7 ms·

> 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

> 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?

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?