5 ms·

This is addressed in TFA. > [W]hen I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club. Some people at Google reacted by saying “well if he’s so wrong, then w

This is addressed in TFA. > [W]hen I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club. Some people at Google reacted by saying “well if he’s so wrong, then why not refute him,” but that requires spending a significant amount of time building an argument against the claims in his document. On the other hand, if I remain silent, that silence could be mistaken for agreement. I should not be forced into that kind of debate at work. (Ida) > I’m just exhausted by having this same damn argument over and over again since I was a teenager and the amount of time and energy I keep having to spend to counter it. (Edith) Also, none of the "quoted phrases" that you criticized appear in TFA or in any parent comment.

exergy 9y ago
I sympathise with the woman saying she'd much rather just focus on code rather than social justice debates. But, as flippant as it is for a guy to say it, it's their cross to bear isnt it? Women in tech. Because, if they don't speak up, then what? Where does that leave us? Should the "other side" also not speak up? Just focus on code? Should they suppress real emotions that they're feeling? I'm not flaming, just wondering what the best-case way forward would be that mollifies both sides.
- sidlls 9y ago
  I don't care if the women I work with don't speak up. If I see sexism I will (and in fact have on more than one occasion) call it out. I use discussions with my wife and with women I've worked with in the past regarding how sexism in the workplace works to help me identify it in cases where it may be ambiguous or even something I'd never considered to be sexist. It does help identify those cases when women do speak out, though. My view is we should listen more to them about what sexism is and how it works.
- chc 9y ago
  This seems roughly cognate to "There are people who want to do their jobs, and there are people who want to poke the people in Group A with sticks. Should an employer constrain Group B from poking the people in Group A altogether just because Group A doesn't want to participate?" I think most people would easily answer, "Yes, we should prevent people from going around poking unwilling coworkers with sticks, and they should also be prevented from getting around the rule by throwing sticks around and just 'happening' to hit those coworkers, because it's not useful to have people doing that in your workplace and it disrupts Group A." I don't think anybody would really say, "Getting poked with sticks is just Group A's cross to bear."
  - exergy 9y ago
    Fair points, and as I said, even I tend to fall in the camp of "work is for work" a lot of the times. On the other hand, to play devil's advocate, I think you're being uncharitable by comparing them to "stick pokers" as if they've nothing better to do. I tend to believe that the topic is important enough that, "just let me do my work" isn't an adequate answer, and trivialises the concerns of a sizeable swathe of even Google employees.
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    Except that people are just discussing ideas in a rational way, at least aspirationally. There aren't any physical sticks. This is complex because people desire for fairness and respect in incompatible ways. If we analogize away one of those problems, of course the right decision seems obvious. EDIT: I think the incompatibility is a result of some rules and norms that need changing. I don't think the conflict is a law of nature.
humanrebar 9y ago
> [W]hen I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club. Sure. But people on the wrong side of the Google monoculture feel like they have to be closeted at work. They don't want to feel that way either. There has to be a way for everyone to be professional and honest here.
- sidlls 9y ago
  Good. People who think we don't need diversity efforts or that think studies of aggregates should be applied to determine efforts for smaller specialized populations or individuals should keep it to themselves. I wouldn't want a racist to feel comfortable quoting Bell Curve "research" or criminal population composition numbers at work,for many of the same reasons.
  - jrs95 9y ago
    So you're saying that any research or argument that comes to a conclusion you disagree with should be equated with the research and arguments that Neo-Nazis use? How progressive, open-minded, and forward thinking. That this is a widely held viewpoint on these things ought to be more disturbing than the memo.
    - sidlls 9y ago
      No, that's not at all what I wrote.
  - JimDabell 9y ago
    > People who think we don't need diversity efforts The memo in question explicitly supported the goal of improving diversity and provided concrete suggestions on how to do so.
    - sidlls 9y ago
      Conservatives often claim to support an idea and then go on to lay out exactly how it's only on their terms (usually completely opposed to the idea) or in ways they approve, for example by providing concrete suggestions based on flawed application or understanding of research (as Damore did).
arcticfox 9y ago
It seems like you're holding a significant double standard here, which is exactly why Damore feels his views are systemically quashed. For example, that line of reasoning would go: Damore saw practices he feels are discriminatory based on the available evidence. His silence could be mistaken for agreement. He should not be forced into that kind of debate at work.
- dwaltrip 9y ago
  Ideally, the one whose views are the least congruent with reality in a harmful way should feel more pressure and less freedom to express their opinion (because people won't be interested in hearing nonsense). Finding the approaches and views that are most coherently grounded in reality is obviously a continuously difficult task. We shouldn't treat people poorly just for being wrong, unless their expressions of views is actively harmful. Making that determination can also be very difficult. Lastly, as a slight tangent, no human knowledge is or ever will be 100% certain and robust (although in some specific domains we can attain incredibly high confidence). We should keep this uncertainty in mind when we act.
- Berobero 9y ago
  This would be a reasonable take to me if the issue he took up could reasonably be described as significantly affecting his everyday work life; the key difference I see in your "double standard" is that the woman can't walk away from being a woman in a male dominated profession.

exergy 9y ago

I sympathise with the woman saying she'd much rather just focus on code rather than social justice debates. But, as flippant as it is for a guy to say it, it's their cross to bear isnt it? Women in tech. Because, if they don't speak up, then what? Where does that leave us? Should the "other side" also not speak up? Just focus on code? Should they suppress real emotions that they're feeling? I'm not flaming, just wondering what the best-case way forward would be that mollifies both sides.

sidlls 9y ago
I don't care if the women I work with don't speak up. If I see sexism I will (and in fact have on more than one occasion) call it out. I use discussions with my wife and with women I've worked with in the past regarding how sexism in the workplace works to help me identify it in cases where it may be ambiguous or even something I'd never considered to be sexist. It does help identify those cases when women do speak out, though. My view is we should listen more to them about what sexism is and how it works.
chc 9y ago
This seems roughly cognate to "There are people who want to do their jobs, and there are people who want to poke the people in Group A with sticks. Should an employer constrain Group B from poking the people in Group A altogether just because Group A doesn't want to participate?" I think most people would easily answer, "Yes, we should prevent people from going around poking unwilling coworkers with sticks, and they should also be prevented from getting around the rule by throwing sticks around and just 'happening' to hit those coworkers, because it's not useful to have people doing that in your workplace and it disrupts Group A." I don't think anybody would really say, "Getting poked with sticks is just Group A's cross to bear."
- exergy 9y ago
  Fair points, and as I said, even I tend to fall in the camp of "work is for work" a lot of the times. On the other hand, to play devil's advocate, I think you're being uncharitable by comparing them to "stick pokers" as if they've nothing better to do. I tend to believe that the topic is important enough that, "just let me do my work" isn't an adequate answer, and trivialises the concerns of a sizeable swathe of even Google employees.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Except that people are just discussing ideas in a rational way, at least aspirationally. There aren't any physical sticks. This is complex because people desire for fairness and respect in incompatible ways. If we analogize away one of those problems, of course the right decision seems obvious. EDIT: I think the incompatibility is a result of some rules and norms that need changing. I don't think the conflict is a law of nature.

humanrebar 9y ago

> [W]hen I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club. Sure. But people on the wrong side of the Google monoculture feel like they have to be closeted at work. They don't want to feel that way either. There has to be a way for everyone to be professional and honest here.

sidlls 9y ago
Good. People who think we don't need diversity efforts or that think studies of aggregates should be applied to determine efforts for smaller specialized populations or individuals should keep it to themselves. I wouldn't want a racist to feel comfortable quoting Bell Curve "research" or criminal population composition numbers at work,for many of the same reasons.
- jrs95 9y ago
  So you're saying that any research or argument that comes to a conclusion you disagree with should be equated with the research and arguments that Neo-Nazis use? How progressive, open-minded, and forward thinking. That this is a widely held viewpoint on these things ought to be more disturbing than the memo.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    No, that's not at all what I wrote.
- JimDabell 9y ago
  > People who think we don't need diversity efforts The memo in question explicitly supported the goal of improving diversity and provided concrete suggestions on how to do so.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    Conservatives often claim to support an idea and then go on to lay out exactly how it's only on their terms (usually completely opposed to the idea) or in ways they approve, for example by providing concrete suggestions based on flawed application or understanding of research (as Damore did).

arcticfox 9y ago

It seems like you're holding a significant double standard here, which is exactly why Damore feels his views are systemically quashed. For example, that line of reasoning would go: Damore saw practices he feels are discriminatory based on the available evidence. His silence could be mistaken for agreement. He should not be forced into that kind of debate at work.

dwaltrip 9y ago
Ideally, the one whose views are the least congruent with reality in a harmful way should feel more pressure and less freedom to express their opinion (because people won't be interested in hearing nonsense). Finding the approaches and views that are most coherently grounded in reality is obviously a continuously difficult task. We shouldn't treat people poorly just for being wrong, unless their expressions of views is actively harmful. Making that determination can also be very difficult. Lastly, as a slight tangent, no human knowledge is or ever will be 100% certain and robust (although in some specific domains we can attain incredibly high confidence). We should keep this uncertainty in mind when we act.
Berobero 9y ago
This would be a reasonable take to me if the issue he took up could reasonably be described as significantly affecting his everyday work life; the key difference I see in your "double standard" is that the woman can't walk away from being a woman in a male dominated profession.