6 ms·

So people who disagree with you "haven't hit certain developmental milestones"?

axaxs 9y ago
Because anyone who shuts down and screams in response to a well thought out document, no matter how ridiculous, is not a well formed adult.
- brailsafe 9y ago
  At the very least it's a childish reaction.
- SamReidHughes 9y ago
  You know, I really don't think that's fair. You've got [The Document] -> [What people read or misread from the document, what they infer in other's motives, others' mental framework, etc] -> [Reaction]. I know if I thought everybody thought I was stupid because of my race, or gender, or some other crap like that, because "Science," and they were forming expectations by it and were wrong but there was nothing I could do about it... it would really suck, and I might want to stay home. (It would be stupid to stay home, because there's a perfectly good golf course across the street from HQ, but I digress...) The magnitude of their reaction is very understandable.
- SamReidHughes 9y ago
  Also, while my response focused on one example I personally experienced, to discredit claims about fake-taking-offense, it's not necessarily the case that others are staying home solely because people hold beliefs. There's also, presumably, a general atmosphere of drama to avoid, stress and the like. So it's not merely a document.
SamReidHughes 9y ago
It's not a matter of disagreement. It's the ability to process statements about population distributions, be they true or false, without being insulted by them. If you (a woman, let's say) hear Chris say, "fewer women are able to be good engineers than men," and treat that the same as, "You are not a good engineer," then you're wrong about what was said and what was meant. You'd be lacking the ability to perform a basic act of reading comprehension in certain contexts. Relatedly, many people can't think about population distributions in a sensible way in any context. Another is the inability to handle a statement like "There might be a smaller proportion of men suitable for engineering because of biology." Clearly there's some chance it's true, but plenty of people will say there's no chance that the proportions aren't identical by gender. Which is an absolutely crazy thing to think, because there's like, some chance you're wrong.
- danso 9y ago
  > If you (a woman, let's say) hear Chris say, "fewer women are able to be good engineers than men," and treat that the same as, "You are not a good engineer," But Damore didn't say either of those things.
  - yorwba 9y ago
    Indeed, and yet I have seen lots of comments on HN that interpreted him as saying something indistinguishable from those things.
    - danso 9y ago
      On the other hand, I've seen folks from the pro-Damore crowd who think that when someone accuses Damore of something he didn't literally say, then that person did not read his memo or was being maliciously misleading. That mindset is not particularly more intellectual or rational than not having read the full memo. If a politician says: I'm not a liberal, and all of my best friends are conservatives, but I'm going to vote in support of abortion rights and universal healthcare -- are constituents being obtuse if they perceive that their representative is in fact a liberal?
      - yorwba 9y ago
        To play devil's advocate for a bit, if someone says I'm not a man, and all of my best friends are women, but I'm going to have a prostate checkup tomorrow after football training. then calling them a man instead of a transwoman who happens to enjoy football is definitely inconsiderate. I agree that you don't always have to believe someone's self-characterization, but it is usually polite to still go along with it.
        danso 9y ago
        I'm not sure what your assumptions are. That Pat, who is born a man but who asserts themselves to be a transgender woman, is not objectively a transgender woman, but is just a sadly confused/deluded man? That I'm not obligated to believe that Pat is a transgender woman, nor acknowledge that identity to Pat other than out of polite consideration? OK, we don't need to get into a debate about transgender issues and laws. Your analogy feels deeply flawed in several other ways, though. If someone's best friends are all women, that has...what exactly to do with whether that person is a man or a woman? If you see someone playing football who looks and claims to be a woman, you'd still think that her playing football is evidence that she might possibly be a man? Seriously? In any case, someone's gender identity is not something likely that directly impacts me. If someone claims to be a man, I have the option of being "polite" and to "go along with it", whatever the hell that means. Or I don't even have to bring the issue up at all. But if I'm a conservative voter whose Republican House member keeps voting for universal health care and limitations on gun ownership, the situation isn't one where politeness is part of my decision making process. My Congressmember's behavior and beliefs, unlike Pat's gender identity, affects my rights and livelihood as an American citizen. I don't have to believe he is truly represents my Republican preferences on the basis of his stated party affiliation, or him swearing on his Bible that he truly is a Republican even as he votes against gun rights/abortion regulations/lower taxes/etc, etc. Likewise, Google's management does not have to believe that Damore sincerely values diversity, if they believe what he actually says in his memo reflects someone hostile to Google's diversity efforts and goals. It is not "inconsiderate" for Google's execs to read between the lines of Damore's various claims and rhetorical arguments. Damore is a Google employee who believes he is doing the right thing by taking a moral stand against Google's management, he didn't ask to be politely coddled.

Because anyone who shuts down and screams in response to a well thought out document, no matter how ridiculous, is not a well formed adult.

brailsafe 9y ago
At the very least it's a childish reaction.
SamReidHughes 9y ago
You know, I really don't think that's fair. You've got [The Document] -> [What people read or misread from the document, what they infer in other's motives, others' mental framework, etc] -> [Reaction]. I know if I thought everybody thought I was stupid because of my race, or gender, or some other crap like that, because "Science," and they were forming expectations by it and were wrong but there was nothing I could do about it... it would really suck, and I might want to stay home. (It would be stupid to stay home, because there's a perfectly good golf course across the street from HQ, but I digress...) The magnitude of their reaction is very understandable.
SamReidHughes 9y ago
Also, while my response focused on one example I personally experienced, to discredit claims about fake-taking-offense, it's not necessarily the case that others are staying home solely because people hold beliefs. There's also, presumably, a general atmosphere of drama to avoid, stress and the like. So it's not merely a document.

SamReidHughes 9y ago

It's not a matter of disagreement. It's the ability to process statements about population distributions, be they true or false, without being insulted by them. If you (a woman, let's say) hear Chris say, "fewer women are able to be good engineers than men," and treat that the same as, "You are not a good engineer," then you're wrong about what was said and what was meant. You'd be lacking the ability to perform a basic act of reading comprehension in certain contexts. Relatedly, many people can't think about population distributions in a sensible way in any context. Another is the inability to handle a statement like "There might be a smaller proportion of men suitable for engineering because of biology." Clearly there's some chance it's true, but plenty of people will say there's no chance that the proportions aren't identical by gender. Which is an absolutely crazy thing to think, because there's like, some chance you're wrong.

danso 9y ago
> If you (a woman, let's say) hear Chris say, "fewer women are able to be good engineers than men," and treat that the same as, "You are not a good engineer," But Damore didn't say either of those things.
- yorwba 9y ago
  Indeed, and yet I have seen lots of comments on HN that interpreted him as saying something indistinguishable from those things.
  - danso 9y ago
    On the other hand, I've seen folks from the pro-Damore crowd who think that when someone accuses Damore of something he didn't literally say, then that person did not read his memo or was being maliciously misleading. That mindset is not particularly more intellectual or rational than not having read the full memo. If a politician says: I'm not a liberal, and all of my best friends are conservatives, but I'm going to vote in support of abortion rights and universal healthcare -- are constituents being obtuse if they perceive that their representative is in fact a liberal?
    - yorwba 9y ago
      To play devil's advocate for a bit, if someone says I'm not a man, and all of my best friends are women, but I'm going to have a prostate checkup tomorrow after football training. then calling them a man instead of a transwoman who happens to enjoy football is definitely inconsiderate. I agree that you don't always have to believe someone's self-characterization, but it is usually polite to still go along with it.
      - danso 9y ago
        I'm not sure what your assumptions are. That Pat, who is born a man but who asserts themselves to be a transgender woman, is not objectively a transgender woman, but is just a sadly confused/deluded man? That I'm not obligated to believe that Pat is a transgender woman, nor acknowledge that identity to Pat other than out of polite consideration? OK, we don't need to get into a debate about transgender issues and laws. Your analogy feels deeply flawed in several other ways, though. If someone's best friends are all women, that has...what exactly to do with whether that person is a man or a woman? If you see someone playing football who looks and claims to be a woman, you'd still think that her playing football is evidence that she might possibly be a man? Seriously? In any case, someone's gender identity is not something likely that directly impacts me. If someone claims to be a man, I have the option of being "polite" and to "go along with it", whatever the hell that means. Or I don't even have to bring the issue up at all. But if I'm a conservative voter whose Republican House member keeps voting for universal health care and limitations on gun ownership, the situation isn't one where politeness is part of my decision making process. My Congressmember's behavior and beliefs, unlike Pat's gender identity, affects my rights and livelihood as an American citizen. I don't have to believe he is truly represents my Republican preferences on the basis of his stated party affiliation, or him swearing on his Bible that he truly is a Republican even as he votes against gun rights/abortion regulations/lower taxes/etc, etc. Likewise, Google's management does not have to believe that Damore sincerely values diversity, if they believe what he actually says in his memo reflects someone hostile to Google's diversity efforts and goals. It is not "inconsiderate" for Google's execs to read between the lines of Damore's various claims and rhetorical arguments. Damore is a Google employee who believes he is doing the right thing by taking a moral stand against Google's management, he didn't ask to be politely coddled.