4 ms·

I'm not one to root for people to be fired for holding what I'd consider dumb or ill-informed opinions, but at the same time, as a woman, do I actually want to

by nancye 9y ago

I'm not one to root for people to be fired for holding what I'd consider dumb or ill-informed opinions, but at the same time, as a woman, do I actually want to work on a team with someone who thinks I'm biologically unsuited to the job I'm doing and who is presumably judging my work more harshly and waiting for me to fail at things, who may have the power to review me poorly and affect my long-term career prospects? Gee, that's a tough one. If you've never had to work all day, every day at an office with people who treat you like that, or had to worry about being judged not on how hard you work but on who you are, be thankful. And that's obviously not a great look for a company that's already being investigated for discrimination, so I'm not sure they really had much of a choice here. Bringing bad PR to your company and potentially exposing them to legal liability usually doesn't end well.

lurker69 9y ago
Its a question what was worse for PR. Firing him just proved his point. He said that google created environment, where people whos opinions are not completely aligned with left echo chamber dogma, cant express their views safely. ... And he was fired for exactly this. Right leaning and centrist media is not on googles side here. And seems that he plans on suing: > Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters. Mind you if you read actual manifesto with pictures and sources, you will see he was very careful with words. He carefully sourced all controversial points and mentioned multiple times that this are not his personal views. But pro feminist blogs and media misrepresented this memo, like PS SJW culture usually does. This was enough for vocal minority to pressure google HR to fire him, wihtout actually reading real memo and relying solely on biased interpretations. On court he has the upper hand.
Chris2048 9y ago
> do I actually want to work on a team with someone who thinks I'm biologically unsuited to the job Is that what the memo says? It seems to me to talk about statistical differences - a woman in tech is not representative of women in general, which seems to be the point of the memo. > who is presumably judging my work more harshly Should we assume historic discrimination means women will judge men more harshly? Black people will judge white people more harshly etc. I find the managerial bias argument to be a slippery slope. > people who treat you like that Aren't you making unwarranted assumptions about the memo author?

by nancye 9y ago

lurker69 9y ago

Its a question what was worse for PR. Firing him just proved his point. He said that google created environment, where people whos opinions are not completely aligned with left echo chamber dogma, cant express their views safely. ... And he was fired for exactly this. Right leaning and centrist media is not on googles side here. And seems that he plans on suing: > Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters. Mind you if you read actual manifesto with pictures and sources, you will see he was very careful with words. He carefully sourced all controversial points and mentioned multiple times that this are not his personal views. But pro feminist blogs and media misrepresented this memo, like PS SJW culture usually does. This was enough for vocal minority to pressure google HR to fire him, wihtout actually reading real memo and relying solely on biased interpretations. On court he has the upper hand.

Chris2048 9y ago

> do I actually want to work on a team with someone who thinks I'm biologically unsuited to the job Is that what the memo says? It seems to me to talk about statistical differences - a woman in tech is not representative of women in general, which seems to be the point of the memo. > who is presumably judging my work more harshly Should we assume historic discrimination means women will judge men more harshly? Black people will judge white people more harshly etc. I find the managerial bias argument to be a slippery slope. > people who treat you like that Aren't you making unwarranted assumptions about the memo author?