mr. Damore didn't have a useful filter - a friend's if not his own.
5
You didn't read the memo. Mr. Damore spent a significant percentage of the word count talking about how none of the data he mentions should ever be used as a basis for judging individuals, or making assumptions about a group as a whole.
He specifically stated that there were differences in the statistical distribution of certain personality traits based on gender.
He even made a chart, that explained exactly why the statistics should not be used to judge entire groups or individuals.
If you don't actually read and understand what someone says, and only pay attention to the heresay, you open yourself up to being the victim of incorrect assumptions yourself. The circus that's based on those assumptions is absolutely destroying our ability to discuss these issues, resolve misunderstandings, and find equitable resolutions to our actual differences.
He specifically stated that there were differences in the statistical distribution of certain personality traits based on gender.
He even made a chart, that explained exactly why the statistics should not be used to judge entire groups or individuals.
If you don't actually read and understand what someone says, and only pay attention to the heresay, you open yourself up to being the victim of incorrect assumptions yourself. The circus that's based on those assumptions is absolutely destroying our ability to discuss these issues, resolve misunderstandings, and find equitable resolutions to our actual differences.
3
I did read the memo.
My point is his interpretation of the facts he references are through his lens. When publishing such a memo in an office environment, he is showing less than stellar judgment. If you want to have a conversation, fine. Just be aware of how to broach the topic in a company. Be smart.
My point is his interpretation of the facts he references are through his lens. When publishing such a memo in an office environment, he is showing less than stellar judgment. If you want to have a conversation, fine. Just be aware of how to broach the topic in a company. Be smart.
3
Mr. Galinsky of Columbia is wrong. This has nothing to do with a license via Trump. Mr. Damore writes a very strong paper with data to back it up. Again, I ask, did anyone critiquing this paper actually READ IT?
It is a macro view of the world, not micro.
It is a macro view of the world, not micro.
1
I read the paper.. can you please post the data to enlighten us?
2
i'll leave it to you to find. also, read Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind.
Yes, Google has a right to what ever culture they want to inculcate, just like conservative companies like Hobby Lobby, Its funny when the shoe is on the other foot. One thing's for sure. Google CANNOT be the best place to work unless you are a zoo animal where you think endless food is worth the right to independent thought. And this is what millennials are, sorry to say.
4
Both parties want diversity, the thinking being different groups will allow for faster progress. Yet, when differences arise we are unable to acknowledge them? Far-left or Far-right, we just have a lot of people who are bad at science in this country.
5
People need to ask themselves: Do you want a country where you're afraid to even share your political views? This is the boiled down take I'm getting from this controversy.
6
How were these views 'political'?
1
The problem with Damore was not that he was "politically incorrect" but that his assertions of biological inferiority were factually incorrect, as numerous studies of women in computing and technology have shown. Sure he has a right to express his antiquated and unsupported opinions, but by doing so he demonstrated to his employer that he was stupid and misinformed, thus justifying his own dismissal.
8
But for the right, it became a potent symbol of the tech industry’s intolerance of ideological diversity.
Oh, yeah, of course, Nazism is just an "ideological diversity". And certainly, the ideological diversity of the owners of slaves was just that.
There are some very very sick "ideologies" out there and Trump is up to his ears in the oldest, and sickest, of them all. Some people are more equal than others. Some are meant to rule, others are suckers and meant to be.
The "ideology" that drives the group of fascists that now make up the used to be Republican Party, should not and will not be tolerated on this Planet. The ideologues who feed on this stuff are the present day dinosaurs. They have already fossilized themselves into extinction. Like the mastodons of old, tghey are sinking into the tar pits, being recycled as it were, of evolution.
Oh, yeah, of course, Nazism is just an "ideological diversity". And certainly, the ideological diversity of the owners of slaves was just that.
There are some very very sick "ideologies" out there and Trump is up to his ears in the oldest, and sickest, of them all. Some people are more equal than others. Some are meant to rule, others are suckers and meant to be.
The "ideology" that drives the group of fascists that now make up the used to be Republican Party, should not and will not be tolerated on this Planet. The ideologues who feed on this stuff are the present day dinosaurs. They have already fossilized themselves into extinction. Like the mastodons of old, tghey are sinking into the tar pits, being recycled as it were, of evolution.
5
I spent 4 decades in high-tech R&D in Silicon Valley-- a woman who often looked around and saw no other women or who saw them in subservient positions. The issue here is not about freedom of speech. The Google spokesperson explicitly stated a welcome for Damore's point that Google (heck, most of Silicon Valley) might want to look closely at whether it stifles conservative commentary. What Google took exception to is that it is a company that strives to be welcoming to people of diverse backgrounds and "demographics." An employer has the right-- perhaps the obligation-- to fire employees who are open bigots and make derogatory statements about a whole demographic of people who might be considered for employment or who are already employed by the company.
8
As an American, I wonder at what age men pick these biases towards women that keep arising in the workplace or is it something that festers in the workplace. The women I knew in high school were quite capable and the guys never griped about their academic abilities. The women went on to very elite universities and have successful careers.
5
I have yet to be convinced that diversity is realistic. What it is, is a front for global multi-nationals who want to reach the largest possible market. In tech that is Asia, India, China and Indonesia. So it is no surprise that Google is headed by an Asian, it looks good. But, in reality men women different cultures excel at different things. Would we want he NBA to under go the diversity treatment, 13% African American, 65% White 6% Asian and the rest Hispanic and Latino.. I don't think so..
6
How does the New York Times which is forever linked to American first amendment freedom to criticize (New York Times v. Sullivan) ignore Thiel's role in Bollea v. Gawker? To ignore the hypocrisy of Thiel portraying himself as a victim unable to express himself is absurd in light of the damage he has done to expression rights.
10
Mr. Wingfield's assertion than "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber" was a challenge to the company's diversity efforts was misleading at best, but tending toward disingenuous.
Google has a gender gap - among many gaps. It recognizes that gap. It has extensive programs geared to closing that gap.
Mr. Damore's internal memo was intended to assist in closing that gender gap. He suggested that Google's approach may actually be impeding their [Google's] efforts to be more gender inclusive. He shared his thoughts with others in the Google culture of internal dialogue.
Google's termination of Mr. Damore would lend credibility to his assertion "we [Google] have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology." In the meantime, Google still has a self-professed gender gap problem.
Do no evil. Yeah, sure.
Google has a gender gap - among many gaps. It recognizes that gap. It has extensive programs geared to closing that gap.
Mr. Damore's internal memo was intended to assist in closing that gender gap. He suggested that Google's approach may actually be impeding their [Google's] efforts to be more gender inclusive. He shared his thoughts with others in the Google culture of internal dialogue.
Google's termination of Mr. Damore would lend credibility to his assertion "we [Google] have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology." In the meantime, Google still has a self-professed gender gap problem.
Do no evil. Yeah, sure.
9
Geee, monkey see no evil, Oooo, Oooo, monkey hear no evil, GLEee fully monkey speak no evil. We're the Google monkeys. Mr. Danmore's not one of us. He must go lest we see, hear or speak his evil, incorrect views.
2
The reality is that today's tech firms and their owners are no different from the robber barons of the past.
Silicon Valley corporations are all about making money, becoming rich. They act very liberally when it is in their best interests. Firms such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, Snapchat all support freedom of speech on their websites. You can post anything. Youtube is filled with copy write violations. These days Google inserts advertising into bootleg music playlists, but does not pay royalties. Titter and Snapchat are heavily used by adult cam-models. As the comedian Chris Rock once said "he's been watching porn since he was twelve years old!" (ref: his routine on the difference between men and women on Youtube) It takes a while for Facebook to remove a video with violence in it. Its all good for business.
However when the firms are faced with something that threatens their business they act in a harsh manner in the opposite direction just like corporations used to do, but without the violence (ex: great railway strike of 1877) The firing at Google is a modern day case in point.. These days clauses in employment contracts restricting disclosure of salary and other things are common in the tech industry. Based upon court documents Apple, Google, Adobe, Intel, Intuit and other tech firms had agreements not to poach one another's employees. What kind of laissez-faire business attitude is that?
Silicon Valley corporations are all about making money, becoming rich. They act very liberally when it is in their best interests. Firms such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, Snapchat all support freedom of speech on their websites. You can post anything. Youtube is filled with copy write violations. These days Google inserts advertising into bootleg music playlists, but does not pay royalties. Titter and Snapchat are heavily used by adult cam-models. As the comedian Chris Rock once said "he's been watching porn since he was twelve years old!" (ref: his routine on the difference between men and women on Youtube) It takes a while for Facebook to remove a video with violence in it. Its all good for business.
However when the firms are faced with something that threatens their business they act in a harsh manner in the opposite direction just like corporations used to do, but without the violence (ex: great railway strike of 1877) The firing at Google is a modern day case in point.. These days clauses in employment contracts restricting disclosure of salary and other things are common in the tech industry. Based upon court documents Apple, Google, Adobe, Intel, Intuit and other tech firms had agreements not to poach one another's employees. What kind of laissez-faire business attitude is that?
4
He can say what he wants when he works for himself. If he works for someone and his words don't reflect the company ethos, especially when it concerns the company or the industry, the company can choose to no longer retain his services.
8
I'm in Tech and you have to find a place you feel comfortable working. You spend 40+ hours a week interacting with colleagues. I'm female and have felt the isolation of not being part of the boy's club! I know that patronizing, mansplaining, testosterone behavior when I see it! Where I work now favors diversity and has a culture of putting people first: employees, customers and contributes time and resources to the community. Many places do not. Many companies pay lip service to diversity and opportunity. Having said that, I do not voice my political views except to a very few colleagues. It is not the place. Some of us agree to disagree and that's fine. I love where I now work because I'm valued for my contributions. As a woman and an older person that's wonderful. Most employers look at the stereotype and don't see beyond the fact that I'm an older woman. Keep the boys club in the tree house, not the office!
10
As much as I hate to defend large soulless corporations, I think it was quite appropriate to terminate the author. Change the argument from women to African-Americans or Jews, for example, and see how that fares in the company or in public. In short it's in the companies interest to avoid castigating fellow employees on the basis of generalizations. It certainly does not help workplace efficacy.
As to denying his 'right', he picked the wrong forum. We certainly have enough opinions flying through the wires and the air, without polluting a workplace. I'm sure he'll become a 15 minute right-wing hero and get a job where they appreciate his opinions - maybe even at work (e.g., Fox News).
As to denying his 'right', he picked the wrong forum. We certainly have enough opinions flying through the wires and the air, without polluting a workplace. I'm sure he'll become a 15 minute right-wing hero and get a job where they appreciate his opinions - maybe even at work (e.g., Fox News).
5
The individuals (Damore, Thiel, Luckey) cited in the article have committed sins against the reigning ideological orthodoxy. And like any orthodoxy, ideological or religious, there will always be dissident heretics to exile or burn at the stake.
9
It seems like Mr. Damore and others on the right seem to think their right to free speech come with a freedom from consequences of that speech.
In sharing his views, Mr. Damore could reasonably be held responsible for creating a hostile work environment and Google could be exposing itself legally for seeming to condone that. Of course he was going to get fired. Those are the consequences of demeaning others in your workplace.
In sharing his views, Mr. Damore could reasonably be held responsible for creating a hostile work environment and Google could be exposing itself legally for seeming to condone that. Of course he was going to get fired. Those are the consequences of demeaning others in your workplace.
7
Damore posted a public criticism of the company policy. That's not speaking up th or his company about concerns related to his employment. I have seen this done before but usually it is done as part of a person's last day. They usually publish and walk out or walk out and publish.
I don't think he'll win a lawsuit. And, in the meantime, he has become notorious in the industry. People do not thrive by suing their ex - employer.
I don't think he'll win a lawsuit. And, in the meantime, he has become notorious in the industry. People do not thrive by suing their ex - employer.
3
As a CEO I insisted on a work environment - where hiring and promotions were based on individual talents and abilities, without regard to race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex, age, or disability. It was sound business to put merit ahead of external differences. We later called it diversity.
But “diversity” has changed... Once a concentrated effort to overlook differences has become a prescription for accentuating them.
We y favor one or more types of people when hiring and promoting in order to appear “diverse”.. So what started as a struggle against discrimination has grown into a process that fosters discrimination.
E pluribus unum was one of our first national mottos. Translated it means “From many, one” or “Out of many, one”. It referred to the integration of our thirteen original colonies but later took on an additional meaning, given the pluralistic nature of our society drawn from immigration. The twin evils of the new diversity, suppression of free speech and underscoring our differences, is splintering us into a myriad of special interests.. E pluribus pluribus is becoming a more appropriate national motto meaning “Out of many, (we still have) many”.
But “diversity” has changed... Once a concentrated effort to overlook differences has become a prescription for accentuating them.
We y favor one or more types of people when hiring and promoting in order to appear “diverse”.. So what started as a struggle against discrimination has grown into a process that fosters discrimination.
E pluribus unum was one of our first national mottos. Translated it means “From many, one” or “Out of many, one”. It referred to the integration of our thirteen original colonies but later took on an additional meaning, given the pluralistic nature of our society drawn from immigration. The twin evils of the new diversity, suppression of free speech and underscoring our differences, is splintering us into a myriad of special interests.. E pluribus pluribus is becoming a more appropriate national motto meaning “Out of many, (we still have) many”.
8
Shoddy journalism. Damore's was not a "dissenting opinion." It was ascribing a psychological deficiency to one group (women) that would have been intolerable had it been ascribed to others (i.e.: blacks, latinos, gays, Jews,...Christians). Bigotry cloaked in pseudo-science is bigotry all the same.
10
This is why I deleted my facebook account, support for trump is support for racism, misogyny and white supremacy. Peter Thiel also paid legal fees for James O'Keefe whose fraudulent "expose" bought down ACORN. In my book Peter Thiel is a white supremacist. But now that I quit facebook, I'm so so much happier, that was unexpected.
5
The idea that a low level employee should have a voice in company policies simply because he's an angry white guy, is just another example of white male privilege.
8
The end justifies the means is perfectly acceptable for the jihadis in the anti-Trump crowd. Suppression of counter opinion is fascism at its core. Peter Theil sees a different way and will lose his voice on the board because the " know it all " stewards of liberalism have spoken.
What about his constitutional rights? What about the rights to freedom of speech? Wake up. You have crossed a line that is dangerous for all Americans
What about his constitutional rights? What about the rights to freedom of speech? Wake up. You have crossed a line that is dangerous for all Americans
4
Interestingly enough, one could easily make the case that James Damore is biologically unfit for his position.
He has many of the physical and social characteristics as someone with Lujan–Fryns syndrome or someone on the autism spectrum. He also fits the profile of a mass shooter, many of whom compose public manifestos before committing their crimes.
But hey, I am in no way stereotyping! I'm certain Damore would not be offended at all by these observations and would welcome an open, reasoned discussion about them.
He has many of the physical and social characteristics as someone with Lujan–Fryns syndrome or someone on the autism spectrum. He also fits the profile of a mass shooter, many of whom compose public manifestos before committing their crimes.
But hey, I am in no way stereotyping! I'm certain Damore would not be offended at all by these observations and would welcome an open, reasoned discussion about them.
13
Beware of any offer to have an "honest dialogue" about any contentious issue, public or private.
Honestly is never appreciated and your words will be used against you...unless your opinion is completely innocuous and non-controversial. Then preach to the choir, I guess.
Otherwise, keep your mouth shut, and work towards your goals/beliefs, whatever they may be.
Honestly is never appreciated and your words will be used against you...unless your opinion is completely innocuous and non-controversial. Then preach to the choir, I guess.
Otherwise, keep your mouth shut, and work towards your goals/beliefs, whatever they may be.
3
". . . it became a potent symbol of the tech industry's intolerance of ideological diversity." "Intolerant" is the dictionary definition of bigot.
4
Oh, please. In the US today, employees don't enjoy any protections. If your boss wakes up in the morning and simply doesn't like how you dress, they can fire you. This is the conservative pro-job-creator utopia that our owners have designed. How many times have we had to listen to "pro-business" folk tell us that if we don't like what our boss thinks or believes, we can go look for another job. Pro-business folk should be happy that Google fired someone who was, in their view, an employee they no longer like or value. What this person wrote (on company time) was, in the owner's opinion, inappropriate and so he got fired. Too bad.
Oh, and can the media now cover issues that are actually important, like infrastructure, education and job training? This story is nothing but a sideshow.
Oh, and can the media now cover issues that are actually important, like infrastructure, education and job training? This story is nothing but a sideshow.
10
re: Palmer Luckey. Don't forget he made his donations subsequently in a scheme designed to circumvent campaign financing laws. He convinced Milo Yiannopoulous publicize his intent to match donations on the subreddit The_Donald and also offered to pay for offensive memes. This behavior is far beyond donating to the presidential campaign of Donald Trump.
4
From a commenter:
"Those who are shocked this guy got fired are missing the point. This is a job, not a public forum or college classroom. Everyone, in every workplace, has to behave with a certain level of decorum and use judgment about what he or she says. Anyone who deliberately insults and provokes coworkers and, especially, one's bosses, risks being fired."
Do these same standards apply or not apply to QB Colin Kaepernick, who has not been picked up by an NFL team despite his demonstrated abilities as a QB?
"Those who are shocked this guy got fired are missing the point. This is a job, not a public forum or college classroom. Everyone, in every workplace, has to behave with a certain level of decorum and use judgment about what he or she says. Anyone who deliberately insults and provokes coworkers and, especially, one's bosses, risks being fired."
Do these same standards apply or not apply to QB Colin Kaepernick, who has not been picked up by an NFL team despite his demonstrated abilities as a QB?
5
Google had to fire him because going forward it would be very difficult for them to have any female employee work with or for him. If a racial bigot had written the same paper calling black people racially inferior there would be no question of firing that bigot immediately
9
How many have actually read Damore's memo? Where was the "ranting"? What was the "screed"? Since when do we conflate acknowledging difference with calling a group inferior? One can understand why Google had to (and had the right to) fire Mr. Damore. The reason most likely that many in the company share or at least can understand his arguments and the company is already under the microscope on these issues. But the media has completely abdicated it's duty and made itself a shill of the Twitter mob by misrepresenting Damore's reasoning and his ultimate intent. There are inherent biological differences between men and women. If not all Damore's stated differences. Some differences may be exacerbated or negated by how we nurture children. Damore was wrong to overstate difference and where it comes from. But he himself acknowledges that traits for engineers/workers at Google are a Venn diagram with overlap in the middle of men and women. You would think, reading most reactions, he had asked women to return to the kitchen. Why can't his views be more honestly grappled with? Because we lack answers? As is now common, more than one commentator has said that to respond at all to Damore's points would be to validate them. We no longer even have to argue our points? We simply use mob rule and label any dissent with pejoratives? I do not recognize this liberalism. It offends sacred values. It has no rigor. It is substance sacrificed at the altar of sensitivity.
7
A screed is a long piece of tedious writing. This most certainly qualifies. It's also kindergarten research and fake science.
His reasoning is: Why should we work toward parity? Women don't really want this anyway, and it's because of their biology.
That should clear things up.
His reasoning is: Why should we work toward parity? Women don't really want this anyway, and it's because of their biology.
That should clear things up.
6
There should be no ground given to intolerance and bigotry. None. Hiding behind cover of free speech and diversity of ideology is nonsense. Those who do not espouse this man's views but say we should allow him to express himself are aiding and abetting intolerance and bigotry, regardless of their intention. This is NOT an issue of free speech, and we should not allow ourselves to be bullied into believing it is. Intolerance, bigotry, misogyny, racism -- these "viewpoints" have no place in civilized American society.
1
Suddenly the alt-right derides the "cultural fit" and "at-will employment" arguments that animate so much of their reasoning that women are fabricating claims of discrimination in the workplace.
It's so funny that this young man attributes qualities like "logic" and "strength" and "pragmatism" to the right, while whining in a company-wide memo about how Google is being so unfair to him, and here's ten pages of why. That sounds a little neurotic and emotional, buddy.
Bottom line, most companies would be embarrassed to be associated with someone so unprofessional. Since he thinks he knows better than Alphabet how to run a tech company, he's now free to do so.
It's so funny that this young man attributes qualities like "logic" and "strength" and "pragmatism" to the right, while whining in a company-wide memo about how Google is being so unfair to him, and here's ten pages of why. That sounds a little neurotic and emotional, buddy.
Bottom line, most companies would be embarrassed to be associated with someone so unprofessional. Since he thinks he knows better than Alphabet how to run a tech company, he's now free to do so.
3
So far reporting on the "Tech Industry" is woefully inadequate to make broad assumptions such as this. Reporting by big papers and others has actually focused on only a tiny handful of a tiny region's companies: Silicon Valley.
The Tech industry as a whole is much bigger and much more inclusive than Silicon valley and the glitzy, sexy issues with which it attracts reporters.
Here's an eye opener to you and your non-tech readers:
Every single government in the world, every corporation, every non-profit, every NGO, every kid w/a smartphone has a IT department these days.
You, @NYT and others, will never convince me what happens at Uber and Google is emblematic of the (relatively boring) industry of which you and your readers are completely ignorant.
Unfortunately this situation won't change easily. Liberal Arts indoctrinated journalists will not report what an actual IT department looks like or how it operates because they wouldn't know how. It is boring to them and readers; it would never sell subscriptions!
The Tech industry as a whole is much bigger and much more inclusive than Silicon valley and the glitzy, sexy issues with which it attracts reporters.
Here's an eye opener to you and your non-tech readers:
Every single government in the world, every corporation, every non-profit, every NGO, every kid w/a smartphone has a IT department these days.
You, @NYT and others, will never convince me what happens at Uber and Google is emblematic of the (relatively boring) industry of which you and your readers are completely ignorant.
Unfortunately this situation won't change easily. Liberal Arts indoctrinated journalists will not report what an actual IT department looks like or how it operates because they wouldn't know how. It is boring to them and readers; it would never sell subscriptions!
3
The kid is entitled to his opinion though it makes me suspicious of his thinking. I wonder how his personal relationships with women are.
He's just going to have to hold his opinion in another workplace. I'm shocked that this shocks him. Perhaps he's not very bright.
2
Only 31 percent of google employees are women. By their own standards, they must fire the ChairPerson and CEO.
2
Political correctness? Science based manifesto? Devaluation of skills? Efforts to sustain the delusional primacy of maleness, in spite of all evidence proving otherwise. Always tend to require dismissal, defamation, rejection of equity in every attempt to validate bigotry and discrimination. All of this in an age when opinion is king and facts are tromped under our feet like scraps. I don't trust any opinion, especially the opinion of individuals who haven't walked my walk, felt my reaction to oppression, understood my compulsion to rise above their blatant ignorance and selfish service it to maintain a grasp on a tattered destructive set of values and beliefs that will never be the truth or an accurate reflection of the value of women in every aspect of human life. I keep telling myself I'm done with ignorant selfish people only to realize they are like cockroaches scurrying from the light into my sacred spaces for that last desperate meal.
1
I read Mr. Damore's memo. He didn't list biological differences between women and men. Instead, he listed stereotypes and advocated policies based on those stereotypes. If he intended to create a dialogue, it was a very counter-intuitive way of doing so. Here's a question for Mr. Damore: is it is a biological difference between women and men that explains why a man working at Google would feel confident circulating such an internal memorandum when his company is faced with gender discrimination lawsuits and is conducting an internal investigation?
4
google fired the guy for telling the inconvenient truth
1
This topic is philosphical. Remove your opinion on ANY topic and examine the underlying structure on which any topic is discussed.
Free speech MUST be defended above ANY specific topical discussion.
"I disagree with you Sir but I defend to the death your right to say it."
No one should be subjected to detriment for stating ANY opinion no matter how vile or reprehensible anyone else feels about the opinion.
Political, religious, philosophical viewpoints (no matter how vile) must be allowed. It is hard to listen to someone who makes your skin crawl. Of course it offends. So what? No one has the right to "not be offended" otherwise repression of free speech occurs which is far worse than anything the offending person says. Neo-nazis, KKK, prejudices (anti-gay, black, Muslim, conservative, liberal. . . . . whatever) must be allowed to express their opinion not because their opinion is right but because the "right to express it" is inviolable if one is to live in a free world. Repression of "wrong ideologies" by any group is still repression. Challenge the ideology you oppose with your own free speech. There are people out there who actually argue the Earth is flat. I grit my teeth, shake my head, take a deep breath, remember that some people are just "ornery" and "argumentative" for the sake of it no matter what you say. Of course they are wrong/hurting themselves but they have the right. This guy stated his reasoned opinion and should suffer no damage for it.
Free speech MUST be defended above ANY specific topical discussion.
"I disagree with you Sir but I defend to the death your right to say it."
No one should be subjected to detriment for stating ANY opinion no matter how vile or reprehensible anyone else feels about the opinion.
Political, religious, philosophical viewpoints (no matter how vile) must be allowed. It is hard to listen to someone who makes your skin crawl. Of course it offends. So what? No one has the right to "not be offended" otherwise repression of free speech occurs which is far worse than anything the offending person says. Neo-nazis, KKK, prejudices (anti-gay, black, Muslim, conservative, liberal. . . . . whatever) must be allowed to express their opinion not because their opinion is right but because the "right to express it" is inviolable if one is to live in a free world. Repression of "wrong ideologies" by any group is still repression. Challenge the ideology you oppose with your own free speech. There are people out there who actually argue the Earth is flat. I grit my teeth, shake my head, take a deep breath, remember that some people are just "ornery" and "argumentative" for the sake of it no matter what you say. Of course they are wrong/hurting themselves but they have the right. This guy stated his reasoned opinion and should suffer no damage for it.
3
Nobody stopped him from expressing his opinion. He's not in jail, or dead. He hasn't been arrested or threatened in any way by the government. He can stand on the street corner and scream his pseudo-science at the top of his lungs.
His rights haven't been abridged. He doesn't have the right to keep a job.
His rights haven't been abridged. He doesn't have the right to keep a job.
4
We are heading into an Orwellian society where well present differing opinions are not tolerated. Having read the entire email, I find the reactive hysteria to be an immature and overly sensitive response. I am surprised Mr. Damore was not sent to a re-education gulag until he was purged of all personal opinions. We are truly producing a culture of whimpy "snowflakes".
6
I fully agree with this guy getting fired, but there's not a facepalm big enough for the cringe-inducing statement asserting that he was fired for "perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes". I don't know how Google could have played right into Damore's hand any better than that - it's like they poured gasoline on the alt-right outrage fire. The stated reasoning should have been for him being a gigantic public relations liability, being a potential gender discrimination lawsuit liability now that it's known how he feels about women, and costing the company millions in lost productivity and damage control efforts.
5
So, I guess if the internal memo said African Americans were intellectually inferior that would be okay? After all, it's just a personal opinion... right?
5
Try to argue the facts instead of delving into what ifs.
2
Are the poor little white males getting beat up on again?
Maybe they can use Bing or Yahoo if it hurts their feelings so much.
Maybe they can use Bing or Yahoo if it hurts their feelings so much.
3
His paper is a Rorschach test.
Bigotry, homophobia, misogyny, racism and xenophobia, all without any validity, has no place in the tech industry.
Bigotry, homophobia, misogyny, racism and xenophobia should be penalized...by firing the bigot, homophobe, misogynist, racist xenophobe.
"...the tech industry is under the microscope for penalizing dissenting opinions."
Bigotry, homophobia, misogyny, racism and xenophobia should be penalized...by firing the bigot, homophobe, misogynist, racist xenophobe.
"...the tech industry is under the microscope for penalizing dissenting opinions."
1
Replace "women" with "black people" in this screed, and tell me a company doesn't have the right to fire him.
No one is taking away his right to think women are neurotic, and he can fill his blog and his friends' ears with these thoughts, but his employer doesn't have to put up with his idiocy.
No one is taking away his right to think women are neurotic, and he can fill his blog and his friends' ears with these thoughts, but his employer doesn't have to put up with his idiocy.
3
Very interesting article in Wired about how when he was a student st Harvard he offended women in a skit but even worse than that his LinkedIn page up until last week he listed himself as having a PHD from Harvard which is false
4
How could anything be worse than offending a woman in a skit? Or, did you mean that being a Harvard student was worse than ......?
@GLC, it was not "a woman", it was "women", i.e. more than one person.
2
The man made foolish statements and that is self obvious, but his termination is shameful. Google made itself look even worse by booting this man out simply because he did not agree with the predominant thinking of most people. So, Google has advanced intolerance and made it clear that in Googles' world, you say what you want, as long it is the party line. Goolge has become its own University of California where left wing babble is ok but right wing babble is not.
3
I have never seen an engineer survive publically criticizing his company's policies. Especially when his arguments are unconvincing and unsupported.
5
It seems that Mr. Damore has an antiquated view of what it takes to make a "good" anything. His failure to see that the competencies that women bring to projects that men do not make for better engineers, not worse ones. He's thinking is extremely limited here.
3
So some acne faced guy who can't get a woman to look sideways at him believes it is now time to start the Battle of the Sexes? Really little boy?
Yeesh, it isn't bad enough we have a child in the White House playing ego wars with Kim Jung Un, insulting military generals, immigrants legal and undocumented, bashing John McCain, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins who refuse to obey like good little puppies, now comes a middle age male who wants to control women.
Yeesh, it isn't bad enough we have a child in the White House playing ego wars with Kim Jung Un, insulting military generals, immigrants legal and undocumented, bashing John McCain, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins who refuse to obey like good little puppies, now comes a middle age male who wants to control women.
2
Didn't bother to read the caption under the pictures, did you little girl? Geeze
1
Violate company policy, get fired. Sound like a conservatve culture to me.
3
I don't really care what some random guy at google thinks about anything. I do, however, think that it is ridiculous that people can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that men and women are inherently different. In many ways. It's all well and good to believe that everything should be the same between the sexes, but it will never happen. Men and women are biologically different and to pretend otherwise is just as bad as using those differences to favor one sex over the other.
7
Firing Damore doesn't resolve the discussion he precipitated; it merely suppresses it and ends the issues for Google. I would think more of Google if they found a way to continue the dialogue without ending his career with them. This does not feel like a satisfactory conclusion.
5
Here, let me try to sum it up:
LIBERALS: We need to enhance diversity because different people have different strengths.
ME: So, not everyone has equal strengths?
LIBERALS: You're fired, racist!!
LIBERALS: We need to enhance diversity because different people have different strengths.
ME: So, not everyone has equal strengths?
LIBERALS: You're fired, racist!!
9
In what way is Mr. Damore qualified to address biological differences between men and women? He is not a doctor, medical researcher, biologist or geneticist. He is just a software engineer, and his memo was merely his opinion, based on nothing but his own prejudices. He was an "at will" employee and could be fired at any time for any reason, as all "at will" employees can be. There is no freedom of speech in a private place of employment. He has ruined his career--what other company, technology or otherwise, will ever hire him now. He should move to DC and try for a job in the Trump administration. Who else would have him?
6
I imagine Breitbart will take him, and that that was the plan all along.
2
If Mr. Andreessen is so foolish to ask this question: What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can't express themselves? - Perhaps he should ask a person of color who must live that life, to some capacity, every single day, instead of asking vapid rhetorical questions that in reality, don't actually affect him.
2
Has no one examined the possibility that he is a plant? That he has the backing of a Peter Thiel, along with a guaranteed job, once he has blown a hole through "the liberal workplace"?
1
Beyond all notions of left/right politics, the problem with supporting President Trump is that it reveals you're a sucker.
2
Since when is calling out asininity "culture wars"?
4
Based on some comments defending Damore, I read his poorly cited piece, and, contrary to what his defenders are saying found it replete with sexist and un-cited, unsupported declarations, which underpin his argument: women on average have higher "neuroticism"; women on average have more openness to feelings and aesthetics than ideas; women on average are more prone to anxiety. The foregoing are his main bullet points on gender differences. The others I have not mentioned are equally dubious, and are not footnoted or cited. While I think Google should have just ignored his poorly argued essay, rather than firing him, only because he is now a cause-celebre in the right, anyone reading his words would roll their eyes and think: "what an idiot!".
6
"My larger point is that we [Google] have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology. I'm also not saying that we [Google] should restrict people to certain gender roles; I'm advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)".
What an idiot! Indeed. Can you imagine working for a company that treated you like an individual and was tolerant of diverse ideologies.
Thank God Google (which may be redundant) has no tolerance for such heretical demagoguery.
What an idiot! Indeed. Can you imagine working for a company that treated you like an individual and was tolerant of diverse ideologies.
Thank God Google (which may be redundant) has no tolerance for such heretical demagoguery.
6
If the majority of the men in CS are like this guy, there's no wonder women don't want to work in this field.
3
As long as Damore does not do it on company time,equipment, or property nothing should be said to him.
They can fire him for whatever they want (or nothing) but it was done on company time, equipment and property.
3
California is an "at will" employment state. The memo by the former Google violated Google's code of conduct. There is not much more to it. Freedom of speech doesn't exist at a private work place especially when you post an internal memory. Never has.
2
You would think so right? But freedom of expression at the workplace apparently does exist under certain conditions in California:
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/08/07/it-may-be-illegal-for-google-to-puni...
"An employee does not have free reign to engage in political speech that disrupts the workplace, but punishing an employee for deviating from company orthodoxy on a political issue is not allowed either. Brown acknowledged that when she wrote that "an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions."
Third, the engineer complained in parts of his memo about company policies that he believes violate employment discrimination laws. Those policies include support programs limited by race or gender and promotional and hiring scoring policies that consider race and gender. It is unlawful for an employer to discipline an employee for challenging conduct that the employee reasonably believed to be discriminatory, even when a court later determines the conduct was not actually prohibited by the discrimination laws. In other words, the engineer doesn't have to be right that some of Google's diversity initiatives are unlawful, only that he reasonably believes that they are."
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/08/07/it-may-be-illegal-for-google-to-puni...
"An employee does not have free reign to engage in political speech that disrupts the workplace, but punishing an employee for deviating from company orthodoxy on a political issue is not allowed either. Brown acknowledged that when she wrote that "an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions."
Third, the engineer complained in parts of his memo about company policies that he believes violate employment discrimination laws. Those policies include support programs limited by race or gender and promotional and hiring scoring policies that consider race and gender. It is unlawful for an employer to discipline an employee for challenging conduct that the employee reasonably believed to be discriminatory, even when a court later determines the conduct was not actually prohibited by the discrimination laws. In other words, the engineer doesn't have to be right that some of Google's diversity initiatives are unlawful, only that he reasonably believes that they are."
2
With diversity one can see the end of Silicon Valley as a place of innovation. Instead we will have "political correctness" being valued over skills. Sad.
8
rather than taking for granted what this article implies is his message, read the gentleman's original memo.
he put forth a rational, scientifically based argument for his position, citing peer reviewed research.
so much for 'only the left follows real science'. anyone offended by what he said did not comprehend what he was saying.
google has certified their irrelevancy with this action...
he put forth a rational, scientifically based argument for his position, citing peer reviewed research.
so much for 'only the left follows real science'. anyone offended by what he said did not comprehend what he was saying.
google has certified their irrelevancy with this action...
5
His memo embodied none of those adjectives, and he isn't qualified to write about those issues knowledgeably anyway. It's silly pseudo-research with cherry-picked (and Wikipedia) cites.
3
People should be able to freely express themselves. Whether Google agree or disagree Mr. Damore's views they have no right to fire him for them. A company should hire its employees based on their skill.
As a liberal I belive that Mr. Damore's opinions are senseless and should not be a part of a modern society. however, as long as Mr. Damore does not use his opinions as an excuse to break the law there is no justification to fire him.
Even though I believe that google did not have a right fire Mr. Damore, I also believe that he should not have been working there. A man who values his opinions and is willing to fight for them should not be working for a company that openly promotes the opposite opinion. When someone chooses to work for a company which promotes different opinions he can choose to either silence his opinions or share them and face the consaquencess. Even though Google did not have the right to fire Mr. Damore, what he did is not ok.
I belive that niether google nor Mr. Demore acted properly. however, google took it a bit too far.
As a liberal I belive that Mr. Damore's opinions are senseless and should not be a part of a modern society. however, as long as Mr. Damore does not use his opinions as an excuse to break the law there is no justification to fire him.
Even though I believe that google did not have a right fire Mr. Damore, I also believe that he should not have been working there. A man who values his opinions and is willing to fight for them should not be working for a company that openly promotes the opposite opinion. When someone chooses to work for a company which promotes different opinions he can choose to either silence his opinions or share them and face the consaquencess. Even though Google did not have the right to fire Mr. Damore, what he did is not ok.
I belive that niether google nor Mr. Demore acted properly. however, google took it a bit too far.
1
Actually Google did have the right to fire him, he created a hostile working environment. He should have published his "memo" on a personal blog.
3
The free market has spoken: gender bias is bad for business.
4
The bottom line is equal pay for women.
They must pay the same prices for food, housing and fuel.
And very often some are providing for their child(ren), alone without support.
Why should women be forced to work longer hours to put a roof over their head and to eat? Cars and other necessities cost the same for all, yet wages aren't?
Jeopardizing a young person's career potential just because they are female is destructive. It seriously harms their lifetime employment earnings as well.
Considering that women too must pay off their college loans.
They must pay the same prices for food, housing and fuel.
And very often some are providing for their child(ren), alone without support.
Why should women be forced to work longer hours to put a roof over their head and to eat? Cars and other necessities cost the same for all, yet wages aren't?
Jeopardizing a young person's career potential just because they are female is destructive. It seriously harms their lifetime employment earnings as well.
Considering that women too must pay off their college loans.
2
Reasonably fair-minded article with emphasis on the free speech infringement aspect (yeah, Google’s a private company and can trash the First Amendment but human rights should still exist inside corporations).
The sacred diversity dictatorship can’t exist without coercion and suppression.
Furthermore, the ethics of some of these companies are not as righteous and high-minded as they like to pretend (Times columnist Ross Douthat points out that Apple’s new, giant campus has no day-care center but a 100,000 square foot “wellness center”); I’ll wager Apple does have an on-site kennel for dogs and cats recently rescued.
The craziness can only go so far before there is a sane correction. I hope Mr. Damore is the trigger for it.
The sacred diversity dictatorship can’t exist without coercion and suppression.
Furthermore, the ethics of some of these companies are not as righteous and high-minded as they like to pretend (Times columnist Ross Douthat points out that Apple’s new, giant campus has no day-care center but a 100,000 square foot “wellness center”); I’ll wager Apple does have an on-site kennel for dogs and cats recently rescued.
The craziness can only go so far before there is a sane correction. I hope Mr. Damore is the trigger for it.
5
There was no "free speech infringement" because the First Amendment has no bearing on this at all.
2
In the 80's, the CEO of the company I worked for said he only hired the best person for a job. The fact that he only saw merit in people like himself seemed to elude him. This gentleman's crime is that he had the audacity to say out loud what is generally believed. How white males act in the workplace is the only right way to act and achieve. Asian males figured it out and, if college admissions and tech companies are any guide, they have bested the white guys at their own game.
The rest of us, with different experiences related to color or gender, have to work harder and longer. This guy simply said what people who run companies, and work in government, believe no matter what phony egalitarian nonsense they espouse.
The rest of us, with different experiences related to color or gender, have to work harder and longer. This guy simply said what people who run companies, and work in government, believe no matter what phony egalitarian nonsense they espouse.
6
I mentioned this in a comment on the article from yesterday.
If you believe "The Bell Curve" book and it's "findings" were rubbish, then you should also see what the man in question at Google wrote was also rubbish. He said that 51% of the population isn't suited for tech!
What would you think if this man had instead written that, say, African-Americans were not suited to software engineering? Or Jews? Or LGBT? What he posited, with dubious citations, was just as bad.
If you believe "The Bell Curve" book and it's "findings" were rubbish, then you should also see what the man in question at Google wrote was also rubbish. He said that 51% of the population isn't suited for tech!
What would you think if this man had instead written that, say, African-Americans were not suited to software engineering? Or Jews? Or LGBT? What he posited, with dubious citations, was just as bad.
7
I don't see the parallel. I think the percentage of the population not suited to coding/engineering is a lot higher than 51%. The point was that the percentage of women suited to coding/engineering (as opposed to other specialties in tech) may be lower than the percentage of men, so maybe a natural breakdown working in coding/engineering would be 60/40 (pick your percentage split) rather than 50/50.
2
There is no biological imperative for that whatsoever, and he didn't produce any research supporting his position. Citing to cherry-picked nonsense isn't proof.
2
You didn't actually read "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber", the internal memo that Mr. Damore circulated, did you Dormouse42? There are several versions readily available on the net. It's only ten pages. Give it a try, just for the sake of argument.
Then, you should realize how absurd your 51% comment is.
Then, you should realize how absurd your 51% comment is.
1
Nope. There is no need whatsoever to tolerate Intolerance. Period.
Andreesen asked the wrong question "What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can’t express themselves?”
He should instead ask "What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can't BE black, and/or female, and/or any other target of Intolerance?"
Andreesen asked the wrong question "What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can’t express themselves?”
He should instead ask "What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can't BE black, and/or female, and/or any other target of Intolerance?"
3
Culture wars? Really? Employees with misogynistic, racist, homophobic or you name it traits whether manifested through speech or not should not be tolerated. It's not just a culture thing. It creates a hostile work environment. White men grow up. Learn to live with and accept other people.
8
Culture war? It's bigotry, plain and simple. Don't dignify it just because the pablum was expressed by someone who worked at Google.
7
So there is freedom of speech and thought as long as the liberals agree with it? It is ok to criticize us evil straight males as a group but none other?
1
As a conservative, I believe Google had every right to make the stupid decision to fire Mr. Damore. The result will be a reduction in honest and open discussion at Google as employees more than ever regurgitate politically correct thought. Google will get more "yes men" (can I say that or have I created a hostile work environment) and less innovation as a result of fearful people toeing the corporate line.
3
Remember when Google's MOTTO was "Don't be evil?"
Well, we can forget that now.
Well, we can forget that now.
2
There's a difference between expressing yourself and creating a hostile work environment in which you degrade and demoralize your coworkers. It is actually illegal to create a hostile work environment. See: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/harassment.cfm. And please don't lump the hostility expressed in the Google memo with a company accepting a variety of political views. One has nothing to do with the other.
5
I've been fortunate to have been at the forefront of the generation that celebrated the promotion of women to top management. I've worked for, with, and hired women executives up to and including CEOs.
These women were far from being diversity hires, even though many insecure and far less competent men denigrated them as such.
Mr. Damore's insecurity is really his problem, isn't it? Even the most competent women couldn't fix that.
These women were far from being diversity hires, even though many insecure and far less competent men denigrated them as such.
Mr. Damore's insecurity is really his problem, isn't it? Even the most competent women couldn't fix that.
13
I come from the generation where i could only be a secretary but went back to college and graduated at age 40. I was hired by the head of a TelecommDept who as promised he gave me the oportunity to become a Telecom Project Manager from which I retired as a Sr Tech Officer.
2
Would there be a "debate" of any sort if instead of "woman" the culprit's focus had been "brown" or "black" people? No. He would have been dismissed, and most rightly so, as a rank bigot. So, it is curious indeed how women continue to be the one MAJORITY that is mistreated and maligned in so many subtle and so many blunt ways with so little consequence. Or perhaps it is because they are a majority that we continue to witness such fear and such loathing?
4
I've know many, many Harvard and MIT grads, truly bright, intelligent people, who are basically misogynists. Unfortunately, it seems like a whole lot of them have migrated to the San Francisco Bay Area. It's truly sad.
8
Funny how discrimination against women turns into a narrative about culture wars and free speech. It's just another way to diminish/minimize the real impact of discrimination.
10
I am a center liberal, and am ashamed at how many liberals have reacted -- when someone disagrees with you, it is dangerouns to shut them down on principle without engaging in debate, no matter how offensive. Does anyone beleive that the beliefs of those who disagree with you will simply go away if there is no discussion? If we do not talk about it does it mean it doesnt exist? Do we allow free discussion so long as it is about ideas we agree with?
Clearly the employee's thoughts are not unique --he simply gave voice to what many believe but wont say publically for fear of exactly what happened to this guy. That is dangerous -- at some point there will be bad counterreaction as those people, many of whom are just as smart and decent as you, will seek redress against what they perceive as an elitist, liberal conspriracy. Better to get it out in the open, force them to use facts, not hyperbole, keep debate focussed on supportable evidence, than to give them cause to claim that liberals are tyrants of idealogy.
Clearly the employee's thoughts are not unique --he simply gave voice to what many believe but wont say publically for fear of exactly what happened to this guy. That is dangerous -- at some point there will be bad counterreaction as those people, many of whom are just as smart and decent as you, will seek redress against what they perceive as an elitist, liberal conspriracy. Better to get it out in the open, force them to use facts, not hyperbole, keep debate focussed on supportable evidence, than to give them cause to claim that liberals are tyrants of idealogy.
6
Good start. Next don't assume that a non-liberal opinion is offensive.
1
I stand 100% with Google!!!!!!!!
5
If you said that at my work place, I would hope you would be fired.
:)
:)
1
if the owners were neo-Nazis and they fired all those attacking Nazism would still be the case?
2
That's not the issue. In reality, if the owners were neo-Nazis who fired non-believing employees that would be their legal right, just as it was Google's legal right to fire their employee. For any reason, or no reason.
1
I wish there was data on the number of times people say sexist and discriminatory things at work and do *not* get fired. That number is far, far higher than the number of those who *do* get fired.
There are plenty of places and ways to share a manifesto of your views -- bring it to HR! -- just don't distribute it internally to your colleagues. Duh.
There are plenty of places and ways to share a manifesto of your views -- bring it to HR! -- just don't distribute it internally to your colleagues. Duh.
5
I'm the mirror version of James Damore. I work in the software industry, but my company is located in a red state. My left of center views are definitely the minority opinion among my coworkers. Sometimes it does get annoying that my coworkers feel total license to freely share their conservative political opinions openly and brazenly, such as in company all-hands meetings. But I suck it up because I'm trying to model my personal beliefs that divisive issues like religion and politics aren't appropriate for discussion in the workplace. My solution is to bring a crossword to the meeting so that I can better ignore the political chatter and leave the meeting feeling like I can peacefully coexist with people whose views differ from mine. What is the point of turning it into a drawn-out moral battle that doesn't change anyone's mind?
6
have you ever thought of throwing in a monkey wrench? I worked at a primarily Jewish law firm and, whenever the mentioned that they would never tolerate their daughers marrying a goy I would mention that as a follower of Thoth, ancient Monkey God of writing, I could understand their tolerance.
2
The "Thought Police" are looking right over your shoulder! My take-away from this is that Google does not encourage the free exchange of all ideas, only those that adhere to its official orthodoxy.
13
just like most of society, especially in this day and age.
4
considering women as humans is hardly an orthodoxy. I guess your sexism has been bolstered by trumpism.
1
Are you allowed to use company resources to express ideas which violate your employer's orthodoxy on company time?
I thought not.
I thought not.
3
Mr. Damore's comments strike a chord because he writes from a position of extreme privilege, and isn't satisfied because it's not complete privilege. He states his warped case well, but it's still warped. Corporate progressives in Silicon Valley are only doing, from the "other side," what the corporate world has always done, and continues to do. Only because the circumstances are reversed is it a "culture war."
2
A dissenting opinion is: "I think too much money goes to people who already have more then 99% of tbe population." Bigotry is: "I think over half the population is inferior to me because of their sex and shouldn't be allowed to work next to me." This is not a "Culture War". It's the same battle women have faced for millenia: the battle to be recognized by men as just as human as men are. These phrases are insulting and dismissive when used in this context. Damore is a garden-variety woman-hater, nothing more or less.
4
Mr. Damore surely has the right to express his opinion. Because of his nasty opinion, now he created hug tension between him and his female colleagues. Google requires all its workers to work together to provide the best services and increase its profits. With the hug tension that Mr. Damore created, how can he work with others? Google fired him simply because it did not need someone who worked alone. Why do people think Google is wrong because of the first Amendment? If you hire 10 people to build your house and one of those people does not collude with others, do you think your house can be built on time?
2
Since the dawn of recorded history, a common method for dealing with an opinion which is both contrary to established orthodoxy, and difficult to refute, has been to kill the person offering the opinion . . . literally, or, in this case, figuratively.
6
Hate is not a dissenting opinion. We have got to stop dealing in false equivalencies.
7
Again with the hate??
1
so you want to see all black studies programs in US colleges supporting the mass murderer Robert Mugabe disbanded?
News Flash.
Google is a PRIVATE company.
No one is "suppressing" Mr Damore, period. End of story. Full stop.
He can spew what ever he wants on his free time, not company time.
If Mr Damore said African Americans were somehow "inferior" how would people respond?.
If Mr Damore said gay's were to dramatic or unqualified what would be the response.
He said his rant on company time, if on the other hand he wrote an OpEd to a newspaper and was fired for said comments, well that would be a different story.
Spare me the fake outrage about suppressing his views.
Google is a PRIVATE company.
No one is "suppressing" Mr Damore, period. End of story. Full stop.
He can spew what ever he wants on his free time, not company time.
If Mr Damore said African Americans were somehow "inferior" how would people respond?.
If Mr Damore said gay's were to dramatic or unqualified what would be the response.
He said his rant on company time, if on the other hand he wrote an OpEd to a newspaper and was fired for said comments, well that would be a different story.
Spare me the fake outrage about suppressing his views.
8
It is reasonable for a company to require its employees to keep private their disagreements with the company's policies. That's a sufficient reason to fire Mr. Damore, and Google's executives should say nothing more: going on about his 'perpetuation of “harmful gender stereotypes' does have the odor of PC doubletalk.
If you decide to work for Google or another such company, you get the whole package. It's one reason to decide not to work at a company.
If you decide to work for Google or another such company, you get the whole package. It's one reason to decide not to work at a company.
I am puzzling over WHY Mr. Damore wrote this. What prompted him to act as an agent provacateur on the issue of women's abilities to work in tech fields? He could not have imagined there would be no response on such a hot topic; if so then it wrote his "manifesto" specifically to gain attention and notoriety for himself. It is hard for me to see this as a serious effort to address the complex issue of why there are so few women in tech fields, and at Google or a serious example of the culture wars invading Silicon Valley.
5
I imagine he wanted a job at Breitbart or its equivalent. Perhaps he was on his way out anyway once they found out he was claiming degrees he didn't have.
2
With the rise of social conservatism, it has become 'politically correct to be politically incorrect'. The Trump campaign -- in particular the debates -- made bullying acceptable in front of millions. The result: It unleashed a torrent of incivility -- perhaps an incivility that many now feel free to espouse.
Mr Damore speaks (or writes) revealing opinions from the late 19th century. That he harbors these worn out attitudes is his prerogative but that he chose the Google podium to expound upon them is not. Google hired him to work and if Google has a policy on diversity and gender that he found unbearable, Mr. Damore could have easily resigned and then made a statement to the media. Perhaps he was seeking his '15 minutes of fame' in the media circuit.
Mr Damore speaks (or writes) revealing opinions from the late 19th century. That he harbors these worn out attitudes is his prerogative but that he chose the Google podium to expound upon them is not. Google hired him to work and if Google has a policy on diversity and gender that he found unbearable, Mr. Damore could have easily resigned and then made a statement to the media. Perhaps he was seeking his '15 minutes of fame' in the media circuit.
7
The false equivalence of the "culture war" is getting tiresome. Discrimination, in this way of thinking, is treated as just another point of view or political opinion.
"I think women aren't good at programming," gets treated as a worthy expression of considered opinion. Somehow, we're supposed to accept the idea that this is merely "conservative" or an example of challenging the prevailing culture.
It's neither. If he'd been fired for saying, "I think Trump is more charming than Obama," then you could argue that he was unfairly punished for a political opinion. Circulating a memo saying women are inherently less capable isn't political.
Stop treating this guy and people like him as victims of the thought police.
"I think women aren't good at programming," gets treated as a worthy expression of considered opinion. Somehow, we're supposed to accept the idea that this is merely "conservative" or an example of challenging the prevailing culture.
It's neither. If he'd been fired for saying, "I think Trump is more charming than Obama," then you could argue that he was unfairly punished for a political opinion. Circulating a memo saying women are inherently less capable isn't political.
Stop treating this guy and people like him as victims of the thought police.
9
Men and women are different, and the extent of any differences cannot be raised, however reasonably, at Google. As others have suggested, I invite everyone to read the memo itself.
6
I did. It's terrible research. I'd have given him a "D" and then fired him.
2
The paper is quite mild. Some links and references are to sympathetic sources (blog posts), most are mainstream (NYer, Atlantic, Psychology Today, etc) there are no Wikipedia links that I see. Not an A but certainly not a D. The author does come across as young but then again is is.
1
Kim and what are your qualifications to make such a judgement? Are you a neurologist? A programmer with experience? Or is it just because you area a woman?
1
I am male. I am a computer programmer, retired after forty years in Silicon Valley and Northern California, and I have worked as a matter of course both for and with female colleagues. I see no difference in professional competence between males and females.
Among my colleagues, I count the single most generally competent person it has been my pleasure to know: a woman.
Among my colleagues, I count the single most generally competent person it has been my pleasure to know: a woman.
14
Thank you, phhht. You are a truly enlightened person who happens to be a man.
1
I'm a woman who spent 30 years in the tech industry in Silicon Valley. I've managed both men and women and worked for both men and women.
I've admired the skills of both --
I've seen issues of competition and insecurity with both.
That said, my mentors -- the people who helped me reach executive management -- were all men.
Men who admired my willingness to take risks to get to a better outcome and still held the door open for me as we walked into the meeting.
I've admired the skills of both --
I've seen issues of competition and insecurity with both.
That said, my mentors -- the people who helped me reach executive management -- were all men.
Men who admired my willingness to take risks to get to a better outcome and still held the door open for me as we walked into the meeting.
1
As a woman in a male-dominated cademic field, I disagree with Mr. Damore's conclusions, which reveal both ignorance of history (a long list of women who excelled in science, from Hypatia to Ada Lovelace and beyond), and the misunderstanding of evolutionary psychology (statistical differences in aggregate have no bearing on individual cases). However, firing him was unconscionable. If feminism becomes a religion rather than a rational discourse, count me out.
6
The only thing that will change the model is ACTION, Mor. Thanks to Google for taking the correct one.
3
Misogyny is misogyny - Google had every right to let the man go. This is only being questioned because the misogyny in this case was written with fact-like statements - instead of the more brash version we're used to seeing. Women have excelled in all fields when given equal opportunity - they are the best architects, doctors, scientists, and lawyers in the world. There is no reason the tech industry should be any different.
4
Confirmation bias is when you actively ignore all examples that contradict your view and only pay attention to the data that supports it. When you say someone is not capable based on your own standards you are setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy. Mr. Damore uses his standards alone when evaluating women who as he admits are not like men. That makes them less skilled in his opinion but he doesn't look at what they have accomplished. What exactly did he think the reaction to his manifesto would be? At least it showed very clearly what women are up against in most jobs and especially technology. Confirmation bias is a difficult hurdle to overcome when a potential employer already believes your group is not capable. This is true for older workers as well.
2
Everybody knows the saying “Garbage in; garbage out.” Your conclusions are only as good as your input data and premises.
Computer engineers are rationalists,use binary thinking This is also the knowledge model of intellectual dictatorships They stipulate definitions, whether upon factual basis or not, and draw conclusions in a binary derivation: yes/no; true/false. So if your premises are based on the experience and needs of healthy white males,you are not taking advantage of all the knowledge available to you That is what privileged thinking is. You will probably draw conclusions that apply to healthy white males but not to anybody else
This rationalism, also a feature of Communism, doesn’t get us very far. Concepts and premises have to be flexible enough to be modified by new experiences. So it is important to base them on as much information as possible. The test is their usefulness and factual predictions.This is how science operates and why we work with knowledge that has been contributed by people from all over the world, all walks of life. You cannot say a priori, though rationalists would like to, that your system will be confirmed in all instances at all times.
In a company like Google, whose aim is supposed to be the spread of knowledge, it would be fatal to that goal to limit input. Mr. Damore’s position, which he is right to call “ideology,” undermines and deconstructs Google’s supposed mission and would it prevail, would destroy all confidence in its products.
Computer engineers are rationalists,use binary thinking This is also the knowledge model of intellectual dictatorships They stipulate definitions, whether upon factual basis or not, and draw conclusions in a binary derivation: yes/no; true/false. So if your premises are based on the experience and needs of healthy white males,you are not taking advantage of all the knowledge available to you That is what privileged thinking is. You will probably draw conclusions that apply to healthy white males but not to anybody else
This rationalism, also a feature of Communism, doesn’t get us very far. Concepts and premises have to be flexible enough to be modified by new experiences. So it is important to base them on as much information as possible. The test is their usefulness and factual predictions.This is how science operates and why we work with knowledge that has been contributed by people from all over the world, all walks of life. You cannot say a priori, though rationalists would like to, that your system will be confirmed in all instances at all times.
In a company like Google, whose aim is supposed to be the spread of knowledge, it would be fatal to that goal to limit input. Mr. Damore’s position, which he is right to call “ideology,” undermines and deconstructs Google’s supposed mission and would it prevail, would destroy all confidence in its products.
6
Maybe someone has made this point already but I've curious that in response to Mr. Damore's comments there hasn't been more of a pushback on his description of the work environment. Whether there are actual differences between men and women, and whether those differences are genetic or socially constructed, should we not also be asking why the workplace is so high stress in the first place and whether such high stress levels are beneficial to those who work there and for society at large? Perhaps what Mr. Damore is really bringing to our attention is the need for social and economic policies to reduce workplace stress, at which point whether women and men have different stress responses would be immaterial. Of course, that in itself won't stop those who want to preserve male privileges in the workplace from finding some other rationale. People are different and such differences always leave open the door for stereotyping and prejudice.
4
Why is it that after all this time and all these efforts at diversity that Google remains predominately male, white and Asian? One could assume that Google management is comfortable with this situation. Firing someone who points out management's comfort enables Google to issue a sugary memo claiming that they don't like things the way they are, even as nothing seems to to change.
2
if only there were more female employees at Google it would be doing so much better. Is this not self evident? Hence the male, whites (but not the Asians, naturally) need to go to make room.
Why do we insist that irrational ideas have a place in discussions, debates and open forums? Let's not discuss Google's HR policy since they can take care of themselves. As human beings, are we not capable of discerning what are legitimate issues worth debating that are based on facts, human experience and rational thought? While biological differences between men and women do exist, we also know that those can be overcome to achieve common goals and that we base our value as human beings on things greater than what our DNA's tell us.
1
"Why do we insist that irrational ideas have a place in discussions, debates and open forums?"
then we hereby nominate you as the arbiter of what is and is not an irrational idea.
please remind me again, which constitutional amendment is that covered by?
then we hereby nominate you as the arbiter of what is and is not an irrational idea.
please remind me again, which constitutional amendment is that covered by?
the Constitution is your only guidebook?
1
Sorry, you just can't look at this situation from a perspective that the rules haven't changed. Our new president if off the charts and he's the difference here. Does anyone think that the Netflix CEO would have berated the PayPal CEO if Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio had won the election and he publicly supported them? Of course not. Trump is not normal, in terms of the usual personal and political variances between presidents and the way they conduct themselves in office. Does anyone, even Trump's supporters, doubt that? How many years do you need to go back to find a president who was endorsed by the KKK and counsels with advisers who believe in the supremacy of the white race? People are fearful that the country is crumbling from a moral standpoint. Give them a break for being a bit on edge.
5
Board members SHOULD be evaluated on how well they are doing in what should be their primary role which is ensuring that shareholder value is maximized. Reed Hastings was totally out of line to tell Peter Thiel that his political leanings would impact his "evaluation." That is not a meritocracy as it should be - that is political orthodoxy run amuck in a corporation.
4
You mean to tell me that the president and his administration will have no impact on shareholder value? You need to look at the big picture.
1
Amazing that the Google managers who have bragged in writing that they keep blacklists of workers who the managers believe to be insufficiently progressive, and who have bragged in writing that they have launched private "investigations" into the opinions of fellow workers, so fellow workers with whom they discover they disagree on non-business-related topics can be "outed" and given bad reviews and kept off teams and assignments, still have their jobs.
Amazing that so many people commenting here are completely untroubled by ideological blacklists and ideological witch hunts within a company as powerful as Google.
Those people, with access to your data at Google (or Amazon, or Apple), can also "investigate" you and destroy you at any time.
The issues here go so much deeper than Mr. Damore and his memo.
Amazing that so many people commenting here are completely untroubled by ideological blacklists and ideological witch hunts within a company as powerful as Google.
Those people, with access to your data at Google (or Amazon, or Apple), can also "investigate" you and destroy you at any time.
The issues here go so much deeper than Mr. Damore and his memo.
6
Please provide the source(s) for your allegations of these so-called "blacklists".
1
The idea that the tech industry is some meritocracy fueled by liberal ideas is one of the sillier ideas of our time. It's ok to think and act like this engineer but saying it is damaging to the idealized but false presentation of Google culture, so he has to go.
3
Mr. Damore, supposedly an authority in his field, expressed a speculation about the reasons for the under-representation of women in his industry that had no basis in research in the relevant fields. It also reduced gender differences to an oversimplified binary, putting all women i(and men) into the same basket. Very unscientific--and this was a speculation that was hurtful to his employer's efforts (and efforts in general) to attract women to the math and science fields.
Google was right to fire him, though it should have cited his demonstrated incompetence in reasoning as the cause.
Google was right to fire him, though it should have cited his demonstrated incompetence in reasoning as the cause.
8
"Incompetence in reasoning"? I think you confuse "reasoning" with opinion. And certainly in the tech business, "reason" has never had value in the workplace.
2
His "opinion" was based on incompetent reasoning and shoddy data. The logical leaps in his manifesto remind me of the word salads of people suffering from schizophrenia.
3
Google does not need a reason to fire anyone, nor does any other California Company. CA is an "at will" state, most employees of private companies in CA are all "at will" employees who can be fired for any reason or no reason at all with no warning.
Everyone is told this upfront when they are hired and reminded of it periodically.
Everyone is told this upfront when they are hired and reminded of it periodically.
1
I know that women are equally capable as men in fields such as chemistry, physics, mathematics, and computer engineering. The apparent imbalance in the male/female ratio in computer sciences must, therefore have to do with the field being unattractive or unappealing to many women. Thus, the field of computer science is being deprived of tremendous talent! Society would obviously benefit greatly if we could identify the source of the problem. I suspect that it might be related to attitudes and biases possessed by many people currently in the field. If it is thought that I might be referring to "sexist" attitudes...then that is correct, not as an accusation, but as a reality that must be overcome and eliminated.
5
A memo is at most two to three pages once you get to ten pages you are writing a manifesto. Your employer hires you with certain employment policies regarding conduct and behavior if you don't want to abide by them you don't have to take the job. The only speech that is protected is from government interference not from employer interference while on the job. If you want to publish a manifesto on the issues of employment of women chose another form.
7
Excellent point. Many news outlets, including NYT, refer to this ten page, single-spaced document as a "memo". Manifesto, screed, or rant are more appropriate descriptors.
2
There seem to be many people who do not understand statistics. Women as a population have different interests than men as a population. It is not surprising that a larger proportion of men than women are in tech, just like a larger proportion of men than women are football fans. This does not mean that a specific woman cannot be successful in tech or cannot be a football fan. What it does mean is that if we aim for 50/50 gender distributions in all employment categories, we are going to be stymied by different interests. Think about how hard it would be to get 50/50 gender balance in kindergarten teachers. I cannot imagine how that would happen without quotas or pay premiums for men.
22
Statistics can say whatever one wants them to. Every single system we live under was developed by men for men. Every single one.
Women - over one-half the population - have been essentially been EXCLUDED from education in official "finance" and higher mathematics because most do not think like men. It's how men control the power - exclude others.
Women around the world must join together to form an OVERGROUND with a separate economic, health, education and civil model. Women generally have a much higher form of social consciousness than linear-thinking men with their fight or flight mentalities. There IS another way and socially conscious women - and the men who love them - can create a much better, more peaceful form of society. The male-dominator hate-anger-fear-WAR-pillage-rape-plunder model has been around too long and caused enough destruction in the world.
Time for it to end. Time for a socially conscious partnership society where women and men share power equally.
Women - over one-half the population - have been essentially been EXCLUDED from education in official "finance" and higher mathematics because most do not think like men. It's how men control the power - exclude others.
Women around the world must join together to form an OVERGROUND with a separate economic, health, education and civil model. Women generally have a much higher form of social consciousness than linear-thinking men with their fight or flight mentalities. There IS another way and socially conscious women - and the men who love them - can create a much better, more peaceful form of society. The male-dominator hate-anger-fear-WAR-pillage-rape-plunder model has been around too long and caused enough destruction in the world.
Time for it to end. Time for a socially conscious partnership society where women and men share power equally.
4
The UN recommended a goal of 30% women, and most nations and businesses follow that recommendation as a target for 2020 or 2030. So this whole "50/50" thing is nonsense dreamed up by sexist idiots. But you're right that men would never take the pay cut that women's jobs require -- even when the woman is working the same job as a man.
njglea: public schools are run by mostly women, as most elementary teachers are women, and women dominate the Teacher's Unions, and school boards and PTAs and so on. And they have created a public school system (failing wildly) that benefits girls over boys, as it is designed for the things that girls excel at and boys not so much. As a result, boys are failing school at much higher rates than girls and many fewer boys go on to college.
So you are incorrect.
So you are incorrect.
It must be noted that Google allegedly invites different opinions and ideas. You can't simultaneously make a claim you are open to ideas and then fire someone for making a reasoned argument against a policy.
Google can fire him for not adhering to their culture, they cannot fire him and claim they are open and tolerant to different ides. This can now fairly be seen as empty rhetoric from Google.
Google can fire him for not adhering to their culture, they cannot fire him and claim they are open and tolerant to different ides. This can now fairly be seen as empty rhetoric from Google.
12
The writer is a right-wing activist who drank their kook-aid. The only reason for the "memo" was to cause more trouble. That's all the hate-anger-fear-WAR-LIES, LIES, LIES right wing knows how to do. It doesn't take ANY brains to cause dissonance or destruction.
Stop playing the games that would destroy democracy in America and destroy the world. Don't be stupid - particularly if you have an MBA in anything.
Stop playing the games that would destroy democracy in America and destroy the world. Don't be stupid - particularly if you have an MBA in anything.
3
This wasn't an "idea". This was an assertion of fact without any accompanying evidence. It was 10-pages plus of one guy certain that women are somehow less tech-capable. The big question is why write it at all? What did he hope to accomplish? It could be he knew exactly what he was doing and what the end result would be. He's now a hero to the alt-right. He is a nationally known figure. Can a book deal be far behind?
I worked at Google. They are definitely open to ideas. What they aren't open to is irrational hostile rants against coworkers.
5
More poor-little-me white male reverse discrimination "news". Like the poor little catholic church and christianity are under attack. Pat Robertson apparently said, on his religious show, that fox so-called news is under attack with "fake" news about their sex-sick men and said they should fight back. What a crock.
White men + religion = constant destruction of civilization and civil rights.
Pat Robertson also said that because fox so-called news is under attack, "Look who they're watching. Rachel Maddow has the #1 cable ratings?"
WAY TO GO, RACHEL! PLEASE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. Your co-ordination with other media to get the REAL news out may just save democracy in America and around the world.
White men + religion = constant destruction of civilization and civil rights.
Pat Robertson also said that because fox so-called news is under attack, "Look who they're watching. Rachel Maddow has the #1 cable ratings?"
WAY TO GO, RACHEL! PLEASE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. Your co-ordination with other media to get the REAL news out may just save democracy in America and around the world.
6
...from a person who is living in a Western democracy created and founded by white men, using laws and rules they created. Why don't you move to an African country run founded by black muslims - particularly one where slavery is still legal, or a mideastern arab muslim one, where men can have multiple wives.
Oh, that's right - things really aren't that bad in the West.
Oh, that's right - things really aren't that bad in the West.
1
Um, you know that one of Google's founders wasn't a white man using "laws and rules of Western democracy," right? No one is asking you to move to Africa, but reading a book would be a good idea.
2
There is no culture war, just a sexist dope of an engineer wanting to harm women.
16
I'm a retired IBM employee. I spent 30+ years with IBM, mostly with the Global Services Division and its predecessor organizations.
Two of the best programmers I worked with were women. One of them was recognized by local management for her remarkable abilities and was promoted to Watson Labs: she earned a PhD in computer science, paid for by IBM.
The second woman was essential to the development of mainframe operating systems, specifically the portions of the operating systems that received and resolved hardware error interrupts.
Two of the best managers I had were women, one of them, African-American. They were "best" based on their technical knowledge and their ability to handle the many aspects of management: marketing new business, managing projects and client relationships, recruiting new employees and employee development.
I wonder if James Damore is a product of his upbringing. My mother was a college graduate; she earned her degree in the 1920s and wanted to pursue a career as a chemist. When I was in high school, I was able to go to her with questions about my chemistry and Latin homework. I assumed that was normal.
But I've met other men who had different, anti-woman points of view. They were raised in homes where the mother wasn't well educated or where she routinely denigrated by the father and sons. I was taken aback when these men would declare that a project would fail because a woman was managing it.
Prejudice has no place in the workplace!
Two of the best programmers I worked with were women. One of them was recognized by local management for her remarkable abilities and was promoted to Watson Labs: she earned a PhD in computer science, paid for by IBM.
The second woman was essential to the development of mainframe operating systems, specifically the portions of the operating systems that received and resolved hardware error interrupts.
Two of the best managers I had were women, one of them, African-American. They were "best" based on their technical knowledge and their ability to handle the many aspects of management: marketing new business, managing projects and client relationships, recruiting new employees and employee development.
I wonder if James Damore is a product of his upbringing. My mother was a college graduate; she earned her degree in the 1920s and wanted to pursue a career as a chemist. When I was in high school, I was able to go to her with questions about my chemistry and Latin homework. I assumed that was normal.
But I've met other men who had different, anti-woman points of view. They were raised in homes where the mother wasn't well educated or where she routinely denigrated by the father and sons. I was taken aback when these men would declare that a project would fail because a woman was managing it.
Prejudice has no place in the workplace!
19
I'm just amazed how few frame this as a worker's rights issue. It is shameful that in America a worker is not allowed to express his or her opinions, however misguided, without getting fired. Employers should not have the right to fire-at-will. This is yet one more part of life in which Americans lag with respect to the rest of the developed world, and yet one more reason why other peoples live better. Going to work everyday on tiptoes is not conducive to a good life.
4
Sometimes expressed opinions lead to a hostile working environment, that is the premise for the firing, for better or worse.
4
I believe you are misinformed. The rest of the developed world, Europe, Canada, etc., would have fired Damore in a heartbeat for the same reasons that Google did. They likely would have gone further and labeled his ten page, single spaced screed as hate speech.
1
For one thing, Google didn't fire at will. It fired for cause: Damore created a hostile workplace. And it is a worker's rights issue. No worker should have to deal with the open hostility that Damore expressed in his 10 page screed. Work is where you work, not where you're forced to listen to a 28 year old straight white dude go on and on about how you aren't biologically suited for the work because you're so anxious all the time because pseudoscience. Gee, I wonder what's making the women around him anxious?
2
We the people have bought into this narrative that all people are equivalent. This is irrational, counter-productive, anti-science, and downright harmful. To be different is not to be inferior; those words are not synonyms. By refusing to acknowledge differences between different groups of people -- women and men, blacks and whites, extraverts and introverts, religious and seculars -- we doom ourselves to inequality. One size, one environment, one culture does not fit all. If we truly desire plurality and inclusivity, we must recognize the real and substantial differences that exist between people and devise systems, stuctures, and environments that accomodate, embrace, and leverage those differences.
12
You're defending a guy who grouped women and men into separate anti-scientific categories instead of recognizing their individual traits.
2
Did you read what he wrote? He, quite accurately, recognizes that there are differences between characteristics of individuals, and of populations. Or are you just reporting what you've read in the lazy news reports?
He might well be wrong. But not for the reasons you cite.
He might well be wrong. But not for the reasons you cite.
2
Right. So let other people then tell you what it is you are more likely to want, more likely to do, more likely to gravitate toward because of your anatomy. Everyone is different. Individuals are different. It's when you make inferences about what those inferences mean FOR OTHERS that you venture into dangerous territory.
I commented on yesterday's article. I am a woman from a family of engineers. My mother is an engineer, as are three aunts, and four female cousins. We also come from a culture where this was seen as normal.
I joke that in the house where I grew up, we spoke of math the way some families speak of God. We most be real outliers, what with those female brains and "biology"!
I commented on yesterday's article. I am a woman from a family of engineers. My mother is an engineer, as are three aunts, and four female cousins. We also come from a culture where this was seen as normal.
I joke that in the house where I grew up, we spoke of math the way some families speak of God. We most be real outliers, what with those female brains and "biology"!
1
Punishing minority or dissenting views is the new Left in America. Welcome.
9
It's just the cultural fit, bruh. Companies have a culture, some can hang, some can't. He should stop being so sensitive and emotional and go somewhere where he feels like he belongs.
Okay, sarcasm off, if I sent a political manifesto around my office, I would be fired even if people agreed. We have a policy about "reply all" appropriateness where I work, for Pete's sake. I can't even imagine someone having the temerity to think that a ten-page emotional outburst circulated company-wide would be consequence-free.
Okay, sarcasm off, if I sent a political manifesto around my office, I would be fired even if people agreed. We have a policy about "reply all" appropriateness where I work, for Pete's sake. I can't even imagine someone having the temerity to think that a ten-page emotional outburst circulated company-wide would be consequence-free.
6
Damore wasn't punished. He was fired by a company who has the right to fire at will -- something conservatives would call "freedom." Now he'll go on to be an alt-right hero, kinda like our current president. And btw, he wasn't fired for his minority or dissenting views -- there are plenty of conservatives at Google; there are even clubs for Republicans. And there are plenty of sexist men at Google, too. He was fired for creating a hostile workplace by writing 10 pages of drivel about how women are biologically unsuited to be engineers, backed by a bunch of pseudo-science and flying logical leaps.
3
Right being intolerant belongs to the "left" says the supporter of an overtly racist and sexist president.
2
Mr. Damore committed a code of conduct offense when he used his title and his work computer and his work email system to disseminate his document. He has the right as a citizen to post what he likes as an individual on public or private forum but not Google's business forum- once you identify yourself to your title and company you bring the firm into it - Millenials need to learn that their job and their personal postings need to stay separate.
20
As hard as it may be to believe, this is not about Trump. It is about the progressive movement's desire to "play God" with regard to all forms of human interaction based upon its presumed intuition about what is fair, just and right. Progressives are never satisfied to make choices for themselves. Instead they seek to impose their beliefs upon the entire populace through laws regulations and dictates that make their beliefs mandatory. The problem comes in when they are shocked to learn they are not all-knowing, that not everyone agrees with them, and that their mandates have unintended adverse consequences.
The tech industry in bending over backward to show that they are "pro-woman." Is it at all surprising that men have career aspirations that they do not want displaced?
Welcome to the real world.
The tech industry in bending over backward to show that they are "pro-woman." Is it at all surprising that men have career aspirations that they do not want displaced?
Welcome to the real world.
15
Listen, if a man can't compete fairly for his job then he shouldn't have the job. Private enterprise does not exist to give a platform to this guy and his fee-fees. They pay him to work, not to write hateful screeds about his coworkers. There's no law that says Google can't fire him. What surprises me is that conservatives who are supposedly pro-business have a problem with a company getting rid of a guy who is clearly goofing around instead of contributing to the bottom line.
As for the tech industry bending over backward to show that they are pro-woman, Google is currently under investigation by the DOJ for paying women employees less than men for the same job. And let's not even get into what the other tech companies are being investigated for -- Silicon Valley is anything but pro-woman. What you call "bending over backward" is the tech industry's last-minute scramble to demonstrate to its stockholders that it has a modicum of professionalism and can treat employees as people who are there to do an honest day's work for an honest day's pay.
If you don't believe that private companies should be allowed to fire an employee who doesn't follow their code of conduct, then it sounds like you're the one who wants government interference. If you think employees should be paid to go off on personal rants that insult everyone around them instead of doing their damn jobs, you're the one who wants welfare.
James Damore made his own choices. And Google made theirs.
As for the tech industry bending over backward to show that they are pro-woman, Google is currently under investigation by the DOJ for paying women employees less than men for the same job. And let's not even get into what the other tech companies are being investigated for -- Silicon Valley is anything but pro-woman. What you call "bending over backward" is the tech industry's last-minute scramble to demonstrate to its stockholders that it has a modicum of professionalism and can treat employees as people who are there to do an honest day's work for an honest day's pay.
If you don't believe that private companies should be allowed to fire an employee who doesn't follow their code of conduct, then it sounds like you're the one who wants government interference. If you think employees should be paid to go off on personal rants that insult everyone around them instead of doing their damn jobs, you're the one who wants welfare.
James Damore made his own choices. And Google made theirs.
5
"Is it at all surprising that men have career aspirations that they do not want displaced?"
Aww poor bigots. It's not like men have been promoted over women simply because they're men for decades and decades. It's not like white men literally excluded women and minorities from even participating in the majority of professions until very recently. Every thing has been set up to favor white men for so long, and now for once you're not getting the preferential treatment you've become accustomed to, and you're crying foul.
Spare me.
Aww poor bigots. It's not like men have been promoted over women simply because they're men for decades and decades. It's not like white men literally excluded women and minorities from even participating in the majority of professions until very recently. Every thing has been set up to favor white men for so long, and now for once you're not getting the preferential treatment you've become accustomed to, and you're crying foul.
Spare me.
3
As a left leaning liberaI white male (my bad!) I can't find any sentence in that essay about gender equality and free speech that would make firing him necessary. He's voicing an opinion and gets exactly what he sayed would happen. I hope he sues Google and wins! I hate Trump and the alt-right, but purging dissent, deplatforming Richard Dawkins and firing people we don't like are exactly the tactics an authoritarian left wing regime would do. Stop giving the right what it needs to win the next presidential election.
12
If he had offered an opinion on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or even whether high-speed rail was a good idea, he would have gotten a pass. But he offered garbage thinking about biology and behavior, reducing all women to the same package of nature, not nurture, and he did so in a manner that suggested this was coming from one of the best minds in the tech field (after all, he works at Google), with the foreseeable effect of undermining one of his employer's goals in hiring new engineers. It's not a matter of not liking him. It's whether he lacks common sense and intellectual probity.
3
No no, you're wrong. Allow me to explain why.
1) We are not firing people we "don't like." We are firing someone for showing poor judgment and discriminating.
2) Firing him is necessary to protect the rights of women he may work with and may supervise. It is not acceptable to retain a person who will discriminate against others in your workforce.
3) lol he has no cause of action.
4) you're a terrible ally. Do some more reading on feminism and women's rights and then you can call yourself a liberal.
5) "He's voicing an opinion and gets exactly what he sayed (sic) would happen."
Yes, this is called "heads I win, tales, you lose." It's an abuser's tactic- you abuse someone, and tell them that if they fight back it's just more evidence that they're crazy and hysterical. You achieve one of two things: either they don't fight back and you've won, or they do, and you say "see!!! you're a crazy loon!" See how intellectually bankrupt that is?
Let me draw you a little picture: If you knock me down and step on my neck, you don't get to say "see, she's crazy! Yelling and swatting at my ankles like this!"
1) We are not firing people we "don't like." We are firing someone for showing poor judgment and discriminating.
2) Firing him is necessary to protect the rights of women he may work with and may supervise. It is not acceptable to retain a person who will discriminate against others in your workforce.
3) lol he has no cause of action.
4) you're a terrible ally. Do some more reading on feminism and women's rights and then you can call yourself a liberal.
5) "He's voicing an opinion and gets exactly what he sayed (sic) would happen."
Yes, this is called "heads I win, tales, you lose." It's an abuser's tactic- you abuse someone, and tell them that if they fight back it's just more evidence that they're crazy and hysterical. You achieve one of two things: either they don't fight back and you've won, or they do, and you say "see!!! you're a crazy loon!" See how intellectually bankrupt that is?
Let me draw you a little picture: If you knock me down and step on my neck, you don't get to say "see, she's crazy! Yelling and swatting at my ankles like this!"
3
"Women on average have more neuroticism." Based on a wikipedia entry quoting two studies that, despite being done by evolutionary biologists (who are continually being debunked), show only a half a standard deviation. Those studies aren't available for free so God only knows how reliable they are.
A private company fired an employee who wrote a 10-page misogynist screed. You'd have to be an idiot to be a woman who wants to work with him, let alone have your performance reviewed by him. Tolerating hate doesn't win anybody anything and it never has.
A private company fired an employee who wrote a 10-page misogynist screed. You'd have to be an idiot to be a woman who wants to work with him, let alone have your performance reviewed by him. Tolerating hate doesn't win anybody anything and it never has.
3
It's bittersweet to see so many so-called progressive commenters imitating the authoritarian right. They start with the undemonstrated assumption that this is hate speech and conclude, in an instant, that Damore should be fired. They have certainty (a quality usually attributed to the right) that brooks no counter. Their minds are closed and defensive.
12
Or, counterpoint, we read what he wrote.
3
Religious organizations are allowed to make you take a pledge to whomever their 'god' is in order to be considered for employment so Google is well within their rights to require decency to be a part of its employment criteria. Also, this isn't about starting a dialog, this is about a sniveling little wiener who is scared of his own shadow.
6
How The NY Times managed to publish an article about the culture (gender) wars quoting, with a single exception, men is a mystery to me. It should be an embarrassment to the Times.
11
I believe I remember articles in the NYT from some years ago about blind auditions for musicians at leading national symphonies, and how women seemed to do be received better when their sex was unknown by people judging them (almost all men, I believe).
Perhaps it is time to find a way to effect hiring, competitions, admissions without assigned gender and then may the best man win.
Perhaps it is time to find a way to effect hiring, competitions, admissions without assigned gender and then may the best man win.
10
It is infuriating to see how many people commenting are rehashing the same gender stereotypes-- the reason women consistently avoid computer sciences is because of exactly these kind of assumptions
7
Nobody's taunts kept Marcella Zuckerberg from creating facebook in her dorm room, only she didn't did she?
2
Nobody kept Pierre Curie from winning Nobels in two distinct scientific disciplines, but he didn't, did he? What's your point?
3
It is not surprising that women who see discrimination against other women in engineering would shy away from investing 4 years of their lives in studying it. It is admirable that some decide to and are successful despite being stereotyped.
2
I'm really tired of *blatant discrimination against women* being described as issues of cultural differences. Exclusion of women from the work place and perpetuation of traditional gender rules aren't "culture"- they're misogyny. Just because old white men often hold these views and values- and we're used to taking their views and values as default and defining societal norms accordingly- doesn't make it an issue of culture- it's an issue of rights.
Come on now. My grandpa and I have cultural differences in that he believes jeans with holes in them and other types of "grunge" fashion are not appropriate for leaving the house in. He also believes that hard work and self-reliance are fading values in our time, that "youths" spend too much time on screens, and that its important for families to eat dinner together every night. He does *not* believe that women are less capable of being lawyers because we're "emotional" or whatever the f sexist garbage explanation men are coming up with now.
I expect NYT to dig a little deeper and challenge the narrative rather than simply saying "old white man conservative beliefs v. liberal wimmins, har, har, must be a culture war! each side equally valid!"
Come on now. My grandpa and I have cultural differences in that he believes jeans with holes in them and other types of "grunge" fashion are not appropriate for leaving the house in. He also believes that hard work and self-reliance are fading values in our time, that "youths" spend too much time on screens, and that its important for families to eat dinner together every night. He does *not* believe that women are less capable of being lawyers because we're "emotional" or whatever the f sexist garbage explanation men are coming up with now.
I expect NYT to dig a little deeper and challenge the narrative rather than simply saying "old white man conservative beliefs v. liberal wimmins, har, har, must be a culture war! each side equally valid!"
30
I cannot recommend your comment enough. Misogyny is not "culture."
2
Fifteen years ago I worked at an engineering firm in the SF bay area. One of the partners believed that women should not work. That any job a woman had she was taking away from a man. Guess how much fun it was to work there?
24
The memo-writer shows an extreme lack of self-awareness when he describes himself as a person who does not believe in stereotypes, then fills his memo with silly and pernicious stereotypes:
--people who lean right are pragmatic (like Trump!)
--women have more neuroticism and less stress tolerance (unlike the writer of
the memo, who has has not shown any of his neuroses toward people who
are different from himself throughout this memo!)
The memo-writer quotes others who share his worldviews as if he has done a great deal of "research," with no sense that he has simply cherry-picked ideas that match his opinions, as have those he quotes. If this is the kind of "research" he does on the job, I fear for companies that hire him. Finally, to the author of this piece, Silicon Valley does not lean left. Their employment practices are horrendous, and their environmental practices are even worse. They pay very little in taxes to the cities whose resources they exploit, and have no interest in the pernicious housing bubble they've created throughout the Bay Area. These are corporations that are by nature self-interested and their attempts to promote diversity have been on the surface at best. That's why a guy with such a lack of self-awareness and a mind filled with such ridiculous stereotypes can reach a high position and then take himself so seriously as someone with advice for his company.
--people who lean right are pragmatic (like Trump!)
--women have more neuroticism and less stress tolerance (unlike the writer of
the memo, who has has not shown any of his neuroses toward people who
are different from himself throughout this memo!)
The memo-writer quotes others who share his worldviews as if he has done a great deal of "research," with no sense that he has simply cherry-picked ideas that match his opinions, as have those he quotes. If this is the kind of "research" he does on the job, I fear for companies that hire him. Finally, to the author of this piece, Silicon Valley does not lean left. Their employment practices are horrendous, and their environmental practices are even worse. They pay very little in taxes to the cities whose resources they exploit, and have no interest in the pernicious housing bubble they've created throughout the Bay Area. These are corporations that are by nature self-interested and their attempts to promote diversity have been on the surface at best. That's why a guy with such a lack of self-awareness and a mind filled with such ridiculous stereotypes can reach a high position and then take himself so seriously as someone with advice for his company.
12
If Mr. James Damore's views were solely his own and presneted on a public blog site, I would say it's a 'live and let live' type issue, as anyone has a right to say thing that are both unpopular and sometimes stupid and inflammatory. Yet this situati osmewhat more complex as we are dealing with a private company (Google) that has its own inherent rights to so restrict the actions of its employees and to some degree, their workplace words and actions, but not their private thoughts and views (not yet). Google does have a right to restrict its employee communications on its propert and equipment, yet more and more Google and every other American company is also being encouraged and often mandated by Federal law and lawsuites to establish in-place instion, lasses, training, etc- that are designed to enforce policies and ideas that may go aganist the individual. The option od any said individual is to either quit the company or merely submit and let the company's polices be. The latter, however, may be a factor in breeding even more hostility and sometimes manifested workplace/violene, something that also needs to be avoided.
The deabte boils down to an old one- the individaul against the organization/state. The two entities both need and depend upon each other, yet should one become overly dominant - danger abounds for both grouop and the self. This example was clearly demonstrated in Communist China and the USSR, when the collective state was all important.
The deabte boils down to an old one- the individaul against the organization/state. The two entities both need and depend upon each other, yet should one become overly dominant - danger abounds for both grouop and the self. This example was clearly demonstrated in Communist China and the USSR, when the collective state was all important.
1
Or this is about a sniveling, whiny kid getting fired for not paying enough attention to his work.
1
Mr. Damore, you talk all big, picking on women being biologically "different."
Go ahead and write a 10-page screed about how the Black and Latino men with whom you work also have biological differences, as evidenced by the achievement gap in schools and other "studies."
Let's see how brave you really are.
Go ahead and write a 10-page screed about how the Black and Latino men with whom you work also have biological differences, as evidenced by the achievement gap in schools and other "studies."
Let's see how brave you really are.
10
No need to read the memo, the content of which we are instructed to believe is anti-diversity. The message from Google (and others) is clear: conform or be fired. Conformity, thus, is diversity.
10
It says EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW, that not one article in the NYT has linked directly to the memo in question, nor printed it in an attachment, so that whinging lefties could actually READ what was IN IT, instead of condemning this man based on nothing but hysteria and accusations.
So now, in alt-america, sexism and misogyny can be whitewashed as "ideological diversity".
Presumably racism, anti-semitism, and homophobia can be similarly described ?
Is that how we would now term the Beer Hall Putsch, circa 1935? Is that how we now describe a meeting of the Klu Klux Klan..... Oh my.
What happened to calling ignorance and hate out for what they are? Ignorance and hate.
Presumably racism, anti-semitism, and homophobia can be similarly described ?
Is that how we would now term the Beer Hall Putsch, circa 1935? Is that how we now describe a meeting of the Klu Klux Klan..... Oh my.
What happened to calling ignorance and hate out for what they are? Ignorance and hate.
12
In reply to r.mackinnon Concord ma
Yes indeed r.mackinnon, your comment is full of ignorance and hate.
Yes indeed r.mackinnon, your comment is full of ignorance and hate.
The Founding Fathers were wise when they drafted the first amendment, too bad it does not extend to corporations chartered by the government.
2
Google made the right decision in firing Damore. Google has an obligation to run an orderly workplace and Damore's comments were offensive to much of Google's workforce. However, in addition to firing Damore, Google -- and the mainstream press covering this story -- would do well to issue a point-by-point rebuttal of his claims. I've read his entire letter and there is much that is wrong and offensive -- and it would be a helpful if someone took the time to explain why he is wrong -- otherwise, we just look like knee-jerk politically correct reactionaries.
10
This isn't an official response from Google, but a rebuttal written by someone who used to be a senior exec there.
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e377...
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e377...
1
The NYTimes just selected as one of its "picks" a comment that begins:
"If I stood before my students and said, 'Some of you are biologically inferior," I would be fired before the school day ended.'"
Needless to say, the memo does not make any such claim.
The NYTimes should reproduce the entire memo, along with the supporting links and charts so that readers here can actually read for themselves what is under discussion.
"If I stood before my students and said, 'Some of you are biologically inferior," I would be fired before the school day ended.'"
Needless to say, the memo does not make any such claim.
The NYTimes should reproduce the entire memo, along with the supporting links and charts so that readers here can actually read for themselves what is under discussion.
13
It's been posted in a variety of comments. It's really not very good. Mr. Damore is not a psychologist or social scientist and both his research skills and writing are pretty poor.
That said, Google could have fired him if his shirttail was out. They're the employer.
That said, Google could have fired him if his shirttail was out. They're the employer.
4
How about if you said some of you are biologically different?
Anyone remember left brain/right brain discussions of several or more years ago; perhaps men more analytically focused, woman more intuitively perceptive? Those discussions seem to have gone down Big Brother's " memory hole " as the prevailing Party Line has shifted. Perhaps Mr Damore and others will soon be scheduled for sessions in Room 101.
5
The paper
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-E...
is an invitation to dialog, critique, and debate. I t would have been better to take him up on the challenge rather than confirm his point.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-E...
is an invitation to dialog, critique, and debate. I t would have been better to take him up on the challenge rather than confirm his point.
5
It's poorly-written and dreadfully-researched. He probably should have finished the doctorate, perhaps in psychology.
3
Right, because that's what private businesses should do all day: Try to educate a grown man about how his blatant misogyny is based on anti-science and fallacious reasoning and is insulting and hurtful to his colleagues. Forget the stockholders! Profit? Who cares about profit? We have a straight white man to coddle! Isn't he adorable how he wants to "debate" whether or not women are biologically capable of working here? Girls, let's put down our knitting and indulge him.
All these people so valiantly championing this guy's inherent right to a job are the same people who say women shouldn't be given a fair chance. Because if they can't hack working in the industry with its current misogynistic culture, they don't deserve the job. But yes, of course, the wheels of industry should stop turning as we all turn our attention toward seriously considering his regurgitated hot mess of pseudo-science.
All these people so valiantly championing this guy's inherent right to a job are the same people who say women shouldn't be given a fair chance. Because if they can't hack working in the industry with its current misogynistic culture, they don't deserve the job. But yes, of course, the wheels of industry should stop turning as we all turn our attention toward seriously considering his regurgitated hot mess of pseudo-science.
4
For a man who's working in a great position achieved in his own right and earning a great income, you have to ask yourself, What set him off? We may never know.
Mr. Damore's ideas are not new. The memo is reminiscent of the old (yet persistent in some quarters) scientific racism arguments - that some races (White) are superior to others (Black esp. and all others); instead of race, Mr. Damore's thesis was gender.
For Mr. Damore to assert that his views are being suppressed because they are conservative, confuses abject racism with conservatism and gives legitimate conservatism a bad name.
Mr. Damore's ideas are not new. The memo is reminiscent of the old (yet persistent in some quarters) scientific racism arguments - that some races (White) are superior to others (Black esp. and all others); instead of race, Mr. Damore's thesis was gender.
For Mr. Damore to assert that his views are being suppressed because they are conservative, confuses abject racism with conservatism and gives legitimate conservatism a bad name.
10
A lot the research that backs up his claims isn't old at all. I don't understand how people with no understanding of subjects like psychology and neurology so boldly criticise his opinions. You can use Google's own Google Scholar search engine to find studies that talk about these matters. There's plenty and many of them from recent years.
Is this culture war or is the sign of a changing cultural environment in which such misogynistic rants have become unacceptable? If this man was voicing his racist or antisemitic or pro-Nazi views in the public forum as he did with his garbage about women, would it have been a problem that he'd get fired? I mean, just because the WH sets the disgraceful example that it does these days the rest of the society has to blindly follow?
8
I presume and hope that it is a corporate goal and value of Google to reverse the discrimination in tech, against women. Having an employee who voices at length his opinion that women are biologically incapable of working on an equal footing in tech would have a damaging and chilling effect on the women who are employed at Google. The employee could not go unanswered and his opinions could not be treated as merely opening a dialogue. I appreciate one of the comments below, that men and women are not, in fact, the same and that the industry must grow to appreciate the values of female abilities and perspectives. Google had to, and has to continue to, uphold its values.
3
I'm amazed by the way the Times and others are framing this. "Culture Wars"? Seriously? This is NOT a first amendment issue. Google is a private company and is within their rights to enforce the type of culture and values they want to foster. Having a misogynist on their staff who questions whether women can be software engineers or effective tech workers is apparently not what Google is going for. Good for them. Google is not a democracy and this guy was not elected to spread his opinions -- and they don't have to tolerate workers who create hostile work environments, insulting and scaring the women who work there. He did so at risk of firing, again, something within Google's rights to do. I'm amazed that people are somehow conflating the issue of his right to an opinion and his right to voice it in his workplace. He has no such right. And how does it help Google produce and sell their product to have such a person in their midst? Bizarre.
11
as an employer, I am glad you agree with me. You see, when I find employees who believe what I disagree with (i.e., I believe that black lives matter is a racist group, that Title IX amounts to discrimination against males, that university feminist and black studies programs create an aura of racial and sexual tension on campuses amounting to discrimination) I immediately fire them.
5
How do you find out? You first let them write 10 page screeds on company time? You'd probably make more money if you just left non-work issues out of it and simply required your employees to do their jobs.
2
jmm,
I can find out, like most employers by looking at their facebook pages, by what they publish on the internet or press, by what they themselves tell me. And I have every right to fire them. I am truly amused at how you believe google has the legal right to fire Damore for this views and I do not. Your views are truly hypocritical. Then again, I just saw you are from Berkeley. I utterly refuse to hire anyone from your school. Hopefully more employers will follow suit.
I can find out, like most employers by looking at their facebook pages, by what they publish on the internet or press, by what they themselves tell me. And I have every right to fire them. I am truly amused at how you believe google has the legal right to fire Damore for this views and I do not. Your views are truly hypocritical. Then again, I just saw you are from Berkeley. I utterly refuse to hire anyone from your school. Hopefully more employers will follow suit.
No one wins in the PC world. Advocacy Groups that terrorize everybody and anybody who doesn't conform to their world view. Look what happened on Broadway with the re-casting of the musical The Great Comet. A few people complained that a unknown black actor should not have been replaced to by a well known white actor to save the show from closing. Now the show is closing. 100 people out of work because of what? The abuse of political power given to advocates of the disadvantaged? Sad world. Very sad. Just as bad as Trump.
8
I'm pretty sure Google won't shut down because a 28-year old staff engineer was fired for spewing hostility on company time, but nice try.
4
Mr Daramore has the right to say what he wants and Google has the right to fire him. His communications skills are poor to say the least. However, there needs to be a thoughtful discussion about why there are gender differences in outcomes and behaviors that lead to success and failures within particular career tracks. It is not reasonable to simply state that everyone is the same and demand that we hire a numerically diverse workforce regardless of the capabilities of each worker. There are differences between men and women whether by dint of culture, parenting, and yes, there are likely genetic differences. It seems strange to believe that with 6,500 genes expressing themselves differently between men and women that some do not affect cognitive function yet other differences abound. One can either simply ignore a variety of factors that generate differences including behaviors of co-workers, corporate culture, etc or tackle things in a comprehensive fashion that gets to root causes and remediations. Unfortunately, I think the thought police prevent open and honest dialogue and solutions and resort to litigation and litmus tests.
3
"There needs to be a discussion..."
There HAS BEEN a discussion. It is happening, all over the place, all the time. Tremendous amounts of research have been conducted on these topics. Hello, women have been talking about this FOR YEARS. The fact that you haven't listened before now doesn't mean it's not being discussed. Some random man, with NO training in any relevant discipline to analyze this data or research, wrote a screed on his computer. That's not starting a dialogue.
We don't need to have the same conversation over and over again every time some white man wakes up and asks for permission to discriminate. Educate yourselves. Stop asking women to hold your hand and do it for you.
There HAS BEEN a discussion. It is happening, all over the place, all the time. Tremendous amounts of research have been conducted on these topics. Hello, women have been talking about this FOR YEARS. The fact that you haven't listened before now doesn't mean it's not being discussed. Some random man, with NO training in any relevant discipline to analyze this data or research, wrote a screed on his computer. That's not starting a dialogue.
We don't need to have the same conversation over and over again every time some white man wakes up and asks for permission to discriminate. Educate yourselves. Stop asking women to hold your hand and do it for you.
6
C's Daughter - Actually, I am not white. But I guess its too much for a biased mind to think otherwise. Actually there is considerable research in sex based differences in cognitive processing for example that was once attributed to cultural training. There is also considerable evidence of cultural impact on learning and performance. Clearly, you are the type of person that reads headlines and doesn't do the work necessary to take things from pitchfork populism to facts
Actually, there is no credible evolution-based science for sex-based difference. Sorry.
2
The memo rightly discusses confirmation bias. Then it says that certain races and one gender are on average less talented than other races and another gender. So a memo like that foments the confirmation bias it claims to be troubled by and leads to a toxic work environment for everyone. I wouldn't want such a person crystalizing prejudice, mistrust, and distorted perspectives of co-workers and colleagues in my company.
8
It is unfortunate that people can't accept that one can be a feminist, supporting full equality for women, and also recognize that there can be psychological differences between the sexes, rooted in evolution, as there are in all other primates. To deny the differences- always group differences with overlap- requires some version of Creationism. This does not mean agreeing with everything that James Damore wrote, though much of it is accurate.
As a person from the Left, I am saddened that for most of my fellow Progressives, understanding gender is made impossible by taboos against seeing innate differences, or even looking at the mechanisms of evolutionary adaptation. It reminds me of the Soviet campaign, centered on the views of Lysenko, to prove the genetic inheritance of acquired characteristics- a fallacy eventually dropped because of a total lack of evidence, and failure to produce the New Man created by Soviet society.
It is true that people have used stereotypes of male and female as propaganda for male domination. However, in the most important areas of contemporary life, the world would be a much better place if women had more power- in part because they are driven less by the need for power and domination. Imagine if about 90 percent of all politicians were female, instead of the other way around, as it is today.
Simplistically put, we need less hunters and more nurturers- and that doesn't all come from the social environment.
As a person from the Left, I am saddened that for most of my fellow Progressives, understanding gender is made impossible by taboos against seeing innate differences, or even looking at the mechanisms of evolutionary adaptation. It reminds me of the Soviet campaign, centered on the views of Lysenko, to prove the genetic inheritance of acquired characteristics- a fallacy eventually dropped because of a total lack of evidence, and failure to produce the New Man created by Soviet society.
It is true that people have used stereotypes of male and female as propaganda for male domination. However, in the most important areas of contemporary life, the world would be a much better place if women had more power- in part because they are driven less by the need for power and domination. Imagine if about 90 percent of all politicians were female, instead of the other way around, as it is today.
Simplistically put, we need less hunters and more nurturers- and that doesn't all come from the social environment.
6
Google clearly had the right to fire Mr. Damore- there is no free speech issue here. However, I don't think it was the right thing to do. I consider myself a left leaning progressive, and I am concerned at how divided we've become. Perhaps Mr. Damore was trying to be sincere and start a dialogue, perhaps he was just trying to be provocative. Either way, I have found that I get far more mileage out of acknowledging someone's viewpoint and then responding: "You know, I don't think that's right, and here's why." In the end it may not make a difference, but no one can accuse me of being closed-minded or dismissive. I (and the rest of society) will simply move-on, and these folks will self-marginalize.
3
There's a rash of male "left-leaning progressives" here proposing that women just be patient and understanding and open to discussing the same idiotic debunked anti-science over and over ad infinitum with any man who pulls an opinion out of his ass.
Guess what? We go to work to work, just like everybody else. We aren't there for you to insult under the thin guise of "debate." If you want more education about sexism, do your own damn research. Put down the ridiculous evolutionary biology blogs and read some real books. Do not bother me during my lunch break by hounding me with your sweeping overgeneralizations about my biological differences and how much I love nurturing and how I'm not success driven then expect me to take you seriously and make time for you. I have a life to live.
Worse yet, you now want the entirety of a major corporation to stop in its tracks to acknowledge this sniveling kid's degrading "viewpoint" and respectfully disagree. Contrary to popular opinion, businesses are not charities set up to feed and clothe straight white men as they pontificate about the biological differences that make them more suited for high-paying jobs. People go to work to work, not to sit around explaining the history of women's rights to a 28-year old ignoramus.
Guess what? We go to work to work, just like everybody else. We aren't there for you to insult under the thin guise of "debate." If you want more education about sexism, do your own damn research. Put down the ridiculous evolutionary biology blogs and read some real books. Do not bother me during my lunch break by hounding me with your sweeping overgeneralizations about my biological differences and how much I love nurturing and how I'm not success driven then expect me to take you seriously and make time for you. I have a life to live.
Worse yet, you now want the entirety of a major corporation to stop in its tracks to acknowledge this sniveling kid's degrading "viewpoint" and respectfully disagree. Contrary to popular opinion, businesses are not charities set up to feed and clothe straight white men as they pontificate about the biological differences that make them more suited for high-paying jobs. People go to work to work, not to sit around explaining the history of women's rights to a 28-year old ignoramus.
4
From a legal standpoint, Google clearly had the right to fire Damore. Damore was an at-will employee whose employment could be terminated for any reason, good or bad, that is not prohibited by federal, state or local laws. The principle of free speech does not apply to employment decisions made by private employers, who retain the right to terminate any at will employee who expresses or otherwise opposes the employer's legitimate policies. Furthermore, Google has a legal obligation under Title VII to maintain a workplace that is free of discrimination or hostility based on sex, race or other prohibited considerations. Damore has the right to express his opinions but not the right to keep his job.
Stanley Mazaroff
Retired lawyer and law school professor of equal employment law.
Stanley Mazaroff
Retired lawyer and law school professor of equal employment law.
11
Absolutely. They did not need a reason.
He should shepherd his energies toward new employment. I'm sure Breitbart is hiring.
He should shepherd his energies toward new employment. I'm sure Breitbart is hiring.
2
Let's see what you lefty experts and smartypants say, when a liberal employee is fired from a conservative company, for posting a liberal document -- for example, in favor of gay marriage. And their conservative employer sacks them.
You'll be screaming at the top of your lungs "first amendment violation!"
You'll be screaming at the top of your lungs "first amendment violation!"
Mr. Damer wasn't fired for speaking his mind. He was terminated because he arguably created a hostile work environment for women and engaged in illegal stereotyping. How could Google ever assign a woman employee to work with someone who believes that women are biologically inferior in his workplace and are incapable of doing as well or better than he could? His statements became a potential legal liability that would be used against Google in every discrimination charge and lawsuit.
17
They had the right to fire him for speaking his mind had they wanted to. He has no right to work for Google.
1
The first amendment applies to public spaces, not my living room or the workplace. I decide what's acceptable in my house and the corporation decides the same for its facilities. Tolerance has it's limits in both places.
What if someone at Google started advocating for Microsoft's Bing search engine?
What if someone at Google started advocating for Microsoft's Bing search engine?
9
To the extent that anyone speaking out is perceieved as the voice of the company he works for, or who even writes an opinion on a company related issue *without* the express approval of his superior, that employee does so at his own risk.
Corporations are not democracies.
Corporations are not democracies.
8
For Google this is first and foremost an HR issue, they have rules and policies and Damore violated them and did so in a way that likely made many of his female co-workers uncomfortable. Women are already underrepresented at Google and by retaining Damore Goolge sets themselves up for hostile work claims and gender discrimination claims depending on Damore's current role and future role at the company.
Secondly, this is a PR and profit issue for Google, they want to be seen as a progressive company and whether or not you agree with that, they have decided that its best for them as a profit making company. Don't forget that women make up 50% of the public and often make a household's buying and consumer decisions.
Third, I keep seeing people comment that this was a sourced document, just because a document cites to some source doesn't mean that it stands for anything of import. The cites in his document are not peer-reviewed data driven cites, they are cites that simply matched his view points. For example, he cites to Wikipedia repeatedly.
Secondly, this is a PR and profit issue for Google, they want to be seen as a progressive company and whether or not you agree with that, they have decided that its best for them as a profit making company. Don't forget that women make up 50% of the public and often make a household's buying and consumer decisions.
Third, I keep seeing people comment that this was a sourced document, just because a document cites to some source doesn't mean that it stands for anything of import. The cites in his document are not peer-reviewed data driven cites, they are cites that simply matched his view points. For example, he cites to Wikipedia repeatedly.
13
It's really poorly-written. I'm willing to wager that most of the commenters lauding it as some sort of research milestone are young men in their 20's who also failed to finish their doctoral programs.
4
The poor quality of the document would be sufficient to fire someone on the basis of competence. To the problem of sources we may add poor analytical skills (ironically), little to no conceptual clarity, false claims (we don't even need to go look at what he says about gender or race - look at some of the footnotes), and the inability to distinguish facts from wether they are evidence for something (i.e. In what sense are they significant for a given discussion).
It's unfortunate because there are glimpses of progressive steps the company could take in there).
It's unfortunate because there are glimpses of progressive steps the company could take in there).
3
Mr. Damore is perfectly within his rights to share his opinion. Google is perfectly within its rights to say your opinion, now public, is detrimental to the working environment of our company so you are out. Many people, including most commentators here, think that software development is some sort of individual activity. At a big company like Google, its really team based. That's why 360 style reviews are so popular. So the point is then, would I, as a female engineer, be willing to work with or be appraised by a "peer" that has publicly stated that I probably can't perform at a top level because a) of biological differences resulting in inferiority in technical skills, b) choice of extracurricular activities (maybe marriage or kids or knitting, I don't know), and c) total ignorance of the type of bias women in engineering face. The answer is no. And I bet many men wouldn't either.
The point that bothers me about his post is not even the biological variances but the posit that women chose other life activities instead of their career. I know many women that face few avenues of career progression as they see men who are comparable or less comparable rise up higher and faster to become partners, team leads and senior management. So then the women may see little option except to choose the family track.
The point that bothers me about his post is not even the biological variances but the posit that women chose other life activities instead of their career. I know many women that face few avenues of career progression as they see men who are comparable or less comparable rise up higher and faster to become partners, team leads and senior management. So then the women may see little option except to choose the family track.
22
The fact that the company that wants to "organize the world's information" thinks that some ideas shouldn't even be discussed is downright frightening.
36
How about the idea that employees should steal from their employers. Should that idea be discussed on company time?
Google was not suppressing his right to discuss this as it is cleat that the alt right is going gangbusters on doing exactly that. If he wants to discuss his ideas on Breitbart, I am sure he will have ample opportunity.
Google was not suppressing his right to discuss this as it is cleat that the alt right is going gangbusters on doing exactly that. If he wants to discuss his ideas on Breitbart, I am sure he will have ample opportunity.
2
Isn't a basic philosophy of conservatism the idea that corporations should be able to act in any manner in service of their bottom lines? That seems to be the argument when it comes to exploiting workers or the planet. So now that many Silicon Valley companies have concluded that diversity enhances their bottom lines, suddenly the white males are clutching their pearls and lashing out. Tech thrives the more users it can attract and Mr. Damone has alienated fifty percent of the world's population. Google can't afford that liability.
21
Google may have alienated 50% of the world's population but not the 50% you think. I'm not a white male and I support Damone's right to express his views. There is no question there are biological differences between a male and a female. Question is whether that makes one better than the other? Why is it not possible that women are better at some things and men are better at others? Net, net, each gender probably brings the same number of positives to the table and are equal. We can be different but equal, can we not?
On a related matter, the fact that Mr. Hastings finds it necessary to berate Mr. Thiel for his support of Donald Trump is just reprehensible. This is not good governance for Facebook. Diversity is not just good when it is in skin color or gender, it is also in thought. Hastings should probably step down as Chairman.
On a related matter, the fact that Mr. Hastings finds it necessary to berate Mr. Thiel for his support of Donald Trump is just reprehensible. This is not good governance for Facebook. Diversity is not just good when it is in skin color or gender, it is also in thought. Hastings should probably step down as Chairman.
8
The issue isn't whether there are "biological differences" (that was pretty clear the first time I played doctor) but the allegation that those differences are the basis for pulling the rug out from under diversity hiring, to wit: "It's OK not to hire them because their biology means they don't want to work here anyway."
2
If a reader is actually interested in learning more about the issue it's worth reading his original paper. It's much more balanced than what has been presented in the media, which is just taking a few lines out and magnifying them. I would consider myself a typical NYT reader and was offended at the original presentation of the paper. What about overlapping distributions? Sure, women and men have some differences, but overall we are more similar than different. The author states all of these in his paper. I don't agree with every point, but it's not a misogynistic rant either.
36
No, it's not. It's poorly-written and cites to Wikipedia.
3
Hatred of those who are different is not "alternate opinion."
11
??
Has anyone expressed hatred?
Has anyone expressed hatred?
The idea that "Silicon Valley" is a politically monolithic entity that walks in "lockstep" is patently absurd. I worked with SV tech companies my whole career and there is as much or more diversity of thought and political opinion as anywhere. Remember, these people are the intellectual cream of the crop, and independent to a fault. Why not point the spotlight on the finance industry or the oil industry or the auto industry and see that things are worse for women across the economy. In what other industry would a low level professional even contemplate writing a memo on a sensitive political issue and widely circulate it within the company? Why a double standard for SV? As a NY newspaper the Times should focus on women in NYs huge finance industry, which is far worse.
11
"Mr. Hastings, a supporter of Hillary Clinton, said earlier last year that Mr. Trump, if elected, 'would destroy much of what is great about America.'" Mr. Hastings, you were spot on.
16
Who cares what a hysteric like Hastings says or thinks? I'd guess an equal number of people believe that Ms. Clinton, if elected, "would destroy much of what is great about America". Or already did. Hysteria these days is an equal-opportunity profession, apparently.
The matriarchal peaceful sexual bonobo and the patriarchal violent chimpanzee both have cultures that are divided from us by a mere 1.5% biological DNA genetic evolutionary fit difference. And about 2-5% of European and Asian DNA is extinct Neanderthal and Denovisan. Which culture is best represented by a majority in Silicon Valley?
3
maybe you should ask that same question in America's inner cities. The degree of difference in terms of violence between them and silicon valley is well known.
1
This is exactly what the NYT, national democratic party and their far left acolytes want; a complete shutting down of all opinion and thought that undermines their lies and hypocrisy.
"Silicon Valley supports and increases growth in America."
By using a million H1B visa holders who have stolen those jobs from Americans and reduced salaries for them, undermining a large piece of the middle class. Micro$oft, Google, apple and others who lie when they claim they are supporting the country while they undermine it - as shown by their lobbying to support increases in the H1B jobs' theft program, with the aid of their ill-gotten $250 BBN cash hoards of money stolen from the US - are worthless and should be sliced into pieces.
As we've seen recently in Berkeley, the far left wants freedom of speech - but only for themselves, no one else. THIS it the lunatic environment created by the politically correct and dreadful media outlets like this horrific "publication."
"Silicon Valley supports and increases growth in America."
By using a million H1B visa holders who have stolen those jobs from Americans and reduced salaries for them, undermining a large piece of the middle class. Micro$oft, Google, apple and others who lie when they claim they are supporting the country while they undermine it - as shown by their lobbying to support increases in the H1B jobs' theft program, with the aid of their ill-gotten $250 BBN cash hoards of money stolen from the US - are worthless and should be sliced into pieces.
As we've seen recently in Berkeley, the far left wants freedom of speech - but only for themselves, no one else. THIS it the lunatic environment created by the politically correct and dreadful media outlets like this horrific "publication."
15
of all the comments about this article, this is the most insightful and intelligent. thank you.
1
If enough Americans bothered to be educated and possess the required skill sets this wouldn't be a problem, but it's easier to whine.
2
If you have not read the memo in its entirety, you should. It is not the in your face "women are biologically inferior and can't succeed" manifesto that much of the media coverage is conveying by printing little snippets. One point (among others) made by Mr. Demore that is worthy of debate surrounds diversity programs and how to evaluate their effectiveness. Good intentions do not equal effectiveness, and driving debate underground serves no purpose.
70
... so what he said is not that bad, right?
My comment is only meant to say what it says, which does not mean I 100% agree. However, his points are worthy of discussion. I say this as a chemical engineer who worked for a global manufacturing co. when you could count the number of female ChE's on 2 hands .... and who, therefore, worked almost exclusively with men.
1
It's badly-written and poorly-supported. No wonder he got fired.
2
Calling what happened at Google part of the "culture war" is another example of the media adding fuel to the fire.
14
Russell:
Yes, if corporations throw intellectual diversity under the bus of gender diversity, the press has a duty to cover up the crime.
Yes, if corporations throw intellectual diversity under the bus of gender diversity, the press has a duty to cover up the crime.
3
This business of "shouting down" dissent has become pervasive in American society. If focusing on Silicon Valley's ups and downs helps fend that off, then I'm all for it.
That being said, leave your politics at home, please. They don't belong in the workplace.
That being said, leave your politics at home, please. They don't belong in the workplace.
4
but even if they are left at home they can still get one fired, so what difference does it make?
Voltaire's "Treatise on Tolerance" needs to be read on college campuses once again (despite the fact that he is a white male).
13
This issue with the engineer at Google perfectly captures a large portion of the right wing in this country, and where their anger is coming from. There are a ton of white men who do not like the fact that every day it becomes socially unacceptable to have bigoted or intolerant views. You used to be able to say misogynistic things, or homophobic things, or racist things, used to be able to hold those views, and you wouldn't receive any blowback. You wouldn't get fired from your job or reprimanded in any way.
Now there are serious financial repurcussions for spouting those beliefs in the form of losing your job. Which is a very good development for society as a whole.
Now there are serious financial repurcussions for spouting those beliefs in the form of losing your job. Which is a very good development for society as a whole.
22
Those who are shocked this guy got fired are missing the point. This is a job, not a public forum or college classroom. Everyone, in every workplace, has to behave with a certain level of decorum and use judgment about what he or she says. Anyone who deliberately insults and provokes coworkers and, especially, one's bosses, risks being fired. People are fired every day for less than what Mr. Damone did. This is an HR issue, not a political one as the right portrays it. Google simply fired an immature employee who exhibits poor judgment and a bad attitude. This is not news!
213
I don't think the real issue is whether Google has the right to fire him or not. Of course they do if they deem his behavior inappropriate, which they did. I think the issue is whether or not Google is practicing what they preach. I read the manifesto and while there are parts I disagree with, a lot of it was well thought out and could've been considered constructive criticism of Google's practices. I personally see this as a bad look for Google. Was his performance lacking? Was he behaving aggressively towards other employees? No, doesn't sound like it. He expressed an opinion(albeit, somewhat publicly within Google) and got fired because his opinion didn't align with what Google deemed acceptable. To me, that is somewhat hypocritical on Google's part.
20
He commented on a forum created by Google to facilitate discussion. The company does not really believe in diversity, but only uniform compliance to one point of view.
6
Not only is it not news, Mr. Damore would not have been fired had it not been news.
1
women could easily solve this problem: go out and create dozens of $80b tech companies. They could start by creating just one. That would be one more then the current total.
9
Google did exactly the right thing in firing this guy. I can't think of any place I've worked at where an employee sends out an email with there social ideas and theories on gender.
The fact that Google employees depend on their colleagues for peer review and subsequent salary and promotion advancements is critical to this issue. I wouldn't want to be a woman engineer who was reviewed by James Damore. Because according to him, I'm not biologically "suited" to be the equivalent of a male engineer.
Damore should have focused on his software engineering, which what he was hired for, not his social theories. It would have been very fitting if a woman supervisor had called him in to fire him with these words. "James, we have to let you go. Why didn't you just do your job instead of sending out these offensive emails? My advice to you on your next job. Just, "stick to your knitting."
The fact that Google employees depend on their colleagues for peer review and subsequent salary and promotion advancements is critical to this issue. I wouldn't want to be a woman engineer who was reviewed by James Damore. Because according to him, I'm not biologically "suited" to be the equivalent of a male engineer.
Damore should have focused on his software engineering, which what he was hired for, not his social theories. It would have been very fitting if a woman supervisor had called him in to fire him with these words. "James, we have to let you go. Why didn't you just do your job instead of sending out these offensive emails? My advice to you on your next job. Just, "stick to your knitting."
32
"Palmer Luckey, a founder of Oculus VR, a virtual reality start-up owned by Facebook, was pressured to leave the company after it was revealed that he had secretly funded a pro-Trump organization."
The organization, by the way, paid Internet trolls to post anti-Hillary memes.
The organization, by the way, paid Internet trolls to post anti-Hillary memes.
8
Power always corrupts !
3
Holy cow. I just read the actual google memo that James Damore wrote. I urge everybody to read it (it's linked to from the NYT article). The fact that this memo got him fired is a disgrace and just ridiculous. There is so little that is controversial in it, and he is very balanced. The left needs to wake up to the fact that it's extreme elements are out of control. (And I'm progressive on most issues.)
45
It's bad writing and research, but the only issue was whether Google had the right to fire him.
They did.
They did.
2
Yet another male liberal congratulating himself on his open-minded stance on misogyny.
2
Firing Damore is symptomatic of our larger culture, in which voicing of controversial ideas meets with criticism or punishment, but rarely with reasoned counter arguments. Apparently Google encouraged internal questioning and criticism, but has some sacred cows that cannot be questioned. I don't agree with Damore's ideas (though I have no idea if he is right or wrong about the way Google carries out some of its training activities), but I am disturbed that the reaction of America today is a kneejerk one of supporting those who refuse to allow some opinions to be heard. Whether the specific ideas not being allowed are right or wrong, the attitude toward their expression is more conducive to dumbing down our society and to encouraging within-group censorship, which leads to group-think, than to encouraging critical thinking. This paper just ran an editorial about our "incurious" president and the harm his lack of curiosity can cause, yet more and more we try to "shut down" opinions we don't like. An enlightened society discusses ideas, it does not police them.
17
With the pressure that the Obama administration put on companies to be "diverse" many workers at these Tech companies were probably appalled at the dilution of talent. Seriously, shouldn't the company be allowed to hire the best regardless of gender and race.
9
Has anybody actually read James Damore's internal memo? I did and most of the comments I read seem to be describing a different document. Generally I see it described as a "screed" and or a "manifesto". Both descriptions seem to misrepresent both the tone and the intention of what he wrote. Maybe people should read what he wrote and THEN comment on the content as opposed to commenting based on what they think he must have written by reading other comments.
75
Damore put it out as though he was being "helpful," and perhaps some of his suggested changes have some merit. However the supporting arguments about how women are innately different from men made it a political document. He did not have to frame it in those terms. As we used to say --biology is not destiny. Many of the suggestions he made would have been just as helpful for men. I'm sure that many men do not want to work at Google because of its stressful culture.
Why did he have to compare women to men? How did that support his suggestions.
His document would create a hostile environment and Goggle was right (and within its rights) to fire him.
Why did he have to compare women to men? How did that support his suggestions.
His document would create a hostile environment and Goggle was right (and within its rights) to fire him.
7
It's nonsense. It cites to Wikipedia, FFS.
4
Yeah. I read the whole thing. Smug. Offensive. One -sided. Self validating. Kind of pathetic. Yawn.
That it came from a young male hipster in Silicon Valley, whose starting salary right out of the competitive college his parents likely paid for was probably stratospheric , was not surprising.
My guess is he is a high performer, but a "challenging" colleague who struggles with emotional intelligence.
Whatever opinion his boss has of him, it likely pales next to the one he holds of himself.
What a good excuse to get rid of an obnoxious employee that probably brings down a whole team.
That it came from a young male hipster in Silicon Valley, whose starting salary right out of the competitive college his parents likely paid for was probably stratospheric , was not surprising.
My guess is he is a high performer, but a "challenging" colleague who struggles with emotional intelligence.
Whatever opinion his boss has of him, it likely pales next to the one he holds of himself.
What a good excuse to get rid of an obnoxious employee that probably brings down a whole team.
3
In the marketplace of ideas, Mr. Damore's views are intellectually dubious and morally repugnant (although more nuanced than they've generally been portrayed in the media).
But Google's action to silence him is even more reprehensible, because it represents the antithesis of the tolerance and diversity in the workplace the company allegedly advocates. Genuine acceptance of diversity extends not just to race, gender, and sexual orientation, but to viewpoint as well.
But Google's action to silence him is even more reprehensible, because it represents the antithesis of the tolerance and diversity in the workplace the company allegedly advocates. Genuine acceptance of diversity extends not just to race, gender, and sexual orientation, but to viewpoint as well.
7
Freedom of speech, however reprehensible and bigoted, doesn't mean freedom from consequences of such speech, be it in the workplace or the larger society. In other words, freedom of speech means that the government cannot punish someone for expressing unpopular opinions, but it doesn't mean absolute impunity.
Google is a private business and freedom of speech doesn't apply when someone expresses opinions contrary to a company's practices; therefore, Google isn't obligated to retain an employee whose opinions can foment a hostile work environment.
Google is a private business and freedom of speech doesn't apply when someone expresses opinions contrary to a company's practices; therefore, Google isn't obligated to retain an employee whose opinions can foment a hostile work environment.
6
I can't help wondering how many of the commenters here have actually read Mr. Damore's memo.
He argues that the gap in male/female representation in tech may arise in part from factors other than male bias including, yes, biological factors, and a possible preference by a higher percentage of women to spend more time on activities outside the workplace. As the First Amendment doesn't – and shouldn't – apply to the workplace, I'm inclined to think that Google is within its rights to fire him. But, as a "liberal," I don't believe he should be demonized for expressing his opinion, and Google would be wise to consider his recommendations for increasing the number of women there. And I don't believe it's healthy for our society to consider or permit the expression of only those ideas with which we already agree.
He argues that the gap in male/female representation in tech may arise in part from factors other than male bias including, yes, biological factors, and a possible preference by a higher percentage of women to spend more time on activities outside the workplace. As the First Amendment doesn't – and shouldn't – apply to the workplace, I'm inclined to think that Google is within its rights to fire him. But, as a "liberal," I don't believe he should be demonized for expressing his opinion, and Google would be wise to consider his recommendations for increasing the number of women there. And I don't believe it's healthy for our society to consider or permit the expression of only those ideas with which we already agree.
73
"Society" hasn't deprived him of anything. Google, on the other hand, was his employer and it can do whatever it wants.
See the difference?
See the difference?
1
"Society hasn't deprived him of anything. Google, on the other hand, was his employer and it can do whatever it wants. See the difference?"
you have a right to free speech; you don't have a right to never be offended. see the difference?
you have a right to free speech; you don't have a right to never be offended. see the difference?
1
There is no right to free speech in employment. That's the First Amendment, which only protects you from the government. I wish people still took Civics; I get so tired of explaining this.
2
This is not a culture war. Diversity is not right, left, progressive or conservative. It's a strategic priority for Google, so they can attract, hire, and retain the best employees. When a junior level employee forces the company to either support its strategy or cave to his manifesto, guess how that's going to turn out? James Damore hijacked a popular meme -- diversity is a progressive ideology -- and we're all now calling it a culture war. Google's not falling for it. And neither should we.
50
Diversity should be about attracting, hiring and retaining the best employees. But its not. I got told matter of factly yesterday by HR that even though I have 2 screened, qualified candidates for an open position they are going to do some hardcore LinkedIn searches for "diversity" candidates who aren't necessarily looking since so far to date none had applied and passed the initial assessment - this is a step that HR handles, not me. When I asked her to define diversity, which the company pretends is about thought, background, race, gender and sexual orientation, she told me matter of factly it was "people of color".
I am happy to offer this position to the person that is most qualified and who has the biggest potential to succeed in this role. Period.
I am happy to offer this position to the person that is most qualified and who has the biggest potential to succeed in this role. Period.
4
I'm sorry. I know what it's liked to have open positions and not be able to fill them. It usually means the hiring mgr (you) has to work that much harder until the position is filled. Yet there is real economic value to diversity, and it's possible that in your company, the biggest barrier to diversity is racial diversity. But I don't know. Seeking diversity is often difficult, but in the long run, it's very profitable. But as a friend said to me when I complained about the challenges of MY job, "that's why you're the boss and not the individual contributor. They believe you can do it."
1
I am curious...have commenters read the actual essay by Mr. Damore?
I am also curious as to why few, if any, major publications have actually discussed the statistical and scientific claims made by Mr. Damore, to which his essay links.
And I wonder whether despite the industry's effort to recruit more women into engineering ranks, whether their failure is not subtle evidence for what Mr. Damore argues...and there lies the panic.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-E...
I am also curious as to why few, if any, major publications have actually discussed the statistical and scientific claims made by Mr. Damore, to which his essay links.
And I wonder whether despite the industry's effort to recruit more women into engineering ranks, whether their failure is not subtle evidence for what Mr. Damore argues...and there lies the panic.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-E...
55
I read the manifesto.
The manifesto seems to imply there is a biological reason women aren't in tech or won't be good at it. The differences between genders is miniscule. When it comes to coding, size does not matter. It's brain power, and that is not different.
The manifesto seems to imply there is a biological reason women aren't in tech or won't be good at it. The differences between genders is miniscule. When it comes to coding, size does not matter. It's brain power, and that is not different.
5
Closet misogyny?
No. the answer to "I am curious...have commenters read the actual essay by Mr. Damore?" is a resounding, angry and strident "NO!".
Its obvious that ~95% of the commenters here have not read the document, but that does not stop them from sharing their opinions. I'm really disappointed how 'the left' wishes to be the 'party of intellectualism' while simultaneously basking in this weird, deep ignorance.
Its obvious that ~95% of the commenters here have not read the document, but that does not stop them from sharing their opinions. I'm really disappointed how 'the left' wishes to be the 'party of intellectualism' while simultaneously basking in this weird, deep ignorance.
4
Any functioning democracy needs to be able to air a diversity of views, even the unpopular (actually the unpopular need more protection). Without the debate that entails democracy collapses. Orwell, in his work, pointed this out.
Yet today, a large portion of American society refuses to accept this basic fact. It complains of Trump as a threat to democracy. It needs to more much more introspective.
Yet today, a large portion of American society refuses to accept this basic fact. It complains of Trump as a threat to democracy. It needs to more much more introspective.
17
Google is not a functioning democracy
4
pete, I was referring to what this incident implies in terms of US society as a whole. It reflects the fact that democracy is threatened (and not by Trump but the anti-Turmps).
And our functioning democracy does air a diversity of views. That's why the idiotic Mr. Damore isn't in jail.
2
So the right is concerned about "ideological diversity"? Since when?
15
An employer has, through the hard-won battles of capital against labor, ensured to preserve the primacy of at-will employment --and firing. It is because of such protections that, from the Catholic church to Chic-Fil-A, an employer can assert supreme a corporation's "freedom."
Further enshrined in the Hobby Lobby decision, the corporation's freedom of speech, and of silencing workers' speech, while an employee is on the job and performing his or her professional capacities, is supreme as long as they print a paycheck. Should an employee dislike it, they can resign or express themselves in their free time.
The only exception, though very withered after much battling against unions, is a freedom to organize workers. A freedom that Mr. Damore is clearly stretching too far as he claims protection, while Google is exercising the very laws that the Chamber of Commerce and the Religious Right enshrined for corporations.
How ironic that these forces are now reneging on their campaigning, their legal advocacy, and their insistence of corporations as uber-legal-persons so that Mr. Damore can now speak prejudice when the very same forces uphold an employer's silencing of pro-choice, pro-immigrant, pro-diversity, and pro-equality speech everywhere else!
Further enshrined in the Hobby Lobby decision, the corporation's freedom of speech, and of silencing workers' speech, while an employee is on the job and performing his or her professional capacities, is supreme as long as they print a paycheck. Should an employee dislike it, they can resign or express themselves in their free time.
The only exception, though very withered after much battling against unions, is a freedom to organize workers. A freedom that Mr. Damore is clearly stretching too far as he claims protection, while Google is exercising the very laws that the Chamber of Commerce and the Religious Right enshrined for corporations.
How ironic that these forces are now reneging on their campaigning, their legal advocacy, and their insistence of corporations as uber-legal-persons so that Mr. Damore can now speak prejudice when the very same forces uphold an employer's silencing of pro-choice, pro-immigrant, pro-diversity, and pro-equality speech everywhere else!
10
There is no "I' in team and what he did was divisive in an office and team oriented setting. And a better question is when does his attitude towards other people get in the way of productivity. Granted, he's entitled to his own opinion, but he's not entitled to be free of the blowback that comes from espousing that opinion within the workspace. No matter if that blowback comes from his co-workers or management.
10
If you read his memo, he is suggesting ways to get more women to work at Google. That doesn't sound very divisive to me.
8
Granted, he's entitled to his own opinion, but he's not entitled to be free of the blowback that comes from espousing that opinion within the workspace.
so if someone mentions the pogrom of Koreans by blacks during the Rodney king riots they should be fired because of "blowback"?
so if someone mentions the pogrom of Koreans by blacks during the Rodney king riots they should be fired because of "blowback"?
2
Ok. I'll be sure to tell my female co-workers at work today that they're being "Neurotic" when an issue comes up. I'm sure that'll go over well and not land me in the HR office. LOL!
"Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."
"Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs."
2
This case revolves around too many details that are not being adequately reported on. The terms and conditions of this guy's employment mainly, but also the context of the release of the "email". As to references regarding other persons being retaliated against because they supported Trump or whatever; I agree that such should be dealt with harshly by law enforcement (in the case of violations of law relating to employee retaliation), and that they should pursue whatever legal remedy these wealthy persons might afford.
I do not agree with anything those persons, and this guy, actually said, but I think the right to free speech is more important than any other consideration or argument I've yet heard on this issue.
I do not agree with anything those persons, and this guy, actually said, but I think the right to free speech is more important than any other consideration or argument I've yet heard on this issue.
2
This has nothing to do with "free speech." The right enshrined in the First Amendment protects you from government suppression of your speech.
Google isn't the government. They hired him and then they fired him. The reason for the latter doesn't matter at all.
And if they had fired him because of whomever he voted for, that would have been just as legal.
Google isn't the government. They hired him and then they fired him. The reason for the latter doesn't matter at all.
And if they had fired him because of whomever he voted for, that would have been just as legal.
6
I am confused. Why does the Times think this is a political issue? The memo is sexist and if a company does not want its resources used to promote this kind of backwards thinking then I applaud them.
As a woman whose career in the tech industry began in the mid 1970s, I had to work twice as hard to prove I was capable. I was given lots of responsibility, but time after time i was denied the promotions and salaries of the white men whose jobs I moved into.
The tech industry must keep moving towards a diverse workforce, and everyone will benefit from products created by people with different points of view and capabilities. No, men and women are not the same. But to argue that women are not as capable is beyond ridiculous.
As a woman whose career in the tech industry began in the mid 1970s, I had to work twice as hard to prove I was capable. I was given lots of responsibility, but time after time i was denied the promotions and salaries of the white men whose jobs I moved into.
The tech industry must keep moving towards a diverse workforce, and everyone will benefit from products created by people with different points of view and capabilities. No, men and women are not the same. But to argue that women are not as capable is beyond ridiculous.
41
Oh please show us his actual words that " argue that women are not as capable".
1
Well, read it yourself, but here's help:
Arguing that it is foolish to shoot for parity because "science" proves that women don't really want the same things as men because of biological imperative" is not science. It also makes it clears that if being an engineer at Google is the coolest thing ever to want, and women don't really want it as much as men, then they are in some way lesser.
Hope that helps.
Arguing that it is foolish to shoot for parity because "science" proves that women don't really want the same things as men because of biological imperative" is not science. It also makes it clears that if being an engineer at Google is the coolest thing ever to want, and women don't really want it as much as men, then they are in some way lesser.
Hope that helps.
2
People tend to forget that the 1rst Amendment ONLY protects individuals from government actions against their speech. There is no place in the U.S. Constitution that guarantees individuals protection from retaliation from individuals via slander and libel lawsuits nor from employers.
14
There is no place in the U.S. Constitution that guarantees individuals protection from retaliation from individuals via slander and libel lawsuits nor from employers.
as a strong pro-Israel supporter I agree with you. Any employee of mine who is pro BDS will be fired. As will anyone who claims there are any human rights violations by Israelis against Palestinians. As an employer I have this right. These comments are slanderous.
as a strong pro-Israel supporter I agree with you. Any employee of mine who is pro BDS will be fired. As will anyone who claims there are any human rights violations by Israelis against Palestinians. As an employer I have this right. These comments are slanderous.
1
They don't forget. I'm convinced that they never knew it in the first place, which is scarier.
3
with any luck a Title IX style law, like that on college campuses, will come into being at Silicone Valley. That way any charge that wins with a 51% preponderance of the evidence (with the accused, naturally, having no right to challenge evidence, to bring evidence of their own, to have a defense of any sort, etc.).
If its good enough for colleges and universities it is obviously good enough for Silicone Valley (and business in general), is it not?
If its good enough for colleges and universities it is obviously good enough for Silicone Valley (and business in general), is it not?
6
Except that Colleges can opt out of TITLE IX based on religion (eg see: NY Times 2015 "Religious Colleges Obtain Waivers to Law that protects Transgender Students"). However, I do think that since money drives so much - don't put your money towards companies that tolerate/encourage/ or ignore this kind of inequality (hello Uber users).
1
Freedom of speech only protects people from the government from knocking down your door for speaking your mind; if people want to voice their beliefs during work, be prepared to face the ramifications.
6
Yes, that's how most of us understand our work and professional environments and act accordingly. The difference here is Google ostensibly invites everyone to share their opinions; invites and encourages everyone to engage in active dialogue via their "intra-net" (closed employer network), except, apparently, if it goes against the "correct" thinking. Most workplaces do not do this and there is an unspoken code of conduct.
Google still certainly probably has the legal right to dismiss the guy for almost any reason at all, and Mr. Damore, as a white male, will probably have little legal recourse since white males are not generally considered a protected category for purposes of employment law. Generally speaking, labor and employment lawyers will counsel any company to simultaneously dismiss several white heterosexual males for every one dismissal of someone in a protected category as a defense against discrimination lawsuits. An unfortunate perversion of our civil rights laws that were enacted for good reason to address egregious abuses and conduct back in the day.
Google still certainly probably has the legal right to dismiss the guy for almost any reason at all, and Mr. Damore, as a white male, will probably have little legal recourse since white males are not generally considered a protected category for purposes of employment law. Generally speaking, labor and employment lawyers will counsel any company to simultaneously dismiss several white heterosexual males for every one dismissal of someone in a protected category as a defense against discrimination lawsuits. An unfortunate perversion of our civil rights laws that were enacted for good reason to address egregious abuses and conduct back in the day.
2
I work in an environment with several female managers. Typically, when they have meetings, they frequently run a lot longer than the business that needs to be dealt with at those meetings. I hear talk about make up and clothes incessantly. Another female manager asked one for five to ten minutes of her time, and an hour and a half later I had to interrupt them because of something important that could not wait any longer. Am I promoting gender stereotypes in reporting this? And you should know that I supported Hillary Clinton for President twice because I believe she is no nonsense about doing a job.
9
Speaking anecdotally is different than using arguments of biological determinism to promote stereotypes that classify all women as inferior to men, as Damore did. I work with incompetent men every day, but I look at them as individuals and not representative of their entire gender.
13
I work in an environment with several male managers. Typically when they have meetings they run longer than the business that needs to be dealt with. The first 10 minutes are taken up by discussing the local sports teams. There are frequent diversions from the main subject matter into personal golf games or fantasy sports leagues.
We can trade anecdotes all day. Poor time management is not specific to any gender, but only recognizing it when one gender does it is promoting gender stereotypes.
We can trade anecdotes all day. Poor time management is not specific to any gender, but only recognizing it when one gender does it is promoting gender stereotypes.
24
" I hear talk about make up and clothes incessantly.. Am I promoting gender stereotypes in reporting this? "
yes, you are. And you need to be fired immediately for doing so. Not only that, you should be banned for life from ever working in your field again (or any other for that matter).
yes, you are. And you need to be fired immediately for doing so. Not only that, you should be banned for life from ever working in your field again (or any other for that matter).
1
That's what we need right now, the infighting of immature egomaniac billionaires in Silicon Valley. As if it's not enough to have one as president.
5
If a woman wrote a manifesto about how advanced empathy and communication skills among women deserved higher pay than software engineering skills, she'd be laughed out of the unemployment office. Meanwhile, a guy straight-up says women and minorities are biologically unable to excel as software engineers or developers---creating a hostile work environment for every woman and minority who might have to work with him---and we get articles and thinkpieces about how to best treat his "dissenting opinion". 'Kay.
22
That's not at all what he says. I suggest you read the document.
13
You've created a straw man. His argument had nothing to do with men or women deserving anything. He cited studies that bare out some, if not all of his points. But nowhere did he advocate that men deserve more money than women for their skills. Nor did he say they women and minorities are unable to excel. In fact quite the opposite. But he noted that certain differences over large populations may mean new tactics must be utilized to optimize Google's work place for women. Seeing as their hiring numbers have stagnated for years, despite hoopla surrounding promoting diversity, perhaps he has a point?
Huge mistake for Google to fire Dalmore and make a martyr of him. He should have been interviewed by management with the attitude, "James, Tell us more. Maybe there is something to what you say. Show us your data." When he failed to come up with any support, the response should have been: "You are saying that you wrote this and sent it out to others without any data?!. James, we are a data-driven, fact-based institution. Are you saying that you wrote this is just based on your FEELINGS?" A good interviewer could embarrass and effectively turn him into an irrelevant joke, forcing him to resign or continue to work in shame.
17
The actual memo is full of charts, graphs, and footnotes. It is really a very wonkish production, and would not be out of place in The Upshot. I suggest that the New York Times republish it so everyone can read it.
14
The problem with your analysis, Dick Watson, is that the scientific literature is in complete alignment with the claims made in Dalmore's memo.
3
Charts and footnotes don't mean anything. They're like pictures. He cites to Wiki studies. That should tell you all you need to know right there.
2
Compare how Danmore has been treated with how women who complained about men and the gaming industry. I'm sure Leigh Alexander and Anita Sarkeesian of Gamergate fame would gladly buy him a beer so he could vent to them about all the death threats he did not receive.
15
Who's talking about how he's been treated in that sense? In fact, many who agree and disagree with his points, but do not find them "offensive", have endorsed Google's right to fire him.
Let's do a though exercise - had an anonymous female Google engineer written something similar, but instead said that men are too status obsessed and don't value collaboration enough and therefore there we need to redouble the efforts to recruit more women in tech, what would the reaction have been? I imagine the media and the company would have been falling over themselves to call her "brave" and "insightful" and she probably would have been given every resource needed to try and make it happen. It's only discrimination if you're slaughtering PC sacred cows, but if you're not a protected minority in this day and age (read: the loathed straight white male) you are fair game for public shaming and institutionalized discrimination.
47
She could even have used the same paper.
1
Andrew - not at my workplace. Sweeping generalizations and broad assertions based on stereotypes directed at large swaths of my co-workers would not be tolerated no matter who they are aimed at. If I wrote what Damore did and substituted "white male" for each of his arguments about women, I would expect to be fired as well. You are the one seeming to have an "us vs. them" mentality here.
6
Too bad there's no thumbs down option here...........
1
Doesn't Google use peer review when determining raises and promotion? Damore managed to create a hostile work environment for the female engineers. Google had to fire him otherwise women could point to that memo as an example of why they were denied advancement
Even if women in general are not drawn to IT, there's no evidence that women who are interested in IT and employed by Google are any less able than their male counterparts - except in Mr Damore's mind.
I don't know if Damore is a good engineer or not, but he showed incredibly bad judgment and poor social skills in that memo. It would seem to me that part of being a good engineer is to foster the best work in your teammates.
Even if women in general are not drawn to IT, there's no evidence that women who are interested in IT and employed by Google are any less able than their male counterparts - except in Mr Damore's mind.
I don't know if Damore is a good engineer or not, but he showed incredibly bad judgment and poor social skills in that memo. It would seem to me that part of being a good engineer is to foster the best work in your teammates.
15
Being in management, my first thought was, "Yes, he probably needs to be fired." However, I've grown more sympathetic to his argument and have questioned my original conclusion that he should be terminated. He never, under any circumstance said "men are better than women at tech." What he made was a sourced and cited argument that the appropriate ratio might not be 50:50; the author has a PhD in biological systems from Harvard and a number of credible scientists have since backed his claims. Now you wouldn't know that if you didn't read the document b/c the headlines were immediately "Googler published anti-diversity memo!!!" and Gizmodo, who first published the document (intentionally?) stripped the citations, immutably changing the meaning, context and intent of the original document. While that's not 'fake news' per se, it is a perfect example of journalism that seeks to inflame as opposed to journalism that seeks to inform.
My wife who is a high-level executive was horrified by the reaction to the document: if women are fully capable, powerful and strong, how could a ham-handed document cause the existential psychic destruction that so many seemed to be performing on social media? Her view is there is no better example of the 'toxic patriarchy' than the "we must protect the little girls from the mean words!!" attitude that permeated reaction to the document.
Perhaps the answer to controversial speech is more speech, not outrage, misrepresentation and over reaction?
My wife who is a high-level executive was horrified by the reaction to the document: if women are fully capable, powerful and strong, how could a ham-handed document cause the existential psychic destruction that so many seemed to be performing on social media? Her view is there is no better example of the 'toxic patriarchy' than the "we must protect the little girls from the mean words!!" attitude that permeated reaction to the document.
Perhaps the answer to controversial speech is more speech, not outrage, misrepresentation and over reaction?
84
His argument about 50-50 diversity between male and female is a "red-herring" since the situation is not even close to that. The problem of the memo is found in the so-called "data" about women that he presents--which is completely unfounded--, and his lack of self-awareness of his own extreme prejudices. If he is in any kind of position where he is overseeing others, he would likely be demoted or fired for discrimination once it was revealed. He played himself by believing he had some important "advice" for the company, which is in fact 1950s jingoism.
8
You ought to actually read the memo. If you have, then read it again.
When you say:
"The problem of the memo is found in the so-called "data" about women that he presents--which is completely unfounded--"
How would you address the growing number of experts (including female experts) in the field that have come to defend his conclusions?
You seem remarkably under informed on the topic given how strong your opinions are coming across.
When you say:
"The problem of the memo is found in the so-called "data" about women that he presents--which is completely unfounded--"
How would you address the growing number of experts (including female experts) in the field that have come to defend his conclusions?
You seem remarkably under informed on the topic given how strong your opinions are coming across.
4
Contrary to what you state, Harvard confirmed that Mr. Damore actually did not complete his PhD in biological systems.
3
Perhaps Mr. Damore could work for Hobby Lobby, where he could educate his fellow employees on how the company's established religion violates the biblical command to "render under Caesar what is Caesar's."
For conservatives and liberals alike, identity politics always poisons relationships.
For conservatives and liberals alike, identity politics always poisons relationships.
2
or maybe Hillary's election committee. I remember visiting her website and being shocked at how dismissive she was of men. Her election website literally had more on the transvestites than men.
1
This is not a free speech issue, which Breitbart et al. would have us believe. The right is trying to co-opt free speech as an issue by suggesting they should be able to express their racist, sexist, bigoted views wherever they want. Then they act like snowflakes when there's understandable pushback.
Mr. Damore is free to express his odious beliefs, but not at work, where he must respect workplace policies and culture. Google was absolutely within its rights to fire him. Mr. Damore clearly was more interested in creating a stir than discussing women in tech in a constructive way.
In the end, he's a disruptive presence at Google. Perhaps he should run for office.
Mr. Damore is free to express his odious beliefs, but not at work, where he must respect workplace policies and culture. Google was absolutely within its rights to fire him. Mr. Damore clearly was more interested in creating a stir than discussing women in tech in a constructive way.
In the end, he's a disruptive presence at Google. Perhaps he should run for office.
10
Eric, Shwartz, the ex head of the DNC stated that Jews should not marry Gentiles. Yet she was kept on as head of the DNC. Do you consider her views as racist? Do you believe that she should have lost her job because of her comment? Or do you believe that only the correct incorrect views should be punished. I think you fit into the latter category.
1
You didn't read the original document did you?
I enjoy the reporting of facts that comes out of the NYT... However, this is a significant stretch and a transparent attempt to get Trump's name associated with a negative situation. I am not a Trump supporter, but the ignorance created and published by Damore has ZERO to do with Trump. This is not a "culture war" or any other kind of cause and effect coming to Silicon Valley's doorstep.
This is a society that has raised a generation who believes they have the right to say and write anything that is rolling around in their ignorant heads with zero consequence. Google is not censoring him and his right to free speech is not being trampled as many have said. The man shares ignorant, bordering on stupid, opinions using company resources, that by the way are in direct conflict with that company's views, and he lost his job for it.
Boo Hoo...
It is about time people started to remember that even though you have the right to say pretty much anything you want, you are not immune from the accountability for your words. I applaud Google for saying what was said in that "memo" is not our beliefs and if that is the way you think you would be better off finding a company that shares the way you think.
If you open your mouth or type your fingers on the keys to share ignorant or stupid stuff, be prepared to be called ignorant or stupid, or if you do it using a company's resources, be prepared to be fired..
Otherwise, don't do it.
This is a society that has raised a generation who believes they have the right to say and write anything that is rolling around in their ignorant heads with zero consequence. Google is not censoring him and his right to free speech is not being trampled as many have said. The man shares ignorant, bordering on stupid, opinions using company resources, that by the way are in direct conflict with that company's views, and he lost his job for it.
Boo Hoo...
It is about time people started to remember that even though you have the right to say pretty much anything you want, you are not immune from the accountability for your words. I applaud Google for saying what was said in that "memo" is not our beliefs and if that is the way you think you would be better off finding a company that shares the way you think.
If you open your mouth or type your fingers on the keys to share ignorant or stupid stuff, be prepared to be called ignorant or stupid, or if you do it using a company's resources, be prepared to be fired..
Otherwise, don't do it.
8
If you open your mouth or type your fingers on the keys to share ignorant or stupid stuff, be prepared to be called ignorant or stupid, or if you do it using a company's resources, be prepared to be fired..
Otherwise, don't do it.
as an employer I agree. As a strong supporter of Israel, if I find out you are a pro BDS supporter I will fire you in no time for your "ignorant" comment.
Otherwise, don't do it.
as an employer I agree. As a strong supporter of Israel, if I find out you are a pro BDS supporter I will fire you in no time for your "ignorant" comment.
1
A calendar year ago...Barack Obama was the President, and "everyone knew" that Hillary would win the election.
The situation in high tech was PRECISELY the same as today -- dominated by men, and with a lot of foreign H1Bs, asians, southeast asians, etc. but relatively few women.
It was the same 30 years ago too. So please tell me how this is TRUMP'S fault?
The situation in high tech was PRECISELY the same as today -- dominated by men, and with a lot of foreign H1Bs, asians, southeast asians, etc. but relatively few women.
It was the same 30 years ago too. So please tell me how this is TRUMP'S fault?
1
concerned citizen, because so many people like Andy need a scapegoat to blame.
This certainly is an appropriate story for DAY 200 of our Collective National Nightmare. Moi? I truly have come to despise technology over the last several years, and it will only get worse. This train wreck certainly does not help.
1
“If you want your company to be successful, then you should hire female workers!” Alibaba’s CEO said. “Women think about others more than themselves.”
Ma said that the reason behind this is a woman’s emotional intelligence which allows them to be more thoughtful about their jobs and roles.
_____
Anyone for kicking Alibaba and Ma off the stock exchange?
Ma said that the reason behind this is a woman’s emotional intelligence which allows them to be more thoughtful about their jobs and roles.
_____
Anyone for kicking Alibaba and Ma off the stock exchange?
3
Let me boil it down for you:
In lefty liberalism, you can say anything POSITIVE about women, and it's fine -- you can say they are smarter, harder working, more moral and ethical -- better employees -- better parents and citizens.
It is always OK in lefty liberalism to put down white men, especially if they are blue collar or working class -- I could quote them all day -- "deplorables....stupid....low information....rednecks....racists...bigots...homophobes"....
Nobody would ever, ever get fired for putting own white men.
But criticize women -- or holy moly, GODDESS FORBID -- you say anything negative about black or hispanic people -- and you will be executed at dawn on public square.
In lefty liberalism, it is always only OK and acceptable to mock, criticize and revile WHITE MEN.
NOTE: I am not a white man.
In lefty liberalism, you can say anything POSITIVE about women, and it's fine -- you can say they are smarter, harder working, more moral and ethical -- better employees -- better parents and citizens.
It is always OK in lefty liberalism to put down white men, especially if they are blue collar or working class -- I could quote them all day -- "deplorables....stupid....low information....rednecks....racists...bigots...homophobes"....
Nobody would ever, ever get fired for putting own white men.
But criticize women -- or holy moly, GODDESS FORBID -- you say anything negative about black or hispanic people -- and you will be executed at dawn on public square.
In lefty liberalism, it is always only OK and acceptable to mock, criticize and revile WHITE MEN.
NOTE: I am not a white man.
18
Why do we continue to accept standards based on gender that would be repugnant on any other basis? One only needs to consider how a memo rejecting blacks for slothfulness or Asians for being untrustworthy would be greeted.
13
Is he doing his job as an engineer? If yes, how does his opinion about personnel policy have any relevance to his legitimate expectation to continued employment? If you are going to tell me that being employed means subscribing to the whole political agenda of my company because it can be branded as "values," then it's proof we DESPERATELY need a more robust application of the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
14
Really? His opinion about a whole subgroup of his coworkers doesn't affect his work--and theirs? I wonder what if everyone defending him here would feel the same way if he had said the reason there aren't more African American engineers is biological.... That would be a acceptable expression of a personal opinion, on a company platform?
6
Everyone but the most junior engineer at Google is expected to offer accurate feedback about their peers, that will be used for promotion and retention decisions.
Since this particular "engineer" has declared that he is not capable of doing this task without freaking out about something with two X chromosomes, no manager can ethically or legally ask a woman to work with him. I mean, very literally, Google could be sued for doing so.
Therefore, no, he cannot do his job as engineer. That such did not occur to him is probably because he is so weak in those "softer" skills he denigrates.
Since this particular "engineer" has declared that he is not capable of doing this task without freaking out about something with two X chromosomes, no manager can ethically or legally ask a woman to work with him. I mean, very literally, Google could be sued for doing so.
Therefore, no, he cannot do his job as engineer. That such did not occur to him is probably because he is so weak in those "softer" skills he denigrates.
6
That is not how the First Amendment works. It protects citizens from suppression of their speech by the government. It does not govern the internal policies of companies, nor does it override California's at-will employment law; Google can fire Damore any time it wants for any or no reason.
Similarly, freedom of religion protects against the government advocating for or against a particular faith. Believe what you want; you don't get to control my beliefs or behavior, and I don't have to alter my life to accommodate your beliefs. Workplaces are required to make reasonable accommodations for religious practice; that is not a license to do whatever you want. Republican notions of religious freedom currently making the rounds essentially place certain beliefs above the law and I believe will not withstand court scrutiny.
Your suggestion that extending free speech and freedom of religion protections into private companies is, frankly, ridiculous. It is directly opposed to free market values, and would create instant chaos and severely impact the economy.
Similarly, freedom of religion protects against the government advocating for or against a particular faith. Believe what you want; you don't get to control my beliefs or behavior, and I don't have to alter my life to accommodate your beliefs. Workplaces are required to make reasonable accommodations for religious practice; that is not a license to do whatever you want. Republican notions of religious freedom currently making the rounds essentially place certain beliefs above the law and I believe will not withstand court scrutiny.
Your suggestion that extending free speech and freedom of religion protections into private companies is, frankly, ridiculous. It is directly opposed to free market values, and would create instant chaos and severely impact the economy.
6
Yes, kick out all those evil, sexist men! Outside the exit door, there is a big booth: "Sign up for the Republican Party - we need educated young voters!"
16
Firing someone because of having a divergent opinion is a big mistake.
This man had an opinion. A very sexist one but nevertheless, an opinion. Freedom of speech is a core value in this country. Even if you might not agree with this man said, he still has a right to state his opinion.
As for employees stating political views and being "warned" that those views might affect their job, whether it be on the line or on the board is abhorrent. That should never be allowed. It's just a point where a dialogue can be started, not stopped.
The men who supported trump in the beginning, I would imagine that, given the actions of this POTUS, they would certainly change their minds. At least I would hope so.
This man had an opinion. A very sexist one but nevertheless, an opinion. Freedom of speech is a core value in this country. Even if you might not agree with this man said, he still has a right to state his opinion.
As for employees stating political views and being "warned" that those views might affect their job, whether it be on the line or on the board is abhorrent. That should never be allowed. It's just a point where a dialogue can be started, not stopped.
The men who supported trump in the beginning, I would imagine that, given the actions of this POTUS, they would certainly change their minds. At least I would hope so.
9
Freedom of Speech does not apply in the workplace --this has been established and re-established by the Supreme Court, just lately in Hobby Lobby.
4
Yoandel: the Hobby Lobby decision was about contraception, not free speech.
1
It was about religious freedom, not contraception, and was based in the First Amendment. Yoandel is correct.
1
How managers should respond to opinions voiced in the workplace remains a complex question. But as we address the validity of opinions (Google memo: sexist or a reasonable dissent?) we shouldn't lose touch with the fact that large numbers of women in Silicon Valley testify to being treated poorly: harassed, paid less (this is empirically verified), passed over for promotion, belittled.
There are harmful, real world implications to theoretical opinions, although we can't assume any direct causation. How surprising is it that Mr. Damore's supervisors at Harvard had to apologize for a skit he promoted that women found sexist, and that made them feel marginalized? How surprising is that Peter Thiel once declared that giving women the vote has degraded democracy?
There are harmful, real world implications to theoretical opinions, although we can't assume any direct causation. How surprising is it that Mr. Damore's supervisors at Harvard had to apologize for a skit he promoted that women found sexist, and that made them feel marginalized? How surprising is that Peter Thiel once declared that giving women the vote has degraded democracy?
21
He has a right to his own opinions. He could have expressed them and probably did express them elsewhere. He knew that he would get fired for using company time and company resources to produce his manifesto of white male supremacy. He deliberately did this to become a martyr to the far right.
Google was right to fire him, because he was not just espousing his own opinion on his own time, he was telling every female he worked with that they were inferior. I've worked in tech for 25 years and never, ever have I seen the kind of problems he portrays. Maybe I've just worked with exceptional women, but after 25 years I see no difference in the dedication of women and men software developers. NONE. Some are better than others, but that is true for both male and female. His premise is insulting to brilliant women everywhere.
Google was right to fire him, because he was not just espousing his own opinion on his own time, he was telling every female he worked with that they were inferior. I've worked in tech for 25 years and never, ever have I seen the kind of problems he portrays. Maybe I've just worked with exceptional women, but after 25 years I see no difference in the dedication of women and men software developers. NONE. Some are better than others, but that is true for both male and female. His premise is insulting to brilliant women everywhere.
83
Thank you for speaking up.
I'm a woman in the tech industry and I've seen my share of sexism but I've also worked alongside some amazing men and women who made tech a very satisfying and fulfilling career.
I'm a woman in the tech industry and I've seen my share of sexism but I've also worked alongside some amazing men and women who made tech a very satisfying and fulfilling career.
5
"I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions."
This is his "white male supremacist" thesis; and you'll have to forgive me, but I fail to see how this is "being a martyr to the far right", or "telling every female he worked with that they were inferior". Have you actually read his essay or are you just using this as an opportunity to espouse your own sexist and racist biases?
This is his "white male supremacist" thesis; and you'll have to forgive me, but I fail to see how this is "being a martyr to the far right", or "telling every female he worked with that they were inferior". Have you actually read his essay or are you just using this as an opportunity to espouse your own sexist and racist biases?
2
Can you please point out quotes from the original memo that seem to indicate that he is a white supremacist? I read the memo and frankly can't find anything.
1
If Mr. Damore is in a leadership position in Google, he would take responsibility of his statement. But if he is just an engineer expressing personal opinion in Google internal network, Mr. Damore should be free to express his view. The problem really is why Google has more male engineers than female engineers. Since Mr. Damore was fired based on his "wrong" view, Google could be liable for discrimination against hiring female engineers. Otherwise, how could you explain more male than female engineers in Google?
8
science and logic aside, everyone believes he or she is an expert about sex and gender; there's no other topic which inspires such confidence. as far as individual performance goes, hateful beliefs probably are not much of a factor -- peter thiel's support for donald trump is no more of a hindrance than, say, henry ford's antisemitism. however, from the perspective of a group or organization, the damage of bias is readily apparent. google made the right decision by removing mr damore from its team.
7
The issue here is not about the right to share an opinion, rather it is about values. Google has corporate values and is entitled to select employees consistent with their values. Clearly Mr. Damore has contrary values with regard to perceptions of women. Google has a right to dismiss Mr. Damore. Had Mr. Damore expressed these values at the job interviews, he may very well not have been offered a job.
127
Wow--Google can express its corporate values, but Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor have to tow the government line on abortifacients.
4
"Values"? You are talking about Google and claiming they have any?
They are a monolopoly which has helped thieve/steal 1 MM jobs from American workers through the lunatic H1B jobs' theft program. What kind of "values" to which are you referring?
They are a monolopoly which has helped thieve/steal 1 MM jobs from American workers through the lunatic H1B jobs' theft program. What kind of "values" to which are you referring?
5
Do you also believe that Christian businesses should be free to reject applicants because they are LGBT, not sufficiently modest, have a relationship outside of wedlock, etc?
2
The four identified companies, and indeed the wider sector, are very similar to the long tradition of high growth, innovative, hugely successful corporations within the American story. As mentioned its a bunch of white guys predominantly working in these companies, the culture is sexist and not open. Different haircuts and uniforms maybe, but essentially the same. And of course, when someone does not agree with the 'script' - thats all it is - then they are treated in a way that the script requires. Mr Hastings and his cohorts are merely behaving in the manner they would characterise as the behaviour of say, Trump or Thiel. Silicon Valley is stuck in the losing script, the one that was defeated in the polls last November. We all had so much hope for the 'new economy, for 'tech', but we now realise its just the next chapter in the same book.
3
How did you post this comment? PC, laptop, or your smartphone?
Unless you used a smoke signal or carrier pigeon, tech has fulfilled all of your "hopes."
Unless you used a smoke signal or carrier pigeon, tech has fulfilled all of your "hopes."
1
Kim: I use it because I have no choice. Unlike you, I am old enough to remember the magical world of 1995, before smartphones and (much) internet, where people still read books and talked to each other in person.
"Tech" -- as expressed via Silicon Valley -- has made our lives WORSE by every imaginable metric -- and sucked up every dollar, so they are arrogant billionaires and we have NOTHING.
"Tech" -- as expressed via Silicon Valley -- has made our lives WORSE by every imaginable metric -- and sucked up every dollar, so they are arrogant billionaires and we have NOTHING.
As a citizen of a democracy, I think that Mr. Damore had every right to speak his mind and Google was wrong to suppress him. As a female software developer, I also believe that Damore has a right to present his arguments. I will go so far as to say that some of them are correct and I see those traits in myself. Based on the excerpts I've seen, he handled it sensitively and with the intention of starting a dialogue. Maybe we don't need to go around pretending that every human is just the same, and maybe if we can accept the differences, we can move forward to finding a place for "Feminine" behavior within the IT community.
165
Speak for yourself then but not for other women. I'm a woman in tech and I'm nothing like what he describes.
No employee has a right to express an opinion counter to their company's values without facing the consequences, especially when they are using company time and resources.
No employee has a right to express an opinion counter to their company's values without facing the consequences, especially when they are using company time and resources.
9
Just to give one example. I am very organized and careful. I take large amounts of notes and document like crazy. (I'm generalizing) but often, my male colleagues just charge into the work, update configuration, even production, and claim to "keep it all in their heads". Usually that works for them, but sometimes when a server goes down and I am the one who can solve the problem because I have the notes from last time.
9
It would help me understand your comment if you were to point out just exactly which accommodations need to be made for 'feminine' behavior in the work place. As it stands, I'm insulted by your comment and embarrassed for the great female developers I work with.
7
If I stood before my students and said, "Some of you are biologically inferior," I would be fired before the school day ended. I am not even allowed to say that I often vote for Democrats. There are myriad venues for me to discuss my opinions and have them open for debate. My place of employment is not one of them.
279
The memo never said that women are "biologically inferior." It outlined a set of uncontroversial biological facts which explain behavioral differences over averages of large populations.
If you want to chime in then read the original document, all the media coverage has been laughably distorted.
If you want to chime in then read the original document, all the media coverage has been laughably distorted.
81
He wasn't a teacher and had not authority over anyone. Not the same.
16
It happens all the time, when employers crow about the putative superiority of female workers. Of course, they don't use the word "superior", but neither did Damore use the word "inferior".
4
Google isn't the government and the First Amendment has no applicability here. Mr. Damore insulted his employer and his coworkers on company time with company resources.
Of course his first thought is legal action rather than accepting the stupidity of his act of sophomoric rebellion.
As a lawyer, I hope he gets a female judge and jury.
Of course his first thought is legal action rather than accepting the stupidity of his act of sophomoric rebellion.
As a lawyer, I hope he gets a female judge and jury.
304
Lawyer here too - you should read the memo before you call it a 'sophomoric rebellion.' Its hardly sophomoric, and that matters here.
I don't know your familiarity with this corner of the law, but he has a very interesting case against Google, particularly given some nuances within CA labor law regarding code/law prohibiting retaliation for political beliefs. Of course it would never make it to trial (this is a classic 'just settle it quietly' type of case), but I don't think it would be too high a mountain to climb to get half a jury to agree that there is a 'pervasive hostility" towards conservative beliefs, particularly given the (over)reaction we saw to the document. Put differently, is Google pursuing with equal zeal the employees that leaked the document, or the employees that violated their internal code of conduct by taking the issue publicly to twitter? Maybe OJ Simpson and Google can team up to find the real killers?
If you can show uneven enforcement, which I suspect is the case here, winning a settlement from Google becomes much easier.
I don't know your familiarity with this corner of the law, but he has a very interesting case against Google, particularly given some nuances within CA labor law regarding code/law prohibiting retaliation for political beliefs. Of course it would never make it to trial (this is a classic 'just settle it quietly' type of case), but I don't think it would be too high a mountain to climb to get half a jury to agree that there is a 'pervasive hostility" towards conservative beliefs, particularly given the (over)reaction we saw to the document. Put differently, is Google pursuing with equal zeal the employees that leaked the document, or the employees that violated their internal code of conduct by taking the issue publicly to twitter? Maybe OJ Simpson and Google can team up to find the real killers?
If you can show uneven enforcement, which I suspect is the case here, winning a settlement from Google becomes much easier.
14
It is not quite so simple. Employment law has become a tool of government control, used as a form of reeducation for those of us who dare disagree with the direction our society is heading. Employers are in essence acting at the government's direction with a plethora of workplace laws that protect expressions of opinions it likes, and punish those it does not. Traditional moral statements are shunned while divergent expressions are encouraged and protected under law.
Business policy is largely reflective of the legal atmosphere. It would be impossible for a company like Google, even if it's top management were conservative (which they are not), to do anything other than what they've done in this case. Unfortunately, if Mr. Damore sues, it is unlikely he can get a fair trial on the left coast where diversity is a one way street.
Business policy is largely reflective of the legal atmosphere. It would be impossible for a company like Google, even if it's top management were conservative (which they are not), to do anything other than what they've done in this case. Unfortunately, if Mr. Damore sues, it is unlikely he can get a fair trial on the left coast where diversity is a one way street.
3
I don't think anything Damore said was insulting.
5
Workplace mail is not an appropriate place for airing these views. Company email is not a platform for airing your sexist, racist opinions though you are entitled to have them. If it was not women but Asians or French people would these comments be tolerated in the workplace?
103
This is absolutely correct.
1
I abhore Damore's thinking, but banning right-wingers from college and business campuses makes no sense in a society struggling to keep freedom of speech off the endangered list. And look what the result was --fodder for Breitbart et al.
31
Since when does "getting fired" == banned? Also, please learn more about freedom of speech. Because it isn't what you're describing.
1
jmm, so when the left attacks those who come to campus to give non-leftist speeches and they are prevented this is not an attack on free speech?
Are the works of Voltaire and Orwell still taught at schools like Berkelely? Or have they been replaced by the sexism and racism taught in womens and black studies programs?
Are the works of Voltaire and Orwell still taught at schools like Berkelely? Or have they been replaced by the sexism and racism taught in womens and black studies programs?
what was to abhor? rather than explore the differences between sexes and honor, respect, embrace it, we are to ignore it? women are equal to men in everyway and yet that doesn't preclude us from being different...biologically. At a MACRO level, this leads to different interests, areas of focus, etc. My 14 yr old daughter read Damore's paper and found it to be mostly true. She disagreed about leadership but also understood it was at a level far greater than an individual. She is a strong young woman who values her womanness, feminine qualities, AND embraces her recognizes that men and women are different. why is this so hard to understand for people 20 years her senior?
Yes, the Trump supporters in Silicon Valley, all three of them, are oh-so influential.
9
There are far more than you think, but we're smart enough to know that the left wants to play whack-a-mole with every one of us who dares to show ourselves publicly. It seems the highest crime one can have is to speak their mind if it doesn't agree with the "progressive" view of the world. That isn't diversity. it's totalitarian.
3
If Mr. Damore is just an individual contributor engineer, I think he should be allowed to express his opinion. As Google is a private company, he doesn't have the First Amendment right to do it, but I think suppressing opinions is a bad idea generally.
But what if he is a manager, or rises to that position? In choosing his teams, he would obviously be reluctant to use a female engineer on his team, or make her tech lead. How should Google respond to that? Mr. Damore is entitled to his opinions, but his opinion should not impede the progress of other Google employees.
But what if he is a manager, or rises to that position? In choosing his teams, he would obviously be reluctant to use a female engineer on his team, or make her tech lead. How should Google respond to that? Mr. Damore is entitled to his opinions, but his opinion should not impede the progress of other Google employees.
67
Why should this jerk be allowed to express ignorant and sexist opinions? You don't have to be a manager to make the workplace a hostile environment for your co-workers.
4
Google employees are required to do annual peer reviews. So it doesn't matter that he's not a manager -- he was still in the position to really damage someone's life.
3
And what did he actually say (not what the media translated) that made you think that his opinion might impede the progress of other Google employees?
Had Google left Mr Damore in place I suspect that he would've been forced out by his peers. Essentially, nature would "take it's course" and he would've suffered the consequences of his words and actions in the workplace. It will be interesting to see just how Google, and other tech firms, show just how wrong Mr Damore is. The first place to do this is to rectify the ridiculous imbalance in employment of men vs women. That will mean getting confronting the "fraternity" attitudes that imbue the culture there.
6
If Mr. Damore had not used biological determinism to underpin his argument against the efficacy of Google's diversity programs his missive might have had some credibility. I can understand why Google would not want to retain an employee who doesn't believe his fellow female coworkers are biologically capable of the work that they'd been hired to do.
134
Clearly you didn't read the actual document, there was no insinuation that women aren't biologically capable of engineering work. It cited a set of uncontroversial biological facts that explain behavioral differences in averages over large populations. Artificially injecting sex-based discrimination into the hiring process is misogynist and patronizing to women, as it discounts the success of the myriad qualified female engineers who got hired on merit.
Read the original memo, it's actually very reasonable and rational and has been misrepresented dramatically by histrionic diatribes.
Read the original memo, it's actually very reasonable and rational and has been misrepresented dramatically by histrionic diatribes.
61
Read the memo and you will find out how false your assertions are. Damore was trying, like any good engineer, to deal with reality and not make-believe. The man states clearly his desire for inclusiveness and diversity of all types, including that of thought and perspective. His case was powerful so all we see are misdirections and outright lies told about his memo. Read it.
12
I read the primary source (the memo) and could not identify any appeal to biological determinism. Distributional tendencies are an entirely different matter and your willful misrepresentation that he "doesn't believe that his fellow female coworkers are biologically capable" made me cringe as a left-of-center citizen and a statistician. Individuals != population distributions.
6