Poll of the Day > Duckbear article: Google FIRES engineer for advancing harmful gender stereotypes

(+) Yeah! (+)

Google fires male engineer for 'advancing harmful gender stereotypes' after he wrote a viral memo saying women are 'biologically' less likely to succeed in tech.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4770130/Google-fires-male-engineer-viral-gender-

-Google fired software engineer James Damore on Monday after his controversial internal memo went viral

-CEO Sundar Pichai said the engineer had violated Google's code of conduct by 'advancing harmful gender stereotypes'

-Damore's controversial 10-page document has divided opinion since going viral

-He said women could not get ahead at Google because of biological differences

-Google's new head of diversity, Danielle Brown, slammed the memo saying it 'advanced incorrect assumptions about gender'

-Damore also claimed that Google stifles opinions that don't fit its 'left-wing bias'

Fired:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/08/05/430FDBC500000578-4770130-Software_engineer_James_Damore_was_sacked_on_Monday_for_violatin-m-44_1502167913839.jpg

Google Ceo:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/08/05/430DF23800000578-4770130-Google_CEO_Sundar_Pichai_has_not_commented_on_the_controversy-a-38_1502167188938.jpg

Google:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/08/04/430F863600000578-4770130-image-a-4_1502162559032.jpg

Danielle Brown, Google's new head of diversity:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/08/05/430DF22C00000578-4770130-Danielle_Brown_Google_s_new_head_of_diversity_issued_her_own_mem-m-40_1502167688538.jpg

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/190/821/e55.gif
---

Yeah, I can see firing somebody for that. It might be true -- and I'm not sure how much research has actually been done into it -- usually that kind of behavior is forbidden by the company guidelines.

Also their head of diversity is a dog. Woof. If you're going to hire somebody for a bullshit position, at least hire somebody attractive.
---

it depends how you say it. if you say "women [can] not get ahead at Google because of biological differences", that's wrong, women can get ahead if they want to, and no one can tell them they can't.

if you say "women are 'biologically' less likely to succeed in tech" that's a little better

but I think maybe better still is something like "women are generally biologically predisposed not to want to succeed in tech".

it's not that they can't, or that they necessarily have any disadvantage, it's that given the option, women themselves will tend to choose not to.
---

dioxxys posted...

-Damore also claimed that Google stifles opinions that don't fit its 'left-wing bias'

well, he isn't super wrong here considering he got fired for it
---

dioxxys posted...

Google fires male engineer for 'advancing harmful gender stereotypes' after he wrote a viral memo saying women are 'biologically' less likely to succeed in tech

I don't necessarily agree that women can't succeed but they are more likely to be held back or have trouble breaking into the biz initially so there's plenty of merit in what he's saying-it's not a lack of skill because vaginas, just existing societal issues imho.
That said, it's fair that he was fired because these days you have to know that you're going to get backlash from one side or the other in these SJW, trigger-ridden times if you write anything racially, politically or gender charged, no matter the reasoning you use or position you take.
I'm not saying it was a sackable offense, just that he knew what was going to happen and did it anyway instead of keeping it to himself.
---

Here is the deal/

He was likely an "at will" employee. He could be fired for wearing a yellow tie instead of a red one one day.

So it's fair to fire him for any reason (that isn't discrimination) or no reason.
---

another thing I heard that relates to this. IQ is a symmetrical bell curve for both men, and for women. so evenly distributed intelligence regardless of sex.

the difference is (supposedly) that mens' bell curve is flatter and wider. so men have a higher tendency towards the extremes. this means that if you take all of the smartest (or dumbest) people in the world, the majority of them will be male.

so when you have a place like google or even all of silicon valley, if it really is meritocratic (like it arguably should be), then as a gathering place of the smartest people in the world, the tendency is going to be that it's a male majority.
---

Sahuagin posted...

but I think maybe better still is something like "women are generally biologically predisposed not to want to succeed in tech".

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive. One interesting citation is as follows:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/men-crave-competition-women-work-play/story?id=12641830
Men are 94 percent more likely than women to apply for a job with a salary potential that is dependent on outperforming their colleagues, according to a large new study from the University of Chicago.

"Women shy away from competitive workplaces whereas men covet, and even thrive in, competitive environments," the study, involving nearly 7,000 job seekers in 16 large American cities, concluded.
---

Sahuagin posted...

(like it arguably should be)

I think it should be whatever the owners of the company want. It's just that if they want to succeed in a cutthroat industry they should probably hire the best.

-Google's new head of diversity, Danielle Brown, slammed the memo saying it 'advanced incorrect assumptions about gender'

So if it was actually proven true could he get his job back?
---

Lokarin posted...

So if it was actually proven true could he get his job back?

nope

helly posted...

well, he isn't super wrong here considering he got fired for it

He got fired for being sexist, not for being conservative.

Or is sexism now a conservative thing?

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive. One interesting citation is as follows:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/men-crave-competition-women-work-play/story?id=12641830
Men are 94 percent more likely than women to apply for a job with a salary potential that is dependent on outperforming their colleagues, according to a large new study from the University of Chicago.

"Women shy away from competitive workplaces whereas men covet, and even thrive in, competitive environments," the study, involving nearly 7,000 job seekers in 16 large American cities, concluded.

Your citation doesn't match your assertion.

Your citation suggests that men are more likely to seek competition. That's not the same thing as saying they are more driven to succeed.

Not all success is borne of competition; to the contrary, there are situations where a competitive drive can be a detriment. Success that comes from collaboration is no less success than that which comes from competition.
---

Here is the actual memo without all the clickbait bullshit

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf
---

Is he saying that can't get ahead and wanting that to change, or is he stating that they can't get ahead and he hopes it stays that way? Or is he saying that can't get ahead, when it may have already been proven that they can?

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive.

What reason do you have to attribute that to biology, rather than sociology?

I'm pretty sure people of any gender are equally capable of being enough of an unscrupulous asshole to advance in any industry if they put their minds to it.
---

_AdjI_ posted...

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive.

What reason do you have to attribute that to biology, rather than sociology?

Because it has everything to do with biology?

I dont think theres a difference but this definitely holds water:
Sahuagin posted...

IQ is a symmetrical bell curve for both men, and for women. so evenly distributed intelligence regardless of sex.

the difference is (supposedly) that mens' bell curve is flatter and wider. so men have a higher tendency towards the extremes. this means that if you take all of the smartest (or dumbest) people in the world, the majority of them will be male.

Theres a portion in here about this:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sideways-view/201410/are-men-really-more-intelligent-women

Google is a left company. It's not a secret. He's an idiot for not hiding his views and just work.
---

Mead posted...

Here is the actual memo without all the clickbait bullshit

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Not that anybody else is likely to have read the thing, but he repeatedly advocates for more women in tech, and is basically being Lynch mobbed for pointing out that women just aren't as prevalent or drawn to STEM fields as men. IE, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

But the Cntrl Left will have it's pound of flesh for his blasphemy regardless because feelz are more important than realz. But muh patriarchy!
---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Mead posted...

Here is the actual memo without all the clickbait bullshit

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Not that anybody else is likely to have read the thing, but he repeatedly advocates for more women in tech, and is basically being Lynch mobbed for pointing out that women just aren't as prevalent or drawn to STEM fields as men. IE, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

But the Cntrl Left will have it's pound of flesh for his blasphemy regardless because feelz are more important than realz. But muh patriarchy!

Well thats good to know he isnt just being misogynist like google would have us believe

That guy looks like a forever alone who hasn't seen a vagina since he came out of one.
---

Dikitain posted...

That guy looks like a forever alone who hasn't seen a vagina since he came out of one.

This is sort of the point I was making. Switch everything around about that sentence 180 degrees and say it about a woman and the mob will have your head as well.
---

Gender stereotypes: offensive when applied to the expected person, a sign of bravery when displayed by a trans person. That in itself disqualifies the whole debate's credibility.
---

Just another example of why Trump won. The left is going to continue to lose as long as they continue to lie, obsess over identity politics, and label everything to the right of Marx as "alt right hate speech".
---

Google needs to die in a fire

SJW Hell

I don't agree with the guy at all, but I think it's pretty foolish that Google tries to promote an environment where everyone can express their opinion, everyone's valuable, everyone can say what's on their minds...

And then they fire a guy for suggesting something controversial.
---

Gynthaeres posted...

I don't agree with the guy at all, but I think it's pretty foolish that Google tries to promote an environment where everyone can express their opinion, everyone's valuable, everyone can say what's on their minds...

No.

They promote "diversity" over actual work.

---

Google employees:

https://i.redd.it/ax0paygm4hez.jpg

He was fired for saying affirmative action is stupid and that gender differences in the work place is due to women desiring different jobs and not because of discrimination.
---

TigerTycoon posted...

He was fired for saying affirmative action is stupid and that gender differences in the work place is due to women desiring different jobs and not because of discrimination.

You ever take any STEM courses before?

Total sausagefest.

TheWorstPoster posted...

TigerTycoon posted...

He was fired for saying affirmative action is stupid and that gender differences in the work place is due to women desiring different jobs and not because of discrimination.

You ever take any STEM courses before?

Total sausagefest.

Because of the law banning women?

/sarcasm
---

Conner4REAL posted...

Here is the deal/

He was likely an "at will" employee. He could be fired for wearing a yellow tie instead of a red one one day.

So it's fair to fire him for any reason (that isn't discrimination) or no reason.

Pretty sure a lot of engineers are contracted rather than at-will, not that it necessarily makes any difference when their behavior voids a contract clause.
---

darkknight109 posted...

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive. One interesting citation is as follows:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/men-crave-competition-women-work-play/story?id=12641830
Men are 94 percent more likely than women to apply for a job with a salary potential that is dependent on outperforming their colleagues, according to a large new study from the University of Chicago.

"Women shy away from competitive workplaces whereas men covet, and even thrive in, competitive environments," the study, involving nearly 7,000 job seekers in 16 large American cities, concluded.

Your citation doesn't match your assertion.

Your citation suggests that men are more likely to seek competition. That's not the same thing as saying they are more driven to succeed.

Not all success is borne of competition; to the contrary, there are situations where a competitive drive can be a detriment. Success that comes from collaboration is no less success than that which comes from competition.

...wanting competition is part of a drive to succeed. There's a direct correlation. And while it may not always result in improved performance, it's certainly tied into wanting and striving to climb the ladder.
---

_AdjI_ posted...

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive.

What reason do you have to attribute that to biology, rather than sociology?

Overlooking that society is largely a construct resulting from biology -- since traditional gender roles have a basis on instincts -- men are naturally more prone to aggression than women and women are naturally more caring/empathetic in no small part due to the body's natural chemicals. Unless you're going to pretend that higher levels of testosterone has no bearing on competition because social "science" nowadays seems to take precedence over actual science.
---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

Mead posted...

Here is the actual memo without all the clickbait bullshit

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Not that anybody else is likely to have read the thing, but he repeatedly advocates for more women in tech, and is basically being Lynch mobbed for pointing out that women just aren't as prevalent or drawn to STEM fields as men. IE, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

But the Cntrl Left will have it's pound of flesh for his blasphemy regardless because feelz are more important than realz. But muh patriarchy!

Then nothing is really at issue there.

TigerTycoon posted...

He was fired for saying affirmative action is stupid and that gender differences in the work place is due to women desiring different jobs and not because of discrimination.

Both of which are completely true. Frankly, if you're trying to counter some largely unproven institutional bias, a better way to do it involves automatic systems which strip identifying characteristics from resumes, etc.
---

Julian Assange on Google

https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/

Good riddance. The conservative cucks get a taste of their own medicine.

Lets be honest, this wouldn't be any different had this been a conservative company taking a stance against gays.

Why should lefties have to bend over for the righties? If you don't like the tech industry being left, go back to whatever it is you were doing before.

Zeus posted...

Overlooking that society is largely a construct resulting from biology -- since traditional gender roles have a basis on instincts

Are you honestly suggesting nothing's been done to perpetuate those roles beyond the basic caveman "ugh me strong you hold baby while I stab food"? Because that's pretty obviously not remotely true at all. A whole lot has been done to reinforce those roles, long, long beyond the point where the underlying biology stopped mattering.

Zeus posted...

men are naturally more prone to aggression than women and women are naturally more caring/empathetic

Serious question: Have you ever actually met any women? And interacted with them beyond that initial meeting? Because the only time I would consider that to be true is in the cases where the prevailing cultural ideal is that women who act aggressively and assertively will be seen as bossy and/or bitchy and fired instead of promoted. Take away the preconceived expectations that they should be docile and motherly, and women act pretty much exactly the same as men.

Google can and should fire them for whatever reason they deem appropriate.

However, what I find disgusting is the all-too-common social media response. The fact that this is on social media at all disgusts me and now every asshole and their dog is trying to blacklist this guy from every company they can.

Real nice. Ruin a guys life over something so stupid.

This should have stayed an internal issue at Google, fired the guy, then he could have gone on to live his life at some other company. He's had his punishment. Fuck off already.
---

Smarkil posted...

This should have stayed an internal issue at Google, fired the guy, then he could have gone on to live his life at some other company. He's had his punishment. Fuck off already.

Nope. Ideological Purity demands that this man has his life ruined until he "bends the knee". This is what outrage culture begets.
---

Mead posted...

Here is the actual memo without all the clickbait bullshit

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

well that's way more rational than I expected. it's not like he tweeted "women can't be smart enough for tech" or something.

_AdjI_ posted...

Zeus posted...

In general, women are less biologically predisposed to want to succeed. By nature, men are more competitive.

What reason do you have to attribute that to biology, rather than sociology?

studies have shown that the more freedom men and women have to do what they want and the less society tells them what they should want, the *more* biological differences matter and the *more* they choose supposedly "stereotypical" jobs.

_AdjI_ posted...

Serious question: Have you ever actually met any women? And interacted with them beyond that initial meeting? Because the only time I would consider that to be true is in the cases where the prevailing cultural ideal is that women who act aggressively and assertively will be seen as bossy and/or bitchy and fired instead of promoted. Take away the preconceived expectations that they should be docile and motherly, and women act pretty much exactly the same as men.

this is ridiculous. most violence is male VS male violence. males need to climb social dominance hierarchies, and if there's no other way to do it, they'll resort to violence to do it.
---

Jordan Peterson has interviewed him already:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agU-mHFcXdw
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sMFQtVRN1Q
---

duckbear trying steal my thunder

The more I think about this, the more the chilling effect stories like this are supposed to carry is what bothers me more than the content itself. The way the media and the Lynch mobs run with this shit, the more it serves to attempt to stifle any sort of rational discourse on social issues.
---

WhiskeyDisk posted...

The more I think about this, the more the chilling effect stories like this are supposed to carry is what bothers me more than the content itself. The way the media and the Lynch mobs run with this shit, the more it serves to attempt to stifle any sort of rational discourse on social issues.

It's not a problem as long as you think exactly like the mob wants you to think. Seems fine to me.
---

Sexual dimorphism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

Read it. Check it out some time. Get fired by Google for hate speech.
---