16 ms·

I watched this interview just a bit ago, and it gave me a better understanding of what James' was trying to articulate. After like 5 days of confusion about the

I watched this interview just a bit ago, and it gave me a better understanding of what James' was trying to articulate. After like 5 days of confusion about the memo, the outrage, and now the firing - I think I can come to a conclusion that he is firstly, not sexist, and secondly is a proponent of equal treatment of both men an women. And thirdly wanted an honest discussion on this topic. I do think it will come to pass that Google will lose a unlawful termination lawsuit (or settle) This engineer was further, exploring the question in what appears to be a very scientific manner based on the latest academic research into these questions, as best as I can discern that appears accurate. This entire conversation is tainted by so many numerous other items that it is almost impossible to discuss without bringing in emotion, tangential arguments, anecdotes, and just random statements. This really is a category 5 hurricane of our current political/cultural battles brought to light. I'm coming from a very liberal perspective, and I found it really hard to agree with others on how this is a very sexist memo. It appears that this young man is truly trying to explore the nature of these issues, and how it applied to his former company - who ostensibly wanted to encourage curiosity and a range of discussion. I often find myself very upset at the fringe right for many of their ideas, but I've usually treated the far left (are they fringe now?) as more just annoying and irrelevant and harmless (the anti-vaxxers(maybe not harmless here), safe space, microaggression proponents) I really think the loose liberal group - that I self select to be a member of - really screwed the pooch on this one. This whole debacle does appear to be a rush to judgement and virtue-signaling. Ugh - I'm not usually on the side of the alt-right/conservatives, but on the merits of this issue - there is a point they are making that is important. HOWEVER and this is important - all the other awful truly sexist and misogynist things that is part of the alt-right is detestable, but as famously said elsewhere - This is not the droid you are looking for.

galacticpony2 9y ago
It's not news though. I've positioned myself squarely on "the left" without much of a thought before the Brendan Eich case. Then I discovered that "the left" has no intellectual integrity whatsoever. The dishonesty has become unbearable. They turn you into a straw man and then ostracize you, just like a cult. You have to constantly police your own thought, lest you say something that can be used against you in the worst possible way, by someone who doesn't like you. It's "orwellian" in every sense of the word.
- Goladus 9y ago
  A minor nitpick, I would say that the main difference between what's happening now and the Orwellian model is that the coercive pressure for maintaining ideological conformity is mostly not government power (yet, in the US). Instead, it's corporate and similar organization power (such the organizing board of a popular conference).
  - galacticpony2 9y ago
    When people say "orwellian", they're often thinking "1984". I'm thinking "Animal Farm". It's a process, a takeover of the mind. It doesn't start with government and doesn't end at government. To be fair, it's not "orwellian" in literally every sense of the word, that was just a figure of speech.
    - Goladus 9y ago
      Some smart people think that you may be more right than I realized: https://blog.simplejustice.us/2017/08/10/walter-olson-a-circle-of-silence-without-responsibility/ https://blog.simplejustice.us/2017/08/10/walter-olson-a-circ... Effectively they're saying that the "Hostile Work Environment" clause is used to pressure corporations to limit speech of their employees. Evidence also suggests enforcement is ideologically biased.
  - Boothroid 9y ago
    No doubt the US govt has its levers to pull in media and business. And I venture that as regards our use of the term Orwellian Orwell was discursive of power in general, rather than governmental power in the specific.
- Boothroid 9y ago
  I couldn't agree more. It used to seem like the left was more scrupulous but as I get older I wonder whether that was just youthful naivety. Certainly they seem to have abandoned their scruples these days.
rbanffy 9y ago
> I do think it will come to pass that Google will lose a unlawful termination lawsuit (or settle) It'll be hard to convince anyone that it'd be viable for him to continue his work after ostracizing a sizable part of Google's workforce by implying they are undeserving of their jobs. It could have been an attempt to start an honest discussion, but it was horrendously articulated, failed miserably to get the point across while offending a ton of people. He has shown appallingly poor judgement in his choice of format and utter disregard for the consequences of openly questioning corporate policies.
- anvandare 9y ago
  >ostracizing a sizable part of Google's workforce by implying they are undeserving of their jobs. He didn't. The only one who was (literally) ostracized was Damore. >consequences of openly questioning corporate policies. Well, the policy was (supposedly) that you could in fact question corporate policies. Of course 'everyone knew' that it was bullshit, but at least now it's been proven and thrown into public for all to see. I'm fine with a company not wanting openness, less so with such a company pretending to want openness. If Google subscribes to modern-day Lysenkoism (because they think it'll get them more profit) then that is their right, but at least quit the whole pretense and be honest about it: "Our company is about making money, not truth, not justice, not the betterment of society, but money, money, money." But of course, that gets you less starry-eyed young minds than the "Don't be Evil" of yesteryear, so it's understandable they keep the mask on. Corporations are sociopaths.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    > Of course 'everyone knew' that it was bullshit, Up until it went viral and everybody with a computer read it, Google was mostly ignoring it. When it leaked outside the company, it could no longer be ignored because it was damaging the company's reputation.
    - anvandare 9y ago
      Yes, and that is the problem. The use of public shaming to silence opponents (or to force their employers to fire them). The ones wielding this cudgel like to say "Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences!", but this sort of suppression of speech will have consequences as well.
cSoze 9y ago
If only he was "exploring the question in what appears to be a very scientific manner based on the latest academic research into these questions". The FIRST warning sign to anyone reading his manifesto should have been how woefully undercited it was. He revealed that he really doesn't understand, much less has read, the science. http://www.epi.org/publication/womens-work-and-the-gender-pay-gap-how-discrimination-societal-norms-and-other-forces-affect-womens-occupational-choices-and-their-pay/ http://www.epi.org/publication/womens-work-and-the-gender-pa...
- Joky 9y ago
  How is this link related to the bulk of his claims?
  - cSoze 9y ago
    There is significant scientific evidence that most of the differences in employment observed between women and men and minorities and white men can be explained by socialization. When conditions are set that reduce or control for these social factors (including implicit bias) the differences in performance that James Demore attributes to "biological" factors disappear. How is this not related to the bulk of his claims?
    - galacticpony2 9y ago
      > When conditions are set that reduce or control for these social factors (including implicit bias) the differences in performance that James Demore attributes to "biological" factors disappear. That's a bold prediction supported by no real-world evidence whatsoever. Where's your control group? Where's the retort society that has all this bias removed or even quantified? Of course societal effects affect the outcome of a person's career, but the idea that there is absolutely zero influence of biological differences is pure dogma. However, it's convenient (if not imperative) to believe, if you're a strong social constructivist.
      - cSoze 9y ago

galacticpony2 9y ago

It's not news though. I've positioned myself squarely on "the left" without much of a thought before the Brendan Eich case. Then I discovered that "the left" has no intellectual integrity whatsoever. The dishonesty has become unbearable. They turn you into a straw man and then ostracize you, just like a cult. You have to constantly police your own thought, lest you say something that can be used against you in the worst possible way, by someone who doesn't like you. It's "orwellian" in every sense of the word.

Goladus 9y ago
A minor nitpick, I would say that the main difference between what's happening now and the Orwellian model is that the coercive pressure for maintaining ideological conformity is mostly not government power (yet, in the US). Instead, it's corporate and similar organization power (such the organizing board of a popular conference).
- galacticpony2 9y ago
  When people say "orwellian", they're often thinking "1984". I'm thinking "Animal Farm". It's a process, a takeover of the mind. It doesn't start with government and doesn't end at government. To be fair, it's not "orwellian" in literally every sense of the word, that was just a figure of speech.
  - Goladus 9y ago
    Some smart people think that you may be more right than I realized: https://blog.simplejustice.us/2017/08/10/walter-olson-a-circle-of-silence-without-responsibility/ https://blog.simplejustice.us/2017/08/10/walter-olson-a-circ... Effectively they're saying that the "Hostile Work Environment" clause is used to pressure corporations to limit speech of their employees. Evidence also suggests enforcement is ideologically biased.
- Boothroid 9y ago
  No doubt the US govt has its levers to pull in media and business. And I venture that as regards our use of the term Orwellian Orwell was discursive of power in general, rather than governmental power in the specific.
Boothroid 9y ago
I couldn't agree more. It used to seem like the left was more scrupulous but as I get older I wonder whether that was just youthful naivety. Certainly they seem to have abandoned their scruples these days.

rbanffy 9y ago

> I do think it will come to pass that Google will lose a unlawful termination lawsuit (or settle) It'll be hard to convince anyone that it'd be viable for him to continue his work after ostracizing a sizable part of Google's workforce by implying they are undeserving of their jobs. It could have been an attempt to start an honest discussion, but it was horrendously articulated, failed miserably to get the point across while offending a ton of people. He has shown appallingly poor judgement in his choice of format and utter disregard for the consequences of openly questioning corporate policies.

anvandare 9y ago
>ostracizing a sizable part of Google's workforce by implying they are undeserving of their jobs. He didn't. The only one who was (literally) ostracized was Damore. >consequences of openly questioning corporate policies. Well, the policy was (supposedly) that you could in fact question corporate policies. Of course 'everyone knew' that it was bullshit, but at least now it's been proven and thrown into public for all to see. I'm fine with a company not wanting openness, less so with such a company pretending to want openness. If Google subscribes to modern-day Lysenkoism (because they think it'll get them more profit) then that is their right, but at least quit the whole pretense and be honest about it: "Our company is about making money, not truth, not justice, not the betterment of society, but money, money, money." But of course, that gets you less starry-eyed young minds than the "Don't be Evil" of yesteryear, so it's understandable they keep the mask on. Corporations are sociopaths.
- rbanffy 9y ago
  > Of course 'everyone knew' that it was bullshit, Up until it went viral and everybody with a computer read it, Google was mostly ignoring it. When it leaked outside the company, it could no longer be ignored because it was damaging the company's reputation.
  - anvandare 9y ago
    Yes, and that is the problem. The use of public shaming to silence opponents (or to force their employers to fire them). The ones wielding this cudgel like to say "Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences!", but this sort of suppression of speech will have consequences as well.

cSoze 9y ago

If only he was "exploring the question in what appears to be a very scientific manner based on the latest academic research into these questions". The FIRST warning sign to anyone reading his manifesto should have been how woefully undercited it was. He revealed that he really doesn't understand, much less has read, the science. http://www.epi.org/publication/womens-work-and-the-gender-pay-gap-how-discrimination-societal-norms-and-other-forces-affect-womens-occupational-choices-and-their-pay/ http://www.epi.org/publication/womens-work-and-the-gender-pa...

Joky 9y ago
How is this link related to the bulk of his claims?
- cSoze 9y ago
  There is significant scientific evidence that most of the differences in employment observed between women and men and minorities and white men can be explained by socialization. When conditions are set that reduce or control for these social factors (including implicit bias) the differences in performance that James Demore attributes to "biological" factors disappear. How is this not related to the bulk of his claims?
  - galacticpony2 9y ago
    > When conditions are set that reduce or control for these social factors (including implicit bias) the differences in performance that James Demore attributes to "biological" factors disappear. That's a bold prediction supported by no real-world evidence whatsoever. Where's your control group? Where's the retort society that has all this bias removed or even quantified? Of course societal effects affect the outcome of a person's career, but the idea that there is absolutely zero influence of biological differences is pure dogma. However, it's convenient (if not imperative) to believe, if you're a strong social constructivist.
    - cSoze 9y ago