Slashdot Mirror
Google Fires Author of Divisive Memo On Gender Differences (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Alphabet Inc.'s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company's diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley. James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for "perpetuating gender stereotypes." Earlier on Monday, Google CEO Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees that said portions of the memo "violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace." But he didn't say if the company was taking action against the employee. A Google representative, asked about the dismissal, referred to Pichai's memo. Damore's 10-page memorandum accused Google of silencing conservative political opinions and argued that biological differences play a role in the shortage of women in tech and leadership positions. It circulated widely inside the company and became public over the weekend, causing a furor that amplified the pressure on Google executives to take a more definitive stand. After the controversy swelled, Danielle Brown, Google's new vice president for diversity, integrity and governance, sent a statement to staff condemning Damore's views and reaffirmed the company's stance on diversity. In internal discussion boards, multiple employees said they supported firing the author, and some said they would not choose to work with him, according to postings viewed by Bloomberg News.
That seems harsh. Does this prove the part of his post about being scared to disagree?
Obey the party line or be fired and banned from the industry.
To those supporting Google's termination, any deviation from the approved narrative is an emergency.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
For such an "inclusive" and "tolerant" company, they sure are quite Soviet in their treatment of dissent.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I have been on work related travel in Africa and Europe the past couple of weeks and had just started my family vacation here this week. I have decided to return tomorrow as clearly there’s a lot more to discuss as a group — including how we create a more inclusive environment for all.
And now we know why he was fired: due to his rant the CEO had to cut short his holidays. This is definitely a firing offense.
"At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint)."
And to prove that their fears are well founded, Google will simply fire one of them. Got a minority conservative viewpoint? Don't you dare to express your view or suffer the consequences.
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
If he takes them to court and can prove that his statements are scientifically backed at the statistical scale, they they aren't stereotypes and it would be wrongful termination right? I would LOVE to see that happen. So tired of the like that says everyone is genetically the same. It's literally shouting at proof to try and scare it into falsehood.
To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.
Did he actually suggest that women are less biologically suited to be programmers? My reading was he was trying to explain why women don't want to become programmers, not that they are less good at it when they choose to do so. I didn't read anywhere in the thing where it said women are worse programmers.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
More importantly, POPULATION AVERAGES ARE NOT THE SAME AS AN INDIVIDUAL!!! For example, it's clear that ON AVERAGE more men appear to commit violent crimes. Does this mean that ALL men are more violent than all women? NO! You can have a super peaceful man who wouldn't hurt a fly and a woman who is a murderer. Google mischaracterized the memo very badly. The author did NOT suggest that this applies to ALL women. It's a very stupid way to miss the point and I will certainly avoid buying anything from Google while they are so fascist in their approach to RESPECTFUL DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. The guy was VERY NUANCED in what he said. Google's just being pathetic here.
I mean, firing people over an _opinion_, formulated without aggression and without attacking anyone - that's harsh. I'd be scared shitless in such an environment that I might accidentally say something that bothers the SJWs and be fired for my troubles. And it's a great demo how, once again, "diversity" means "you'll agree with me or I'll silence you."
An employer who acts like this is not worth working for.
I am not conservative , right winged. I am left winged (a look at my post history for the last 10 years should show that) and for TRUE equality of opportunity, something we did not have until recently with women and skin color minorities being suppressed consciously or unconsciously by the work environment, HR, and the various team leaders. But i am for a good discourse because women and men are different on how they handle situation, how they view social activities, and how they will have bias. This naturally impact on how they will for example chose a job, and while part of it is socially learned, part of it is inherent to sex (I avoid gender due to the pitfall of TG). And that is where I break peace with many of my friends on the left side. I am against equality of outcome. Because you then inherently 1) spit of all sex science and spit on the difference between women and men 2) add inefficiencies by having less good candidate over take better candidate to match an outcome "more women , more minorities". Naturally the converse is that since society move slowly, minorities and women would have been screwed for longer had we not have the equality of outcome. That may be true too. But that still does not make it right or better than equality of opportunity. But where it goes to the "wrong terribly wrong" deep end, is when you get fired for having this opinion like this seem to be in this case. Granted I did not read the full memo, but what I overflew seem to be quite clear : google bent over and fired him to avoid looking "sexist". And thus died any discourse right or left at google.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
All Google did was confirm that James was right about the intolerance of the SJW bullies who run the show.
Fuck Google. I'm glad I don't use any of their products or services. Hopefully Microsoft will bury them.
The backlash is coming, just look at the election of Trump which is the result of over-stressing the "minority" dogmas.
No, the election of Trump WAS the backlash: that was frustrated people lashing out against an establishment, that they feel is stacking the deck against them. What is coming - and is already underway - is the realisation that Trump is just as much part of the establishment, and that trying to cure America's ailments by electing him is like overdosing on laxatives to cure diarrhea. And I don't think the people who keep ranting against PC and equal rights for minorities actually are against treating everbody fairly; they just want to feel that they themselves are being given a fair chance too, but their attention is being directed towards things that sound stupid, so they don't realise that it is the rich and powerful who are the real problem.
You still don't understand. Trump is a warning shot, not a consequence.
Someone at Gizmodo should be shot or sued for editing the memo, "Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber," by removing the references—"hyperlinks," as they call them. The hyperlinks are to many scholarly journal pieces and otherwise respectable publications. Without the references to back up the author's claims, he just looks like a boob to most folks.
Here is a link to a PDF that contains all the hyperlinks to references and also two missing figures left out from the Gizmodo version.
https://assets.documentcloud.o...
Obviously you never even read his "rant". Instead you've concocted a straw man based on what you think he was saying instead of what he actually said, and have judged him based on the straw man rather than what he actually said.
No, it's worse then that. They've concocted a straw man based on what they've been told by people who are pushing the agenda that he's anti-woman. This is exactly the same bullshit that was used against gamergate, when they pushed the narrative that the people who spoke up against shitty game journo's were "white males, who live in their parents basements and are misogynists."
When presented with the exact opposite, like the women defending this guy's view? They ignore it, pretend they don't exist. Just like how the progressives ignored the minorities and women in gamergate, or simply called them house n*iggers, uncle toms, have internalized misogyny, and so on.
You watch, and in the next 2 days you'll start seeing hit pieces against the people who spoke in favor or defended his views will be smeared, attacked, and dragged through the mud. And it won't surprise me if the "progressive 'we believe in free speech -- really' social justice" supporters, also try going after their jobs to boot.
Om, nomnomnom...
Brendan Eich called. He wants his browser back...
Hiring someone because of their gender is not treating everyone equally. Hiring someone because of their sexuality isn't equality. Hiring someone based on their race isn't equality. But apparently in the land of political correctness and soc-jus, these are all forms of equality.
That in truth, isn't equality. None of those people being treated as such are being treated as an equal, they're all being given special handicaps in order to get that position.
Om, nomnomnom...
Yes, I did read it. Did you?
https://medium.com/@Cernovich/...
"I hope it's clear that I'm not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn't try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology. I'm also not saying that we 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)."
There is nothing in there that is offensive, full stop. Misrepresenting the respectful and dispassionate analysis this man did as bigoted or hateful can only happen through malice or ignorance.