@Pool boy till I die, IAINTTHESHARPESTTOOLINTHESHED
@Captain Nibbler , SHEWASLOOKINKINDADUMB
@Nudity Industries, WELLTHEYEARSSTARTCOMINANDTHEYDONTSTOPCOMINGANDTHEYDONTSTOPCOMINANDTHEYDONTSTOPCOMINANDTHEYDONTSTOPCOMIN(goes on forever)
@Spinorama29, *starts beatboxing to it*
Because diversity of description is more important than diversity of ideas. According to Google.
@ArchonErikr, This is a generation where your skin color and sexuality define who you are and they don't tolerate people with differing ideas. Celebrate diversity but don't think differently or you'll be ostracized.
@Jolee Bindo, I'm ok with being ostracized
Google doesn't tolerate intolerant people
@ORGANIC, having different ideas than your google overlords = being intolerant. Says the intolerant.
@ORGANIC, have you passed bio 101
@ORGANIC, there needs to be a font that expresses sarcasm
"Different"...what a wierd way to spell shjtty
@liberachi , I wasn't aware that acknowledging that basic biology could possibly result in different life choices between sexes was a "shìtty idea". I always just assumed that it was, you know, common sense.
@Doctor Krieger, I'm not sure if you read his full memo. What he wrote was not common sense. It also wasn't as simple as "basic biology could result in different life choices between sexes." There is a big debate in the scientific community as to whether his statements were factually accurate. The middle ground seems to be that he wasn't far off from scientific accuracy, but that he was probably greatly exaggerating the effects of gender biological differences.
That being said, I don't think he should have been fired, as he approached the issue in a respectful manner and I don't think his views would inherently cause a hostile work environment. Google also looks horrible, because they are proving his point of minority viewpoints being censored in the workplace. I don't think it was an easy decision for google (they were kinda screwed either way), but they showed horrible leadership.
@Doctor Krieger, I see that Damore is exploring legal action. Based on public info I don't think he has much of a case. He definitely can't go down the Free Speech route
@Blue Shirted Guy, depends on his contract. I'm betting Google's policy is you have to be fired for cause, and if the contract says he has to do a certain level of misbehavior to be fired, he could have a case.
@Blue Shirted Guy, his biological differences he was talking about exist and Google is stupid for trying to deny it. The guys main point was to find ways of getting more women hired, not to dog on them. His memo was as sexist as saying guys are naturally stronger, or about a decade ago that was called duh, everyone knows that. Men and women aren't the same, and there shouldn't be anything wrong in acknowledging that
@liberachi , I know right?! They're hiring a lot of people with some pretty shìtty ideas
@Oujosh29, I highly doubt that anything in his contract would give him a case. It wouldn't be that simple in a lawsuit against Google. I mean, your guess is as good as mine as to what's in his contract, but I'd imagine Google has the means to put a strong defense up against claims that there was no cause to be fired.
In line with what I wrote in my first reply, you are summarizing the memo in an extremely simplistic way. He was not simply saying that men and women have biological differences. It's how he took that fact and used it to make an exaggerated point that google claimed was cause for his firing.
I'm not arguing that google should have fired him. I don't think that was the way to go. I'm also not arguing against biological differences. I'm simply arguing that we don't make it out to be that simple of an issue. Google never claimed that biological differences don't exist. His memo is also not even close to the equivalent to the statement "guys are naturally stronger."
@Blue Shirted Guy, meh, I didn't see anything out of line. In fact a lot of his memo fit perfectly with my master level class in the biological leadership differences between men and women ( that's not the actual name of the class, it's a leadership class that included that).
As for does he have a case? It really depends if Google went all far left "workers rights" in their contract. If his contract says they have to prove severe harassment or something, it would be hard to prove to a judge that memo qualified. Hell, even proving that memo was even a little harassment would be tough. So yeah, he could have a case.
@Oujosh29, we could go back and forth about the contents of the memo but we probably wouldn't get anywhere. I don't think he was out of line in terms of inappropriateness, but I think he exaggerated basic facts to make a point. Again, not saying his points were entirely invalid, just that they were exaggerated. All my point has been is that it wasn't as simple as "common sense" or "men are stronger than women." Not even close.
If I am certain about anything, it's that no contract would make Google have to prove severe harassment. There's just no way. Every single dismissed employee would be winning lawsuits against them haha. I highly doubt they would have to *prove* even a little harassment, but that I'm not certain of. (Edit: now that I think about it, I highly doubt they would. Damore will have to claim a reason as to why he was fired and prove that was the reason.)
@Blue Shirted Guy, I wouldn't be surprised if there's something in the contract that says employees can only be fired for cause. They don't seem like right to work kind of people. At my work I can't be fired on the whim of management , there's only certain things I can be fired for and they have to prove all of it, and I can appeal. Plus, isn't Google in a non right to work state?
@Oujosh29, yes, his argument will most likely be that his memo is protected by California's law(s) against restricting political activity, and that his positions do not constitute legal grounds to be fired. Google f'd up but they aren't morons. It won't be as simple as violating something in his contract. It's going to be a very difficult case.
Either way, I'm sure it will be settled for an undisclosed amount. Google wants this all to stop as quickly as possible. They look horrible right now
@Blue Shirted Guy, At the very least we can agree that this move by Google really put their inner workings in the spotlight. Firing him like that essentially validated his claims that Google silence those who disagree through what is essentially intimidation. His firing even caused former employees to come out and say that they were afraid of even openly admitting to not being a far left progressive as that could've caused hostility and aggression towards them for their ideas, even if they're still on the left. At the very least I know one group not to go work for now being an actual liberal and all.
@Blue Shirted Guy, it is common sense depending on perspective. The problem is, that people love to misunderstand broad generalizations with specific people.
In general, men are physically stronger than women. Does that mean an individual woman can't be stronger than an individual male? Of course not.
What he wrote was talking about broad terms and tendencies. There is literally no scientific debate that mean tend to have some tendencies as a percentage than women, and vice versa.
Then the greater argument. Having lock-step ideological ideals do not make us better. Having creative differences and view points make us better. He criticized Google because they have a lack of diversity (not in skin color, but in thought). Then he was proven correct by being fired for daring to think differently.
@Blue Shirted Guy, I'm on the same page as you. He should not have been fired, because he just proved his point. With that said, he started with valid points, but the moment he got into genetics, he lost it. Are there differences between men and women? Yes there are, but that doesn't mean all women follow this trend. There are women with the same drive to succeed, that are interested in positions of power and don't care about settling for a family. They will be judge in a negative light than their male counterparts. Also, if you look at his footnotes, he wrote that his paper is biased and was only using examples that proved his point. He should have put that in the main paper, right before giving his examples of research.
@mayora13, but that's exactly what the point of the memo was was that not everybody is the same and hiring on the basis of sex is stupid. Companies should hire individuals not group everybody into categories based on broad generalizations
@big freedom, like what I've been saying, you are simplifying his arguments down to vague, agreeable statements that any sensible person would agree with.
"In general, men are physically stronger than women."
"Men tend to have some tendencies as a percentage than women."
"Lock-step ideological ideals do not make us better."
"Having creative differences and view points make us better."
Nobody, including google, is arguing against any of that. It was how he took those basic facts and used them in a biased, exaggerated way to make his point. As mayora said, he even acknowledged this. *This is where the debate is in the scientific community.* My point has been that he used fairly accurate scientific points and greatly exaggerated their effects, which is why the memo blew up.
@mayora13, thank you. You summed it up extremely well. There wouldn't be a scientific debate about his memo if all he wrote were general statements like "men and women have some differences."
@Blue Shirted Guy, and I want to be clear still - I'm not defending google and I'm not putting blame on Damore. I just want to present the middle ground.
@Jolee Bindo, Yes, that was part of his manifesto and I agree with that. He is asking for solutions, and it is true that not agreeing with some issues would make some people judge you. I'm a girl, but I have to be careful of how much I say in front of some of my girlfriends because they'll jump at me. That does not change the fact that in all that fancy and well written paper, his point is that women fail because they are women.
@mayora13, It's not that they fail but that sometimes (not always the case) they have different priorities than men. Sometimes women are better at certain things than men are and vice versa. But the main point of the article is to not to judge someone based on broad generalities, which is what he is accusing google of doing, but as individuals.
@Blue Shirted Guy, well, it's fair to put some blame on the guy. He should have written up the memo and sent it up the chain via his supervisor. Sending it like he did, even internally, was just asking for problems. But we'll agree that Google played this very badly. We agreed on something! 🤓
@Oujosh29, I can agree with that too! Make that 2 things!!! 🙋♂️
@Blue Shirted Guy, did you read how some of the female employees at Google felt so "harassed" by the memo they had to take time off? True story.
@Oujosh29, I did not haha. Looking for that story I stumbled across this - which is a pretty good interview about the issue for anyone interested. (Not that I agree with everything stated, just provides another viewpoint)
@Oujosh29, we are a nation of complete pussies. The idea that you have a little grit, some personal fortitude... completely erased. Now being offended is the highest form of life and everyone strives to be offended at all possible instances.
@big freedom, being offended and making other people offended in your favor is literally the most powerful social tool ever. You can do a lot with some virtue signalling and butthurt.
@Blue Shirted Guy, I think more of the problem is the medium he chose. I think if he made a blog post on his own website it would be a different story but sharing a memo inside the company about personal beliefs is in appropriate. Also as a women software engineer I find his comments untested and inaccurate.