Sort of like creating a hostile work environment for people who don't believe the same things you believe about sex differences, or the second amendment, or the freedom of speech - none of those are protected classes, since they're just opinions. So maybe not illegal, but definitely stupid. And google stepped right into it.
How dare you suggest that the average male is stronger than the average female!!
SEXIST! BIGOT!! MISOGYNIST!!! PATRIARCHY!!!
We should never put into company memos anything that would disparage women's ability to carry things - if the requirement of UPS is that package handlers can lift 70 pounds, it is unfair to women to suggest that there will be fewer female package handlers because of average strength differences! We must have a 50/50 ratio, even if it means hiring lots of doped East German women!!
Surely you don't expect us to believe that the science is settled in favor of your perspective, do you?
He found stuff supporting his view. I'm sure there is stuff supporting the opposite view.
But his point wasn't to say he was right - his point was to say that there should be a conversation. And unless you truly believe that we know everything there is to know about sex differences in personality and life choices, it would be silly to shut down the conversation.
And he didn't say anything about race - which as you know, has no biological basis and is an illusion. XX v. XY, on the other hand, is a real difference.
So yeah, he wanted to stop illegal hiring practices at google, and deliberately premeditated a set of actions to try and convince google to stop their illegal hiring practices.
- sjw lawsuits on gender are stifled because Google obviously acted to protect women. Any accusations against Google will sound hollow, given that they fire people who even *say* anything that might hurt women feelz.
Damore v. Google finds for Damore
- sjw lawsuits on gender are stifled because Damore proved that women aren't discriminated against by Google, they just make different life choices than men. Minor payout to Damore, but massive benefit from 1000s of avoided lawsuits from sjws.
I regularly throw a fit on the corporate surveys we get where they ask for my sexual preferences.
Sorry, but NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.
Frankly, none of my demographic information should be important to my employer - my sex shouldn't matter, my race shouldn't matter, my sexual preference shouldn't matter, my height and weight shouldn't matter, my age shouldn't matter (well, at least after 18), and whether or not I believe my body matches my mind shouldn't matter.
The lefties have gotten so hung up on identity, they've lost sight of any sort of *privacy*.
Lefties don't look at primary sources. Their information is carefully curated by their news sources, the MSM, who will helpfully filter and paraphrase things so that the fit The Narrative ().
And it would have been better if they had not given him any reason.
By stating to him that it was for cause, specifically for perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes in his memo, they put themselves in a real bind. When it is shown in court that the memo did not perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, and that in fact he was retaliated against for his critique of company policy, he's going to win.
MightyMartian is likely both a shill and a useful idiot:)
Like a lot of lefties, this is a team sport, not a reasoned debate. You cheer for your side, and boo the other side. It's not about anything except tribal loyalty.
He recommends lowering the stress in order to make the position more welcoming, so that women, making free choices, prefer it.
Here's the thing - even if you're prone to higher anxiety and lower stress tolerance, and you suffer because of it, you can still do a job that causes high anxiety and high stress. You might throw up when you get home, or go catatonic off hours, but you can have all of those issues and still be a high performer at work, producing more widgets than your peers.
Interest != ability
So, there is literally nothing wrong with him suggesting that Google make tech more attractive to women - in fact, he gets a win-win, because frankly, it'd be better for men too!
You're the one who assumes that lower stress tolerance is a weakness - his assumption is that it can lead to different life choices.
If diversity really matters (of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, favorite color, disability, economic background, geographic background, etc, etc), it's because different people are really, substantially, and significantly different, and those differences help create a better widget.
You cannot expect different people to make the exact same life choices.
Again, it seems to hold - Russia, being more misogynistic, and having less freedom for women, shows less of a difference than free countries, where women are offered choices.
Or do you think Russia is just as progressive as Sweden?
So, if we can agree that there might be some debate on the science, and even the conclusions, then what is left?
Is his firing justified because it's not okay to bring up debatable subjects?
Is his firing justified because it's not okay to be "wrong" about a debatable subject?
Is his firing justified because he brought up the debatable subjects with malice? Or with a professorial tone?
If we're having an honest debate, not a single person in the room would be accusing Damore of malice, or of bringing up any subject so evil and terrible that it must not be spoken of in mixed company. His memo went out of its way to be gentle, and was more about the idea of having a polite debate, than on whether or not his part in the polite debate was definitively correct.
Mod parent up. Damore explicitly recommends ways to get more women into Google and tech in general.
Perhaps his #goolag overlords weren't too happy with the idea of less stressful work environments to attract more women - maybe they have studies showing that high stress improves staff output, and less stress, while more welcoming to women, would hurt their bottom line.
All lefties are qualified to speak on anything - because reasons and feelz:)
Anyone who disagrees with lefties just haven't had the proper lefty training yet:)
Remember, not only is there Unconscious Bias, but there's Unconscious Thinking, that's better than Conscious Thinking with the additional benefit that it doesn't need to be explained rationally:)
If google would highlight what parts of his memo were acceptable, and what parts of his memo were not, I'd have more sympathy for that point of view.
As it is, there is nothing in that memo that in any way violates Google's code of conduct, period. Nothing in it perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes - unless you believe that truthful, scientific research on gender cannot be quoted.
The bottom line is he believes in increasing female representation in tech, and believes that to do so requires making it a more welcoming choice, rather than by imposing quotas and illegally discriminating against people based on sex. For all the alt-right cheering, Damore was fired for giving recommendations on how to *increase* the number of women in tech. He's a lefty, eaten by his own.
Funny how now that these liberals are in charge, instead of developing a system that would have protected everyone from suffering as they did, all they did was develop a system where their opponents now suffer the same indignities they endured.
Make no mistake, the precedents set here are dangerous ones, because when the tide turns the other direction, the same abuses will occur against people the left adores.
"I'm sorry, you believe that simply by cutting of genitals, taking hormones, and dressing in stereotypical female ways that a person can be a real woman? That's perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes, and that's against our Code of Conduct. You're fired."
Make rules and systems that prevent suffering no matter who is in charge, and you'll be safe when the time comes when you're not.
Frankly, I think Damore has some righteous beefs with the media outlets who maliciously and willfully defamed him by mischaracterizing his memo.
The cynic in me thinks that this is a ploy on google's part to fight off the greater threat of women suing google. The cost of settling a lawsuit with one Damore is going to be less than the cost of settling a lawsuit with 1000 snowflake SJWs. And if the Damore thing gets to court, and all his shit is proven *correct*, that's an instant legal refutation of all the snowflake SJW lawsuits in the wings.
"I'm sorry, but if it please the court, despite Jane Doe's insistence that the 80% male 20% female ratio is prima facie evidence of discrimination, it was shown in Damore v. Google that in fact, this statistical disparity can be effectively explained by free choices rather than by malice."
The statistical edge is on the averages, not the individuals. The men and women who make it past the google hiring gauntlet (if that gauntlet is run fairly), should all be on the same level. The fact that there is a disproportionate number of men who make it compared to women SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE WOMEN WHO MADE IT.
Here's where the lefties are missing the boat though - they're setting a precedent. Just like the fucked themselves by blowing up judicial filibusters with the Reid Rule, giving power to Obama that Trump used later on, they're giving their opponents a weapon that can be used on both sides.
"We've come to find that you said something that was disparaging of the 2nd amendment, and the right to bear arms. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
"We've come to find that you said you support gay marriage. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
"We've come to find that you said that government should redistribute wealth. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
If you truly believe that James Damore was righteously fired, you're a super hard-core libertarian on freedom of association, and should be ready when the next private company decides that it will fire anyone who disagrees with their Code of Conduct.
His ultimate statement was "people with XY chromosome make different choices than people with XX chromosomes". Lack of interest doesn't imply lack of ability.
He further went onto say that the way to improve the ratio was to address *why* these differing choices were being made, rather than simply illegally discriminating based on sex.
James Damore is actually left-wing on this - he explicitly lists out ways to improve diversity without discriminating against men.
Thanks for the ref - I'll definitely check it out. I know there's some debate on what might trigger insulin resistance (genetics, high carb diet, alcohol consumption, fructose consumption, some combination), but insofar as the proper prescription depends on the individual, I managed to save my particular life by simply reducing carb intake. Well, I guess I don't really eat fruit either, but I do have the occasional drink:)
Anyway, as a treatment for obesity, cutting down carbs, and increasing fat intake (especially with proper omega3/omega6 balance - grass fed butter baby!), were enough for me. Adding dietary fiber might be important for those folks that can't cut down the carbs like I did, and protein levels might vary for different folk.
Not saying that you can't have a liver problem as well, through say, alcoholism or fructose intake, but that's generally a symptom, not a cause:). Excess carbohydrate intake (and for obesity, any sort of natural insulin resistance), is what starts the cycle. Whether or not fiber has a mediating effect, you drink yourself a sugary soda, and you're gonna see an insulin response. It's literally a response meant to keep you from dying from excess blood sugar by driving it into fat cells, and goes haywire when you've got insulin resistance.
Proteins broken down into sugars will also cause insulin to spike. Insulin can also be released in anticipation of blood sugar.
But um, no obesity with the Japanese? Ever hear of sumo wrestlers?
Certainly, they may have less insulin resistance than other populations, but an absolute "no history of obesity" is just a bit overbroad.
White male, majority white company, but with a substantial black employee base, supporting Black-only safe spaces of segregation because "blacks have special racial differences".
Fire on the spot again?
Or is segregation a good thing so long as it's voluntary?
The problem is that you don't have a rationale for your position other than, "they don't agree with me so they're wrong". When you create rules for a civil society, you want them to work when the shoe is on the other foot, not just assume you'll always be the one with the ass kicking boots on.
Slashdot Mirror
Sort of like creating a hostile work environment for people who don't believe the same things you believe about sex differences, or the second amendment, or the freedom of speech - none of those are protected classes, since they're just opinions. So maybe not illegal, but definitely stupid. And google stepped right into it.
#DiversityInEverythingButThought
How dare you suggest that the average male is stronger than the average female!!
SEXIST! BIGOT!! MISOGYNIST!!! PATRIARCHY!!!
We should never put into company memos anything that would disparage women's ability to carry things - if the requirement of UPS is that package handlers can lift 70 pounds, it is unfair to women to suggest that there will be fewer female package handlers because of average strength differences! We must have a 50/50 ratio, even if it means hiring lots of doped East German women!!
Seriously, you're part of the problem.
Surely you don't expect us to believe that the science is settled in favor of your perspective, do you?
He found stuff supporting his view. I'm sure there is stuff supporting the opposite view.
But his point wasn't to say he was right - his point was to say that there should be a conversation. And unless you truly believe that we know everything there is to know about sex differences in personality and life choices, it would be silly to shut down the conversation.
And he didn't say anything about race - which as you know, has no biological basis and is an illusion. XX v. XY, on the other hand, is a real difference.
He saw illegal activity in diversity training.
He filed a complaint with the NLRB.
He writes a memo whistleblowing.
He gets fired.
He's really glad he filed the complaint :)
So yeah, he wanted to stop illegal hiring practices at google, and deliberately premeditated a set of actions to try and convince google to stop their illegal hiring practices.
Not an innocent, but a hero.
Cynical takes:
Damore v. Google finds for Google.
- sjw lawsuits on gender are stifled because Google obviously acted to protect women. Any accusations against Google will sound hollow, given that they fire people who even *say* anything that might hurt women feelz.
Damore v. Google finds for Damore
- sjw lawsuits on gender are stifled because Damore proved that women aren't discriminated against by Google, they just make different life choices than men. Minor payout to Damore, but massive benefit from 1000s of avoided lawsuits from sjws.
The problem is when they decide genitalia are part of the qualification because reasons and feelz :)
Frankly, the entire male staff of Google should simply identify as women at this point, and then complain that there aren't enough men in the company.
I regularly throw a fit on the corporate surveys we get where they ask for my sexual preferences.
Sorry, but NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.
Frankly, none of my demographic information should be important to my employer - my sex shouldn't matter, my race shouldn't matter, my sexual preference shouldn't matter, my height and weight shouldn't matter, my age shouldn't matter (well, at least after 18), and whether or not I believe my body matches my mind shouldn't matter.
The lefties have gotten so hung up on identity, they've lost sight of any sort of *privacy*.
Lefties don't look at primary sources. Their information is carefully curated by their news sources, the MSM, who will helpfully filter and paraphrase things so that the fit The Narrative ().
And it would have been better if they had not given him any reason.
By stating to him that it was for cause, specifically for perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes in his memo, they put themselves in a real bind. When it is shown in court that the memo did not perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, and that in fact he was retaliated against for his critique of company policy, he's going to win.
MightyMartian is likely both a shill and a useful idiot :)
Like a lot of lefties, this is a team sport, not a reasoned debate. You cheer for your side, and boo the other side. It's not about anything except tribal loyalty.
A few problems.
1) It's absolutely true. Women are more prone to higher anxiety and lower stress tolerance.
2) Women, making free choices, might rationally prefer lower stress positions.
He recommends lowering the stress in order to make the position more welcoming, so that women, making free choices, prefer it.
Here's the thing - even if you're prone to higher anxiety and lower stress tolerance, and you suffer because of it, you can still do a job that causes high anxiety and high stress. You might throw up when you get home, or go catatonic off hours, but you can have all of those issues and still be a high performer at work, producing more widgets than your peers.
Interest != ability
So, there is literally nothing wrong with him suggesting that Google make tech more attractive to women - in fact, he gets a win-win, because frankly, it'd be better for men too!
You're the one who assumes that lower stress tolerance is a weakness - his assumption is that it can lead to different life choices.
Mod parent up. This is the Paradox of Diversity.
If diversity really matters (of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, favorite color, disability, economic background, geographic background, etc, etc), it's because different people are really, substantially, and significantly different, and those differences help create a better widget.
You cannot expect different people to make the exact same life choices.
Again, it seems to hold - Russia, being more misogynistic, and having less freedom for women, shows less of a difference than free countries, where women are offered choices.
Or do you think Russia is just as progressive as Sweden?
So, if we can agree that there might be some debate on the science, and even the conclusions, then what is left?
Is his firing justified because it's not okay to bring up debatable subjects?
Is his firing justified because it's not okay to be "wrong" about a debatable subject?
Is his firing justified because he brought up the debatable subjects with malice? Or with a professorial tone?
If we're having an honest debate, not a single person in the room would be accusing Damore of malice, or of bringing up any subject so evil and terrible that it must not be spoken of in mixed company. His memo went out of its way to be gentle, and was more about the idea of having a polite debate, than on whether or not his part in the polite debate was definitively correct.
Mod parent up. Damore explicitly recommends ways to get more women into Google and tech in general.
Perhaps his #goolag overlords weren't too happy with the idea of less stressful work environments to attract more women - maybe they have studies showing that high stress improves staff output, and less stress, while more welcoming to women, would hurt their bottom line.
All lefties are qualified to speak on anything - because reasons and feelz :)
Anyone who disagrees with lefties just haven't had the proper lefty training yet :)
Remember, not only is there Unconscious Bias, but there's Unconscious Thinking, that's better than Conscious Thinking with the additional benefit that it doesn't need to be explained rationally :)
If google would highlight what parts of his memo were acceptable, and what parts of his memo were not, I'd have more sympathy for that point of view.
As it is, there is nothing in that memo that in any way violates Google's code of conduct, period. Nothing in it perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes - unless you believe that truthful, scientific research on gender cannot be quoted.
The bottom line is he believes in increasing female representation in tech, and believes that to do so requires making it a more welcoming choice, rather than by imposing quotas and illegally discriminating against people based on sex. For all the alt-right cheering, Damore was fired for giving recommendations on how to *increase* the number of women in tech. He's a lefty, eaten by his own.
Funny how now that these liberals are in charge, instead of developing a system that would have protected everyone from suffering as they did, all they did was develop a system where their opponents now suffer the same indignities they endured.
Make no mistake, the precedents set here are dangerous ones, because when the tide turns the other direction, the same abuses will occur against people the left adores.
"I'm sorry, you believe that simply by cutting of genitals, taking hormones, and dressing in stereotypical female ways that a person can be a real woman? That's perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes, and that's against our Code of Conduct. You're fired."
Make rules and systems that prevent suffering no matter who is in charge, and you'll be safe when the time comes when you're not.
Frankly, I think Damore has some righteous beefs with the media outlets who maliciously and willfully defamed him by mischaracterizing his memo.
The cynic in me thinks that this is a ploy on google's part to fight off the greater threat of women suing google. The cost of settling a lawsuit with one Damore is going to be less than the cost of settling a lawsuit with 1000 snowflake SJWs. And if the Damore thing gets to court, and all his shit is proven *correct*, that's an instant legal refutation of all the snowflake SJW lawsuits in the wings.
"I'm sorry, but if it please the court, despite Jane Doe's insistence that the 80% male 20% female ratio is prima facie evidence of discrimination, it was shown in Damore v. Google that in fact, this statistical disparity can be effectively explained by free choices rather than by malice."
The statistical edge is on the averages, not the individuals. The men and women who make it past the google hiring gauntlet (if that gauntlet is run fairly), should all be on the same level. The fact that there is a disproportionate number of men who make it compared to women SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE WOMEN WHO MADE IT.
Here's where the lefties are missing the boat though - they're setting a precedent. Just like the fucked themselves by blowing up judicial filibusters with the Reid Rule, giving power to Obama that Trump used later on, they're giving their opponents a weapon that can be used on both sides.
"We've come to find that you said something that was disparaging of the 2nd amendment, and the right to bear arms. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
"We've come to find that you said you support gay marriage. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
"We've come to find that you said that government should redistribute wealth. This is against our Code of Conduct, so you're fired."
If you truly believe that James Damore was righteously fired, you're a super hard-core libertarian on freedom of association, and should be ready when the next private company decides that it will fire anyone who disagrees with their Code of Conduct.
His ultimate statement was "people with XY chromosome make different choices than people with XX chromosomes". Lack of interest doesn't imply lack of ability.
He further went onto say that the way to improve the ratio was to address *why* these differing choices were being made, rather than simply illegally discriminating based on sex.
James Damore is actually left-wing on this - he explicitly lists out ways to improve diversity without discriminating against men.
Thanks for the ref - I'll definitely check it out. I know there's some debate on what might trigger insulin resistance (genetics, high carb diet, alcohol consumption, fructose consumption, some combination), but insofar as the proper prescription depends on the individual, I managed to save my particular life by simply reducing carb intake. Well, I guess I don't really eat fruit either, but I do have the occasional drink :)
Anyway, as a treatment for obesity, cutting down carbs, and increasing fat intake (especially with proper omega3/omega6 balance - grass fed butter baby!), were enough for me. Adding dietary fiber might be important for those folks that can't cut down the carbs like I did, and protein levels might vary for different folk.
Oh, and fuck google.
Not saying that you can't have a liver problem as well, through say, alcoholism or fructose intake, but that's generally a symptom, not a cause :). Excess carbohydrate intake (and for obesity, any sort of natural insulin resistance), is what starts the cycle. Whether or not fiber has a mediating effect, you drink yourself a sugary soda, and you're gonna see an insulin response. It's literally a response meant to keep you from dying from excess blood sugar by driving it into fat cells, and goes haywire when you've got insulin resistance.
Proteins broken down into sugars will also cause insulin to spike. Insulin can also be released in anticipation of blood sugar.
But um, no obesity with the Japanese? Ever hear of sumo wrestlers?
Certainly, they may have less insulin resistance than other populations, but an absolute "no history of obesity" is just a bit overbroad.
That being said, fuck google.
Insulin is driven by blood sugar levels.
Blood sugar levels are driven by carbohydrate intake.
So, obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases related to insulin are driven by carbohydrate intake. Pretty simple.
Let's try another one:
White male, majority white company, but with a substantial black employee base, supporting Black-only safe spaces of segregation because "blacks have special racial differences".
Fire on the spot again?
Or is segregation a good thing so long as it's voluntary?
The problem is that you don't have a rationale for your position other than, "they don't agree with me so they're wrong". When you create rules for a civil society, you want them to work when the shoe is on the other foot, not just assume you'll always be the one with the ass kicking boots on.