4 ms·

Damore was fired not because his science was flawed, but because he made himself essentially impossible to work with. Would you be "scared" if someone refuses t

Damore was fired not because his science was flawed, but because he made himself essentially impossible to work with. Would you be "scared" if someone refuses to take a shower for months on end and a company decides to fire them?

conanbatt 9y ago
I disagree entirely and vehemently to what you are saying. > he made himself essentially impossible to work with Who told you this? Im sure there were 100's of engineers, including female co-workers, at google that would have worked with him. But lets play along, lets say that effectively no single person at google would voluntarily let himself work with Damore. Why do you think that is? Because 99.9% disagree with his essay? Or because he became a target for scorn in the public eye that overpunished him? He was not fired because he wrote a shabby essay. He did not get fired for writing the essay itself. He got fired because the public asked him to be fired and punished, and google complied for PR.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  > But lets play along, lets say that effectively no single person at google would voluntarily let himself work with Damore. Why do you think that is? Because 99.9% disagree with his essay? Or because he became a target for scorn in the public eye that overpunished him? I'll give you a hint: if you are a female engineer, and you are put as a report for Damore, would you ever have a lingering feeling he might be biased against you if he decided to promote your male peer instead of you? Do you think that consists a liability for the company? Does the company own the onus of making sure Damore doesn't put them in a position where they might be sued for gender discrimination? > He was not fired because he wrote a shabby essay. He did not get fired for writing the essay itself. Wrong. He was fired because he publicly said "fuck it, I don't believe that women are equal and you have to suck it up." That's his prerogative, but doesn't entitle him to a job anywhere.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > I'll give you a hint: if you are a female engineer, and you are put as a report for Damore, would you ever have a lingering feeling he might be biased against you if he decided to promote your male peer instead of you? I don't know. Maybe. What we do know if that if someone else shares the same opinion of Damore within google, we will never hear about it , and the bias effect you attribute will still happen but there would be no way to address it. Not only that, but it might have exacerbated it: someone with the fear of being perceived bias and losing his job will want as few women in his team as possible. How about that possibility? > Wrong. He was fired because he publicly said "fuck it, I don't believe that women are equal and you have to suck it up." That's his prerogative, but doesn't entitle him to a job anywhere. He said it multiple days before he got fired. The timeline doesn't add up!
    - dguaraglia 9y ago
      > Not only that, but it might have exacerbated it: someone with the fear of being perceived bias and losing his job will want as few women in his team as possible. How about that possibility? Someone being actively nasty towards women in his team just because they are women will most likely get fired, so that's a self-limiting problem. > He said it multiple days before he got fired. The timeline doesn't add up! What timeline? There's only one timeline: 1) He releases a "manifesto" expressing his opinion 2) Someone reads the manifesto, is disgusted and a controversy ensues 3) Media picks up on the controversy 4) Google is forced into a really shitty position by being asked a bunch of times what they are going to do 5) Damore gets fired 6) Damore goes to "men's rights advocate" Stefan Molyneaux podcast and wears his "Goolag" shirt. He does a bit of media, tweets out some really ambiguous tweets. 7) The world forgets about Damore. So where's the flaw in the timeline?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Houshalter 9y ago
What does it say about your industry, if even people with average, moderate positions are "impossible to work with"?
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  As I explained to conanbatt, the problem is that he put himself in a position of being perceived as biased against women. Even if 90% of the company agreed with him - even if the CEO agreed with him - any Legal department would recommend firing him, rather than have to deal with the liability. I propose a mental exercise: let's say that Damore had written a similar "manifesto" but instead of concluding that "women are not that interested in engineering" he concluded "black people are not that interested in engineering". Would you see a problem with that? Do you think that might create some friction with fellow engineers of color?
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    What if Damore had been a woman. What do you think would have happened then. This is just en exercise in public outrage, not in morality, responsibility or the application of ideals.
    - dguaraglia 9y ago
      Had Damore been a woman, she would have to be fired too. I don't really understand this perception that "women get away with everything". The legal department would have as much of an argument to fire a female Damore as they'd have a male Damore.
      - conanbatt 9y ago
        > Had Damore been a woman, she would have to be fired too. I seriously doubt that. The public would generally be conflicted about crucifying a woman in the name of women, it would have not arised easily to public knowledge. To deepen the understanding of the situation, men and women withing google might have shown public agreement of some level with the essay and they havent been fire. People have done threats and attacks of many degrees on Damore because of that essay, which would have been a firable offense in any other circumstance.

conanbatt 9y ago

I disagree entirely and vehemently to what you are saying. > he made himself essentially impossible to work with Who told you this? Im sure there were 100's of engineers, including female co-workers, at google that would have worked with him. But lets play along, lets say that effectively no single person at google would voluntarily let himself work with Damore. Why do you think that is? Because 99.9% disagree with his essay? Or because he became a target for scorn in the public eye that overpunished him? He was not fired because he wrote a shabby essay. He did not get fired for writing the essay itself. He got fired because the public asked him to be fired and punished, and google complied for PR.

dguaraglia 9y ago
> But lets play along, lets say that effectively no single person at google would voluntarily let himself work with Damore. Why do you think that is? Because 99.9% disagree with his essay? Or because he became a target for scorn in the public eye that overpunished him? I'll give you a hint: if you are a female engineer, and you are put as a report for Damore, would you ever have a lingering feeling he might be biased against you if he decided to promote your male peer instead of you? Do you think that consists a liability for the company? Does the company own the onus of making sure Damore doesn't put them in a position where they might be sued for gender discrimination? > He was not fired because he wrote a shabby essay. He did not get fired for writing the essay itself. Wrong. He was fired because he publicly said "fuck it, I don't believe that women are equal and you have to suck it up." That's his prerogative, but doesn't entitle him to a job anywhere.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  > I'll give you a hint: if you are a female engineer, and you are put as a report for Damore, would you ever have a lingering feeling he might be biased against you if he decided to promote your male peer instead of you? I don't know. Maybe. What we do know if that if someone else shares the same opinion of Damore within google, we will never hear about it , and the bias effect you attribute will still happen but there would be no way to address it. Not only that, but it might have exacerbated it: someone with the fear of being perceived bias and losing his job will want as few women in his team as possible. How about that possibility? > Wrong. He was fired because he publicly said "fuck it, I don't believe that women are equal and you have to suck it up." That's his prerogative, but doesn't entitle him to a job anywhere. He said it multiple days before he got fired. The timeline doesn't add up!
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    > Not only that, but it might have exacerbated it: someone with the fear of being perceived bias and losing his job will want as few women in his team as possible. How about that possibility? Someone being actively nasty towards women in his team just because they are women will most likely get fired, so that's a self-limiting problem. > He said it multiple days before he got fired. The timeline doesn't add up! What timeline? There's only one timeline: 1) He releases a "manifesto" expressing his opinion 2) Someone reads the manifesto, is disgusted and a controversy ensues 3) Media picks up on the controversy 4) Google is forced into a really shitty position by being asked a bunch of times what they are going to do 5) Damore gets fired 6) Damore goes to "men's rights advocate" Stefan Molyneaux podcast and wears his "Goolag" shirt. He does a bit of media, tweets out some really ambiguous tweets. 7) The world forgets about Damore. So where's the flaw in the timeline?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Houshalter 9y ago

What does it say about your industry, if even people with average, moderate positions are "impossible to work with"?

dguaraglia 9y ago
As I explained to conanbatt, the problem is that he put himself in a position of being perceived as biased against women. Even if 90% of the company agreed with him - even if the CEO agreed with him - any Legal department would recommend firing him, rather than have to deal with the liability. I propose a mental exercise: let's say that Damore had written a similar "manifesto" but instead of concluding that "women are not that interested in engineering" he concluded "black people are not that interested in engineering". Would you see a problem with that? Do you think that might create some friction with fellow engineers of color?
- conanbatt 9y ago
  What if Damore had been a woman. What do you think would have happened then. This is just en exercise in public outrage, not in morality, responsibility or the application of ideals.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    Had Damore been a woman, she would have to be fired too. I don't really understand this perception that "women get away with everything". The legal department would have as much of an argument to fire a female Damore as they'd have a male Damore.
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      > Had Damore been a woman, she would have to be fired too. I seriously doubt that. The public would generally be conflicted about crucifying a woman in the name of women, it would have not arised easily to public knowledge. To deepen the understanding of the situation, men and women withing google might have shown public agreement of some level with the essay and they havent been fire. People have done threats and attacks of many degrees on Damore because of that essay, which would have been a firable offense in any other circumstance.