Slashdot Mirror
Critics Debate Autism's Role in James Damore's Google Memo (themarysue.com)
James Damore "wants you to know he isn't using autism as an excuse," reports a Silicon Valley newspaper, commenting on the fired Google engineer's new interview with the Guardian. But they also note that "he says being on the spectrum means he 'sees things differently'," and the weekend editor at the entertainment and "geek culture" site The Mary Sue sees a problem in the way that interview was framed.
It's the author of this Guardian article, not James Damore himself, who makes the harmful suggestion that Damore's infamous Google memo and subsequent doubling-down are somehow caused by his autism... It frames autism as some sort of basic decency deficiency, rather than a neurological condition shared by millions of people.... This whole article is peppered with weird suggestions like this, suggestions which detract from an otherwise interesting piece.. All these weird suggestions that autism and misogyny/bigotry are somehow tied (as if autistic feminists didn't exist) do unfortunately detract from one of the article's great points.
Having worked at a number of companies large and small, I can at least anecdotally confirm that their diversity training rarely includes a discussion of neurodiversity, and when it does, it's not particularly empathetic or helpful... Many corporate cultures are plainly designed for neurotypical extroverts and no one else -- and that should change. I really do think Lewis meant well in pointing that out. But the other thing that should change? The way the media scapegoats autism as a source of anti-social behavior.
Having worked at a number of companies large and small, I can at least anecdotally confirm that their diversity training rarely includes a discussion of neurodiversity, and when it does, it's not particularly empathetic or helpful... Many corporate cultures are plainly designed for neurotypical extroverts and no one else -- and that should change. I really do think Lewis meant well in pointing that out. But the other thing that should change? The way the media scapegoats autism as a source of anti-social behavior.
that is all.
They call for tolerance on all views on life except when it doesn't suit their own agenda. I call BS.
...also has autism.
... because I read Damore's memo and found it to be perfectly reasonable.
James Damore was asked to provide feedback after attending a diversity event at Google; he provided feedback, and then like the crazy nutcases of the Communist Revolution in China, the "feminist" SJWs used that feedback to identify Damore as a prime candidate for destruction in their Cultural Revolution.
Seriously. If you've spent any time reading about the timeline of Damore's internal document, or listening to Damore speak, you'd realize that he was very badly mistreated by an insidious group of harpies who have zero interest in improving our world.
His mistake was to speak up. Autism doesn't turn people into idiots, often quite the opposite, but it makes it difficult to predict how other people will react. Social customs are highly illogical and usually not codified, but they govern everyday life to a high degree. Autists often speak their mind and offend without intent to offend. It is difficult to understand that it could be wrong to say what you truly believe and can corroborate with facts. It's not a "basic decency" deficiency. Autists are typically honest people, simply because they are bad at deceiving other people. An honest person who doesn't know when to shut up can be quite exhausting however.
Damore's memo is the only thing in this whole debacle that is explicitly based on well established research.
What is wrong with you people? Have you even read his memo, or did you just take some "properly" interpreted version from leftist rags like Salon?
Boy, it's really telling that our reaction is, "They asked that man for his honest opinion about how they could get better, and DAMN he was an idiot to answer honestly! What was he thinking!?"
You can tell who is really in charge these days by saying "women are good X, men are good at Y, women are bad at Z, men are bad at Q" and the only part people care about is that you said women are bad at something.
He said many women were not as drawn to the current work environment that tends to exist around software engineering. He even suggested changing that environment to better suit women so more would be more interested in working there. You can argue against the science, but you cannot say that that is a misogynistic viewpoint. But that's exactly what he was fired for. It's sad, Google used to be such an awesome company before they went evil. I used to really cheer for them when they succeeded. Now, Google just like all the rest of the corporate bastards, I just want them to lose.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
You realize that people have been saying the same thing about you and deliberately trying to misdirect people. In all of the stories related to this, I've seen you or other posters dismiss Damore's memo as nonsense, state that it makes claims that aren't backed up by the research he cited, or claim that the studies are basically pseudoscience, but I think I've only seen one person actually post something that even began citing scientific literature to refute something in Damore's memo.
If there's this 100 years of research on the subject that shows everything that he said was utter nonsense, please start telling us where to find it. Even climate change skeptics around here have a better record of citing something. All you've done is to try to bury your head in the sand and try to convince everyone else that none of this can possibly be true because you don't like the conclusion. I don't really expect anyone here to change your mind because it already seems quite made up, but I'd ask you to actually try to back up some of your assertions.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm starting to think the same thing as well. He seems unaware of both the last 100 years of research on the subject and that people would assume that not addressing it is a deliberate attempt to misdirect the reader, in the way that anti-diversity activists have also been doing for the last 100 years.
The initial assumption was that he must have done it deliberately, but perhaps it is possible that he really didn't mean to.
You constantly call all the egalitarians "anti-diversity", "racist", "misogynist", etc.
It doesn't take much for an idea to take off. People read something that makes sense and they repeat it - my constant assertions that there is a correlation between weak rights for women and high female CS enrollment is getting repeated everywhere (saw it repeatedly on Quora, for example). Another thought that got repeated a lot was the list of objective "privileges" enjoyed by western women (higher avg salary, better health, etc)
Here's another idea that I wish to gain traction: there are two separate concepts -
1. We must treat everyone equally
2. We must fix the injustices of the past (affirmative action)
You, and people like you, are trying to convince the rest of the world that those two separate concepts are the same. That is not true. For example, most people will get behind the concept of "Lets treat everyone equally", but not support affirmative action.
What you are doing, and what you (and the rest of the peanut gallery) always do is try to convince us that ignoring injustices of the past is the same as not treating everyone equally.. That is not true.
We all agree to treat everyone equally. We do not agree with affirmative action.
Disagreeing with affirmative action is not agreement with bigotry!
Disagreeing with affirmative action is not support for racism!
Disagreeing with affirmative action is not support for sexism!
We disagree with your methods because they are discriminatory.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
he's a jerk because he's a jerk.
I always wonder which people are bigger jerks: the ones being called jerks, or the ones calling them that.
Ezekiel 23:20
If not for double standards, the left would have no standards at all.
He "self identifies" as autistic. According to the left's rules, that's good enough for him to qualify as a woman or black. But not autistic?
See that "Preview" button?
he's a jerk because he's a jerk.
Damore didn't post his memo publicly.
Also, some actual jerk (who has not been punished) leaked Damore's internal board memo to the world and started this.
Criticism is not mobbing.
He wasn't mobbed. Mobbing is when someone gets a torrent of harassment when someone targeted them. He has not reported being harassed.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC