They set up an internal forum specifically for controversial discussions and he was dumb enough to actually post on it lol. That'll teach him for not towing the party line.
Although I doubt he intended it completely, that memo is a Trojan horse. Feminists/progressives sharing it believing it to be sexist, despite being anything but that, are proving to to the world how brainwashed they are. Biological differences not existing is a discussion that can't stand up to empirical scrutiny, which is why it's only true in an echo chamber. It's now out there, let the cognitive dissonance consume the world!
"...unfounded bias" - FFS he sourced how he came to conclude many of his claims. Plus, much came from Googles own internal statics and demographics data. _"Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. "_ - Google Welllll, not so much...
if he's wrong, why don't we see more women fixing cars? maybe building tool and die? I know a lot of them will push a button on a stamping press for 35 bucks an hour in a union shop. But I don't actually see them crawling into the dies to fix them. and I mean they have no problem driving a $70,000 automobile. but asked to change the oil...?
Omniscient Presence Women can do anything. But people like James who goes around saying that women are not "biological fit", or "good enough" is detrimental. That can psychology destroy someone. We shouldn't be bringing down anyone psychological, but uplifting them.
During the World Wars women were the industry workers, did the mechanical jobs that men had done. But, after the wars were over, lost those jobs due to the men coming home. Very few women were allowed to maintain those jobs, so it wasn't because they couldn't perform the work they just weren't allowed to keep the jobs.
These responses are stupid. The memo just states well-known findings and observes that they conflict with Google dogma. I have observed that few women know how anything works or care. Do you know how anything works?
+Echo Alpha, you should have read the memo at diversitymemo.com before you start mischaracterizing his words. Only about 10% of people applying these tech jobs are women. He said that this may be attributed to interest in technology, which is related to personality, which is strongly influenced by biology. His argument was to uncover why there are *fewer* women in tech sector. *fewer*, not *worse*. There is sexism in the industry, but it does not come close to explaining the disparity of job applicants.
"Anti-diversity?" That's a complete misrepresentation of his position. Anyone who read even a little of his memo would know that. ABC, this is terrible journalism.
Anti-Diversity memos generally don't have a section on how to promote diversity. It's almost like this was just a differing opinion on how to achieve diversity.
He was right on every account, and as for wage discrimination, investigation found that Google was paying women more for the same work than it was paying men.
Apparently a Google search couldn't come up with a single argument to refute his claim and make him change his mind. No one was able to sight an example that made him feel embarrassed and stupid for making suck a claim. No facts were presented to prove him wrong, so he would take it back and apologize. Apparently he was on to something real and it threatened Google so they had to fire him.
It's frustrating to me why so many people can't see the problem that Damore was trying to point out. Here's the thing, we have a situation in the tech industry that has been flagged as a problem, the situation being that there are far more males in the tech industry than women. Now, the first step to solving any problem is to analyze it to determine its likely causes. After that, you can determine if the problem is something that should be fixed, and then address the causes to fix it. But with this problem, the analysis step just doesn't happen. Any deviation or argument against the hegemonic belief that this problem is 100% caused by discrimination is labeled as forbidden, and the person making the argument is made a heretic and cast out. Even worse, many companies are taking ACTUAL discriminatory actions to "solve" the problem. Like programs based on racial or gender preference. I'm not saying that these programs never have a place, but you better be damn sure it's the right thing to do before you do it. And when you literally disallow any argument against the consensus, it makes it hard to believe that you're justified in discriminating for the "greater good."
Don't call yourself a leftwinger... It's all Illuminati conspiracy so USA political system could only have 2 parties, because controlling 2 parties used to be very easy for them. That's why they grouped "left" and "liberal" together. You don't have to follow false narrative.
how can you guys lie about what his memo when you guys obviously didnt read it. skim through and only pick up offensive words? very professional journalisms.
He said he was pro diversity and criticized Google's approach to attaining it. He also laid out an arguably better path to diversity. You can call his plan flawed, and the result of bias/sexism. That is atleast a fair way to engage this topic. But to say the paper was intentionally "anti diversity" is so dishonest and misleading.
Google's CEO should be fired also breaking the company's code of conduct. If you have classes only for specific races, you are reinforcing stereotypes. If you have classes for only one sex, you are reinforcing stereotypes. You can't have preferential treatment of individuals based upon social groups without reinforcing stereotypes.
"Women lagged behind in the tech world because of their biology" This is a lie and is NOT what he said in his document. He said... "At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story. On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed" He also suggests ways to help maximize those difference so that their strengths can be put to better use such as: "Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration." He also goes on to say later. "Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech." So... how is this sexist and derogatory to women? It simply isn't and it attempts to help adjust work habits to help. What's sexist is being fired, because it's not so much what he said that got him fired because if it had come from a woman there would have been nothing done. It's sexist because they fired him for being a white male that said those things even though NONE of the text was sexist. Because femautistic women are such infantile, whiny, tear filled emotional toddlers that can't be expected to act as mature adults or take consequences for their own actions they're either cognitively challenged and it was just impossible for them to understand what was being said beyond singled out words they saw as buzzwords for their personal identity snowflake egos. Or their just incredibly prodigious liars looking to push their own agenda and like the hypocrites they are sought to take advantage. That Google's owner can't see the hypocrisy of firing him is amazingly ridiculous. Here's why. 80% of Google employees are male. Their own diversity officer sticks by their diversity driven hiring policy. So if James Danmore was lying and just some "horrible misogynist" which they think he is, that means that Google, which supposedly has had a diverse hiring policy for many years is actually discriminating against women since only 20% of their employees are female. Or James Danmore, which BTW he supported everything he said with links to highly credible and proven sources from very respected studies, was correct and re-thinking how they approach the problem and try to solve is what needs to change. So he's either wrong or Google discriminates against women in their hiring practices. Those are the only conclusions that can be made.
It is not an anti-diversity memo. This is propaganda. And yes I am a sapiosexual woman, from a single mom that came as a refugee to NA from communist Romania, raised on welfare, with physical problems and anxiety / depression. So you better fucking listen to me. ;)
_"I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)."_ - From the memo I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices: Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race [5]A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidatesHiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rateReconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]- also from the memo
CEO of RUclips finds it tragic "unfounded bias" was 'being exposed to a new generation"? First of all, I'd have thought it's the new generation being exposed to the bias, not the reverse, but expecting CEOs to write competently is entirely unfair. Secondly, what the fk is "unfounded" about it? Did this idiot read the thing? Did they comprehend any of its contents? I suppose, just to take one example, that the effects of testosterone are entirely made up, and hence "unfounded"? Of course you'd want your tech companies run by the scientifically illiterate and ideologically driven, wouldn't you. What could possibly go wrong? The irony for me is the one person who has nothing of which to be ashamed is the one so many are attempting to shame, while those who are promulgating ignorance and an absence of debate as desirable traits are the ones involved in a circle jerk of adulation ecstasy. Yet to hear a SINGLE one of them take up a single point of the argument, or question the sources, or show what is 'false'. If my senior employees were that incapable of critical thinking and basic requirements of meaningful discussion I'd sack the lot of them, if not resign myself over my clearly inept hiring processes. What a sad joke.
But those men were just as capable as those women, and vice versa. Just because less women are interested doesn't mean that those men should be laid off to achieve "equality." Get them interested.
His memo was not anti-diversity, it was anti-Google's very particular diversity policy. I'm getting tired of the Media playing dumb to pretend the rest of the world is just as dumb.
I was angry at him because i thought he didin't want women in his workplace at all. But I completely agree with him - we don't need to force women in the workplace, but there's nothing wrong with having women in the workplace.
As the old saying goes, "If you don't read the paper, you're uninformed. If you do read the paper, you're misinformed." Now we have tv and the internet, but the media hasn't changed.
Even if his beliefs are incorrect he should not have been fired. Is it a crime to be wrong? He believes people should be evaluated on their individual merits, not on their race or sex. He acknowledges there is significant overlap in ability among men and women. He is more accurate than his detractors and he is not nearly as hateful as they. I'm still a GOOG shareholder but I hope he sues their butts and wins.
This is a civil liberty issue I'd like to see rectified. Basically, employers can't discriminate you over race, religion (they often do if you're Christian, though), gender, or sexual orientation. However, they CAN discriminate, or fire, you if they don't like their politics. I wish "political orientation" was protected in Equal Opportunity laws.
We should be giving men and women an equal opportunity to get jobs in the workspace, not give women an absurd advantage and lay off people based off of who they are just so that their company can meet a racial and gender quota.
I don't understand how it can be referred to as an anti-diversity memo when it has an entire section devoted to suggestions for increasing the number of women in IT and leadership roles at Google.
Oh! What the... I just realized that this video is actually on ABC's YT channel. That's two strikes! One for misrepresenting the memo and two for being so stupid as to leave it up on YT.
How was his memo "anti-diversity"? He explicitly stated that he is in favor of having as many women and people of color in tech as who want to be. The memo was making two primary points, and had cited sources supporting them. The first being that having equality of opportunity doesn't necessarily mean you will get equality of outcome. This is especially True in regard to gender because Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. When it comes to the life choices of men and women, we tend to find what is called a bimodal distribution. What that means is that the men will tend to make their life choices based around one set of preferences and women tend to make them around another set of preferences. Naturally there is some overlap in the middle and there are always outliers, so don't mistake this generalized statement as being an all encompassing one. It's just a trend that fits what most people are doing. For example, men are more willing to take on high risk work, and as a natural consequence of that make up something like 98% of all workplace fatalities. Now, is that the result of sexism or the result of sexual dimorphism? Furthermore, on the racial aspect, blacks exhibit a higher prevalence of poverty than other races in the US. As a natural consequence of this, a higher percentage of them can't afford higher education as compared to other groups. So it stands to reason that we might see a lower percentage even gaining the degrees necessary to work in a given field which would mean a smaller applicant pool and lower probability that a company could reasonably hire a number representative of their demographic size. All without any bias taking place on the part of the company. The one thing he was against was some of the diversity policies in place, namely those surrounding quotas. If you have a company and their employee roster shows fewer women and people of color than what the demographic make up of the country is, then you cannot just assume it is because of sexism or racism within the company. That, not even to say it might not still be in part due to sexism or racism, just that the company may very well not be to blame and may in fact simply not be getting as many qualified applicants from that group due to external factors. Now, this is important because the first step in solving racist and sexist practices is in identifying them. So if you just assume they have racist or sexist hiring practices then you could be correct, but are more likely misdiagnosing the problem. You have to look deeper than that. Furthermore, if you then decide the best way to combat it is to set a quota and there was no sexism or racism in the company's hiring practices to begin with, then it logically follows that you are in fact instituting a discriminatory practice rather than dismantling one. That is literally the opposite of your stated goal. If you want to solve the problem, then you actually have to do the work of figuring out what the root cause of it is and fixing that. Just making a quota isn't even analogous to slapping on a bandaid, it's worse, because if you are wrong then you are not only not solving the existing discrimination, but institutionalizing a new form of it.
Great coverage, you cover everyone else's thoughts on the matter without addressing his claims making it seem like it was actually unfounded. This is why people don't like you.
Except it WASN'T an anti-diversity memo. Wish people would actually read what he said instead of getting triggered and all worked up. He brought up some very good points. I don't agree with every single thing he said but there's plenty of room for courteous debate. However that is not possible unless you can be honest about what he actually said.
Take a lesson from the RUclips CEO Susan Wojcicki when you want to encourage hatred of the opposition and sympathy for yourself and your position. Say something to the effect that you do not know how you're going to explain this terrible thing to your worried or fearful Son/Daughter/Children. Works every time.
Seriously - you all need to read his memo for yourselves and not have the news regurgitate a screed version of it (to their credit, in this version, Gizmodo includes all the citations/notes and doesn't chop the article up like the first version : gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320
You know what, screw this, I've had enough of stuff like this broadcasted on my trending, all I want is actually important news, that effects my wellbeing, not this crap.
So, he's delusional in his belief that because he's a google software engineer he gets to pontificate on any topic where he might NOT be an expert, AND people listen? Is this guy a biologist? Psychiatrist? Or just a pompous young buck, thinking that at his 28 years, he's gonna set the record straight? Wow, thankfully I live in the times of James Damore! Please James, give us sa'more! Don't stop now!!!
He studies biology. but any smuck who hasnt had his brain damaged at "university" knows that men and women operate on whole different levels, barring a few exceptions. Women are more risk averse, more highly strung, which probably originates from evolutionary biology: helps keep young kids safe if you are hyper aware and risk avers. Men go out and confront the lion, or start the risky company... just the way it is. And all the brain dead female supremacists wont change a thing. See Camille Paglia on how modern universities are a joke with post-modernism and complete lack of acknowledgement of biology in shaping gender behaviours.
You do know he researched his topics very well and also stated his evidence to? Not just that multiple biological scientists came out and supported his memo.
(*schmuck) I studied biology, too. And in a fist fight, a man is going to win 9 times out of ten. But the brain is complex, whether it be represented on the body by a penis or a vagina. Is he coding with his dick or his brain. I have one mother, 3 sisters, a wife and 2 daughters, not to mention, my mother-in-law, and all my neices, I've had female bosses, and female co-workers, I knows womens, I thinks. What has this guy really done at his 28 years that warrants such attention? A 10-page memo? Really? Get to the point, dude! Did he just update Mein Kampf / The Communist Manifesto / Without Feathers? Boil it down, bro... He should run for president of the US. The bar has been lowered. Then he can set us all straight...
(*, too) In fact, I don't know that he has researched his topics very well. But, I've been on this earth practically twice the blue moons Mr. Damore can claim to have seen, and I've run across a few women, and I respects women.
Look I'm no geneticist, so I'm not gonna start making claims about how genes affect female capacity for certain emotions over men or the role of genetics in that. From what little I've read it seems extremely complicated to say the least. What makes this dude so sure of his beliefs considering he knows, from what I've seen fuck all about genetics as a discipline?
Fun story, in the memo, the word 'genetics' is not used once. I don't think you need to be an expert at anything other than reading and synthesizing scholarly research to put this together. Most of his arguments are predicated on some pretty solid research in personality traits and psychology.
EasternAnime Because all of his claims were sourced... He's drawing factual conclusions from factual documents and famous intellectuals like Mr. Johnathan Haidt. Would you care to say that Mr. Haidt is wrong?
How is this a "smear campaign"? It doesn't lend credence to either side of the argument. They could've chosen less inflammatory quotations from his document, but this is network news and they're trying to sell the story by keeping the viewer excited. See the view count? That's why. But if this had been an NBC or CNN story, it would've been a total SJW circlejerk. ABC played it straight and presented Damore as a decent and honest individual who is sticking by what he said. Watch the clip again with your eyes open.
There is no "inflammatory" content in the memo: it is very mild and reasonable. It states well-known findings about sex differencesand observes that the Google lefty fanaticism conflicts with such findings.
While I definitely wouldn't call it "even-handed" or "fair" or "accurate", I will concede the point that it is better than what CNN has been putting out. Whereas this is only mildly biased, CNN basically portrays him as the devil, and his memo as Mein Kampf.
There are some jobs that women tend to do as well as men, but many jobs either require men to do them or women just flat out refuse to do them due to the nature of the job. All I can complain about is that women make shitty bosses in my personal experience. I've had good male bosses and shitty male bosses, but I've never had a good female boss, they're always shitty, sometimes nice, but always shitty.
I actually read the thing in full. It was a very verbose way of saying that women don't make good coders "because vaginas." What he forgets is that women made up the majority of coders back in the day when it was seen as dull work. I wanted him to be like Lee Pace hot so I would be conflicted about him and it would break up the doldrum of my day, but I see now that's not the case.
I'm a shill? I sell heavy agricultural equipment in Western Mass and live in a studio overlooking a Dunkin Donuts. My table is a literal orange crate. Surely they could have found someone a little more respectable.
So would it better if I had summarized his arguments by saying that women are every bit as competent as men on the three and half out of four weeks a month they're not menstruating?
John A S because you have to be rich to support a horrendous liberal agenda by trying to counter the obviouse truth, and the dishonesty coming from google? Lmfao ok shill.
Yes, it was worth it. He is apart of the revolution and people that don't corrupt themselves to benefit from this post modernist bullshit are going to be seen as heroes. Thank you very much tho, it's nice to see you people showcase so well what you really care about.
The guy lost his job and is getting tons of hate for being misinterpreted, how sad is that?
They set up an internal forum specifically for controversial discussions and he was dumb enough to actually post on it lol. That'll teach him for not towing the party line.
Although I doubt he intended it completely, that memo is a Trojan horse. Feminists/progressives sharing it believing it to be sexist, despite being anything but that, are proving to to the world how brainwashed they are. Biological differences not existing is a discussion that can't stand up to empirical scrutiny, which is why it's only true in an echo chamber. It's now out there, let the cognitive dissonance consume the world!
That's taking the Red Pill sideways.
He's going to get a HUGE check from Google. They have the money.
Two Words: MASS IGNORANCE
Fired for telling the truth shame on Google
"...unfounded bias" - FFS he sourced how he came to conclude many of his claims. Plus, much came from Googles own internal statics and demographics data.
_"Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. "_ - Google
Welllll, not so much...
if he's wrong, why don't we see more women fixing cars? maybe building tool and die? I know a lot of them will push a button on a stamping press for 35 bucks an hour in a union shop. But I don't actually see them crawling into the dies to fix them. and I mean they have no problem driving a $70,000 automobile. but asked to change the oil...?
Omniscient Presence Women can do anything. But people like James who goes around saying that women are not "biological fit", or "good enough" is detrimental. That can psychology destroy someone. We shouldn't be bringing down anyone psychological, but uplifting them.
During the World Wars women were the industry workers, did the mechanical jobs that men had done. But, after the wars were over, lost those jobs due to the men coming home. Very few women were allowed to maintain those jobs, so it wasn't because they couldn't perform the work they just weren't allowed to keep the jobs.
These responses are stupid. The memo just states well-known findings and observes that they conflict with Google dogma. I have observed that few women know how anything works or care. Do you know how anything works?
+Michael Stewart Either you're very young or haven't been around very much or limited exposure, so your post reflects a great lack of knowledge.
+Echo Alpha, you should have read the memo at diversitymemo.com before you start mischaracterizing his words. Only about 10% of people applying these tech jobs are women. He said that this may be attributed to interest in technology, which is related to personality, which is strongly influenced by biology. His argument was to uncover why there are *fewer* women in tech sector. *fewer*, not *worse*. There is sexism in the industry, but it does not come close to explaining the disparity of job applicants.
"Anti-diversity?" That's a complete misrepresentation of his position. Anyone who read even a little of his memo would know that. ABC, this is terrible journalism.
Apparently the consensus of decades of scientific research is "unfounded bias".
A CEO making herself a victim - go figure
Anti-Diversity memos generally don't have a section on how to promote diversity. It's almost like this was just a differing opinion on how to achieve diversity.
What the hell? Did ABC even read the damn document?
James Damore is an American Hero, not because of his stand for science and truth.
He was right on every account, and as for wage discrimination, investigation found that Google was paying women more for the same work than it was paying men.
speaking of misrepresentation... the MSM seems to do a lot of misrepresenting what he actually wrote.
...but _WHY_ don't people trust the media anymore?
Apparently a Google search couldn't come up with a single argument to refute his claim and make him change his mind. No one was able to sight an example that made him feel embarrassed and stupid for making suck a claim. No facts were presented to prove him wrong, so he would take it back and apologize. Apparently he was on to something real and it threatened Google so they had to fire him.
It's frustrating to me why so many people can't see the problem that Damore was trying to point out. Here's the thing, we have a situation in the tech industry that has been flagged as a problem, the situation being that there are far more males in the tech industry than women.
Now, the first step to solving any problem is to analyze it to determine its likely causes. After that, you can determine if the problem is something that should be fixed, and then address the causes to fix it.
But with this problem, the analysis step just doesn't happen. Any deviation or argument against the hegemonic belief that this problem is 100% caused by discrimination is labeled as forbidden, and the person making the argument is made a heretic and cast out.
Even worse, many companies are taking ACTUAL discriminatory actions to "solve" the problem. Like programs based on racial or gender preference.
I'm not saying that these programs never have a place, but you better be damn sure it's the right thing to do before you do it. And when you literally disallow any argument against the consensus, it makes it hard to believe that you're justified in discriminating for the "greater good."
Forcing Diversity only shows us why were differant we should focus on what makes us american not all these bullshit identites
Poor guy! As a leftwinger, I feel his accusations to many of us of being blind and even aggressive to different points of view are completely true.
Don't call yourself a leftwinger... It's all Illuminati conspiracy so USA political system could only have 2 parties, because controlling 2 parties used to be very easy for them. That's why they grouped "left" and "liberal" together. You don't have to follow false narrative.
"Unfounded bias"
Years of scientific study and research deemed "unfounded".
ROFLMFAO
Remember when we actually hired people based on skill and ability?
how can you guys lie about what his memo when you guys obviously didnt read it. skim through and only pick up offensive words? very professional journalisms.
He's anti forced diversity, not anti diversity.
That's like saying someone who is anti rape is anti lovemaking.
Being a white male is so hard in this country
Space Jams Fam precisely. It's so tough to deal with all that privilege.
1StarProductions Nice
Space Jams Fam Hardest job in the world. The white man can't be a victim. Unless he's gay or a drug addict.
Sujit Nair
Specially the whites living in the Appalachian, soooo privileged.
sintered I hope that was sarcasm, otherwise you're an imbecile.
He said he was pro diversity and criticized Google's approach to attaining it. He also laid out an arguably better path to diversity. You can call his plan flawed, and the result of bias/sexism. That is atleast a fair way to engage this topic. But to say the paper was intentionally "anti diversity" is so dishonest and misleading.
He literally said he supports diversity in the work place and yet the video title calls him anti diversity, did they even listen to a word he said😑
That's what he gets for thinking for himself.
Google's CEO should be fired also breaking the company's code of conduct. If you have classes only for specific races, you are reinforcing stereotypes. If you have classes for only one sex, you are reinforcing stereotypes. You can't have preferential treatment of individuals based upon social groups without reinforcing stereotypes.
It's shocking how poor their reading comprehension skills are.
First, his memo was never against diversity. Second, did anybody complaining about it actually read it?
It's not an unfounded bias. Theres decades of research showing character traits in men and women and how they differ and why. Holy shit
"Women lagged behind in the tech world because of their biology"
This is a lie and is NOT what he said in his document.
He said...
"At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story.
On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed"
He also suggests ways to help maximize those difference so that their strengths can be put to better use such as:
"Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things
We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration."
He also goes on to say later.
"Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average
Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech."
So... how is this sexist and derogatory to women? It simply isn't and it attempts to help adjust work habits to help. What's sexist is being fired, because it's not so much what he said that got him fired because if it had come from a woman there would have been nothing done. It's sexist because they fired him for being a white male that said those things even though NONE of the text was sexist.
Because femautistic women are such infantile, whiny, tear filled emotional toddlers that can't be expected to act as mature adults or take consequences for their own actions they're either cognitively challenged and it was just impossible for them to understand what was being said beyond singled out words they saw as buzzwords for their personal identity snowflake egos. Or their just incredibly prodigious liars looking to push their own agenda and like the hypocrites they are sought to take advantage.
That Google's owner can't see the hypocrisy of firing him is amazingly ridiculous.
Here's why.
80% of Google employees are male. Their own diversity officer sticks by their diversity driven hiring policy.
So if James Danmore was lying and just some "horrible misogynist" which they think he is, that means that Google, which supposedly has had a diverse hiring policy for many years is actually discriminating against women since only 20% of their employees are female.
Or James Danmore, which BTW he supported everything he said with links to highly credible and proven sources from very respected studies, was correct and re-thinking how they approach the problem and try to solve is what needs to change.
So he's either wrong or Google discriminates against women in their hiring practices.
Those are the only conclusions that can be made.
You just cherry picked the one part of the memo that caused the most outrage
This man was very brave to send this memo. He must've known the "tolerant" leftist Google company would destroy him for thinking outside the box.
Thrilled to see them including some actual quotes from the individual involved! I label this official "REAL NEWS."
It is not an anti-diversity memo. This is propaganda. And yes I am a sapiosexual woman, from a single mom that came as a refugee to NA from communist Romania, raised on welfare, with physical problems and anxiety / depression. So you better fucking listen to me. ;)
im dizzy from the spin
_"I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)."_ - From the memo
I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we
should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race
representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:
Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race [5]A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidatesHiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rateReconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse”
enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction
(clear confirmation bias)Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]- also from the memo
I am with you James!! Sue Google!!!!!
Proof that diverisity is bad
this is far and away the most mainstream exposure Stefan Molyneux has ever gotten
CEO of RUclips finds it tragic "unfounded bias" was 'being exposed to a new generation"?
First of all, I'd have thought it's the new generation being exposed to the bias, not the reverse, but expecting CEOs to write competently is entirely unfair.
Secondly, what the fk is "unfounded" about it? Did this idiot read the thing? Did they comprehend any of its contents? I suppose, just to take one example, that the effects of testosterone are entirely made up, and hence "unfounded"?
Of course you'd want your tech companies run by the scientifically illiterate and ideologically driven, wouldn't you. What could possibly go wrong?
The irony for me is the one person who has nothing of which to be ashamed is the one so many are attempting to shame, while those who are promulgating ignorance and an absence of debate as desirable traits are the ones involved in a circle jerk of adulation ecstasy. Yet to hear a SINGLE one of them take up a single point of the argument, or question the sources, or show what is 'false'.
If my senior employees were that incapable of critical thinking and basic requirements of meaningful discussion I'd sack the lot of them, if not resign myself over my clearly inept hiring processes.
What a sad joke.
eh, hes probly already rich.
You and your Sound bits. Wow can't get people to talk to you I wonder why.
Damn libertarians. Imagine, treating people as individuals rather than as identical parts of a group.
I will never ever EVER EVER EVER support another Woman's Cause or Black Cause, EVER!!!
Boycott Google
Hey Bro, simply switch over to conservatism and move to the heartland of America and you won't have this turmoil.
Women are not lagging behind. They are the key to technology's success.
O love the title , Anti diversity!
Women are different from men, thus why we have this woman empowerment programs. RUclips hired more women than men because we are not the same.
But those men were just as capable as those women, and vice versa.
Just because less women are interested doesn't mean that those men should be laid off to achieve "equality." Get them interested.
Respect wamen.
I think we know the reason why RUclips sucks and doesn't make any money (Susan Wojcicki)
what did shaggy do KNOW
Peter Thiel needs to start funding free speech platforms PRONTO! #boycottGoogle #boycottRUclips
His memo was not anti-diversity, it was anti-Google's very particular diversity policy. I'm getting tired of the Media playing dumb to pretend the rest of the world is just as dumb.
Google values diversity except when it comes to opinions
free speech
I was angry at him because i thought he didin't want women in his workplace at all. But I completely agree with him - we don't need to force women in the workplace, but there's nothing wrong with having women in the workplace.
0:35 He doesn't argue those points. He references scientific studies.
So abc can't get an interview but Stefan can. This is what main steam media dying looks like.
As the old saying goes, "If you don't read the paper, you're uninformed. If you do read the paper, you're misinformed." Now we have tv and the internet, but the media hasn't changed.
Even if his beliefs are incorrect he should not have been fired. Is it a crime to be wrong? He believes people should be evaluated on their individual merits, not on their race or sex. He acknowledges there is significant overlap in ability among men and women. He is more accurate than his detractors and he is not nearly as hateful as they.
I'm still a GOOG shareholder but I hope he sues their butts and wins.
This is a civil liberty issue I'd like to see rectified. Basically, employers can't discriminate you over race, religion (they often do if you're Christian, though), gender, or sexual orientation. However, they CAN discriminate, or fire, you if they don't like their politics. I wish "political orientation" was protected in Equal Opportunity laws.
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE WHITE PEOPLE!!!!!!!
The Molymeme making a surprise appearance.
We should be giving men and women an equal opportunity to get jobs in the workspace, not give women an absurd advantage and lay off people based off of who they are just so that their company can meet a racial and gender quota.
The cultural war rages on.
What he said is generally true...What's the problem?
I don't understand how it can be referred to as an anti-diversity memo when it has an entire section devoted to suggestions for increasing the number of women in IT and leadership roles at Google.
Oh! What the... I just realized that this video is actually on ABC's YT channel. That's two strikes! One for misrepresenting the memo and two for being so stupid as to leave it up on YT.
Why was this guy fired?
Plot twist: it was actually pro-diversity.
How was his memo "anti-diversity"? He explicitly stated that he is in favor of having as many women and people of color in tech as who want to be.
The memo was making two primary points, and had cited sources supporting them.
The first being that having equality of opportunity doesn't necessarily mean you will get equality of outcome. This is especially True in regard to gender because Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. When it comes to the life choices of men and women, we tend to find what is called a bimodal distribution. What that means is that the men will tend to make their life choices based around one set of preferences and women tend to make them around another set of preferences. Naturally there is some overlap in the middle and there are always outliers, so don't mistake this generalized statement as being an all encompassing one. It's just a trend that fits what most people are doing. For example, men are more willing to take on high risk work, and as a natural consequence of that make up something like 98% of all workplace fatalities. Now, is that the result of sexism or the result of sexual dimorphism?
Furthermore, on the racial aspect, blacks exhibit a higher prevalence of poverty than other races in the US. As a natural consequence of this, a higher percentage of them can't afford higher education as compared to other groups. So it stands to reason that we might see a lower percentage even gaining the degrees necessary to work in a given field which would mean a smaller applicant pool and lower probability that a company could reasonably hire a number representative of their demographic size. All without any bias taking place on the part of the company.
The one thing he was against was some of the diversity policies in place, namely those surrounding quotas. If you have a company and their employee roster shows fewer women and people of color than what the demographic make up of the country is, then you cannot just assume it is because of sexism or racism within the company. That, not even to say it might not still be in part due to sexism or racism, just that the company may very well not be to blame and may in fact simply not be getting as many qualified applicants from that group due to external factors.
Now, this is important because the first step in solving racist and sexist practices is in identifying them. So if you just assume they have racist or sexist hiring practices then you could be correct, but are more likely misdiagnosing the problem. You have to look deeper than that.
Furthermore, if you then decide the best way to combat it is to set a quota and there was no sexism or racism in the company's hiring practices to begin with, then it logically follows that you are in fact instituting a discriminatory practice rather than dismantling one. That is literally the opposite of your stated goal.
If you want to solve the problem, then you actually have to do the work of figuring out what the root cause of it is and fixing that. Just making a quota isn't even analogous to slapping on a bandaid, it's worse, because if you are wrong then you are not only not solving the existing discrimination, but institutionalizing a new form of it.
This guy already god hired by Wikileaks, coincidence?
Has anyone googled James Damore?
Did ABC interview the engineer himself? I heard all his critics in this clip but not the engineer 🤔
Great coverage, you cover everyone else's thoughts on the matter without addressing his claims making it seem like it was actually unfounded. This is why people don't like you.
What memo are you guys reading because the one I read, he wanted to see more women
HE SAID THE RIGHT THINGS HE SHOULD ACCEPT ISLAM
Except it WASN'T an anti-diversity memo. Wish people would actually read what he said instead of getting triggered and all worked up. He brought up some very good points. I don't agree with every single thing he said but there's plenty of room for courteous debate. However that is not possible unless you can be honest about what he actually said.
Abc , cherry pick the memo
Fake news, anyone? Or I just see things?
Take a lesson from the RUclips CEO Susan Wojcicki when you want to encourage hatred of the opposition and sympathy for yourself and your position. Say something to the effect that you do not know how you're going to explain this terrible thing to your worried or fearful Son/Daughter/Children. Works every time.
Seriously - you all need to read his memo for yourselves and not have the news regurgitate a screed version of it (to their credit, in this version, Gizmodo includes all the citations/notes and doesn't chop the article up like the first version :
gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320
1:28, a reason why RUclips is going to shit. Facts too much for your child to bare Mrs Zer?
You know what, screw this, I've had enough of stuff like this broadcasted on my trending, all I want is actually important news, that effects my wellbeing, not this crap.
Fake news
What does tl;dr mean?
hi
So, he's delusional in his belief that because he's a google software engineer he gets to pontificate on any topic where he might NOT be an expert, AND people listen? Is this guy a biologist? Psychiatrist? Or just a pompous young buck, thinking that at his 28 years, he's gonna set the record straight? Wow, thankfully I live in the times of James Damore! Please James, give us sa'more! Don't stop now!!!
He studies biology. but any smuck who hasnt had his brain damaged at "university" knows that men and women operate on whole different levels, barring a few exceptions. Women are more risk averse, more highly strung, which probably originates from evolutionary biology: helps keep young kids safe if you are hyper aware and risk avers. Men go out and confront the lion, or start the risky company... just the way it is. And all the brain dead female supremacists wont change a thing. See Camille Paglia on how modern universities are a joke with post-modernism and complete lack of acknowledgement of biology in shaping gender behaviours.
You do know he researched his topics very well and also stated his evidence to? Not just that multiple biological scientists came out and supported his memo.
(*schmuck) I studied biology, too. And in a fist fight, a man is going to win 9 times out of ten. But the brain is complex, whether it be represented on the body by a penis or a vagina. Is he coding with his dick or his brain. I have one mother, 3 sisters, a wife and 2 daughters, not to mention, my mother-in-law, and all my neices, I've had female bosses, and female co-workers, I knows womens, I thinks.
What has this guy really done at his 28 years that warrants such attention? A 10-page memo? Really? Get to the point, dude! Did he just update Mein Kampf / The Communist Manifesto / Without Feathers? Boil it down, bro...
He should run for president of the US. The bar has been lowered. Then he can set us all straight...
(*, too) In fact, I don't know that he has researched his topics very well. But, I've been on this earth practically twice the blue moons Mr. Damore can claim to have seen, and I've run across a few women, and I respects women.
So... NCO... No College? I'll stop there, big ben.
The irony of all this is that the first programmer was a women and the first person to create a compiler was a women.
It's like someone saying that Chinese people come from China and you responding, "Shows what you know. I knew a Chinese guy who was from Fresno."
What he's saying is true due to biological differences, however staying PC is a must if you want to keep your job.
guessing he knew he was gonna get fired.....
Look I'm no geneticist, so I'm not gonna start making claims about how genes affect female capacity for certain emotions over men or the role of genetics in that. From what little I've read it seems extremely complicated to say the least. What makes this dude so sure of his beliefs considering he knows, from what I've seen fuck all about genetics as a discipline?
Fun story, in the memo, the word 'genetics' is not used once. I don't think you need to be an expert at anything other than reading and synthesizing scholarly research to put this together. Most of his arguments are predicated on some pretty solid research in personality traits and psychology.
EasternAnime Because all of his claims were sourced...
He's drawing factual conclusions from factual documents and famous intellectuals like Mr. Johnathan Haidt. Would you care to say that Mr. Haidt is wrong?
We are All same
Without your mother , your are not here ok
This was pretty even-handed journalism. Good job, ABC.
No... it wasn't... it was distorted and one sided.
How is this a "smear campaign"? It doesn't lend credence to either side of the argument. They could've chosen less inflammatory quotations from his document, but this is network news and they're trying to sell the story by keeping the viewer excited. See the view count? That's why. But if this had been an NBC or CNN story, it would've been a total SJW circlejerk. ABC played it straight and presented Damore as a decent and honest individual who is sticking by what he said. Watch the clip again with your eyes open.
You forgot to use the sarcasm font.
There is no "inflammatory" content in the memo: it is very mild and reasonable. It states well-known findings about sex differencesand observes that the Google lefty fanaticism conflicts with such findings.
While I definitely wouldn't call it "even-handed" or "fair" or "accurate", I will concede the point that it is better than what CNN has been putting out. Whereas this is only mildly biased, CNN basically portrays him as the devil, and his memo as Mein Kampf.
There are some jobs that women tend to do as well as men, but many jobs either require men to do them or women just flat out refuse to do them due to the nature of the job. All I can complain about is that women make shitty bosses in my personal experience. I've had good male bosses and shitty male bosses, but I've never had a good female boss, they're always shitty, sometimes nice, but always shitty.
maybe you should try and be your own boss. ever think about that?
A straight, white, conservative, Christian, male like me be his own boss? But what would stop the universe from imploding?
lol
Cancer. Absolute cancer. Why would you _ever_ say this?
because its backed up by the empirical literature?........
I actually read the thing in full. It was a very verbose way of saying that women don't make good coders "because vaginas." What he forgets is that women made up the majority of coders back in the day when it was seen as dull work. I wanted him to be like Lee Pace hot so I would be conflicted about him and it would break up the doldrum of my day, but I see now that's not the case.
You're a fucking shill buddy, it said nothing of a sort, fucking liar.
I'm a shill? I sell heavy agricultural equipment in Western Mass and live in a studio overlooking a Dunkin Donuts. My table is a literal orange crate. Surely they could have found someone a little more respectable.
So would it better if I had summarized his arguments by saying that women are every bit as competent as men on the three and half out of four weeks a month they're not menstruating?
John A S because you have to be rich to support a horrendous liberal agenda by trying to counter the obviouse truth, and the dishonesty coming from google? Lmfao ok shill.
Aren't we talking on a Google product right now?
Must suck to leave your $200,000 salary at google. Shit, was that really worth it.
Yes, it was worth it. He is apart of the revolution and people that don't corrupt themselves to benefit from this post modernist bullshit are going to be seen as heroes. Thank you very much tho, it's nice to see you people showcase so well what you really care about.
truMalma Hear, hear!
Right on truMalma!
Mike Fletcher he already has a job offer at wiki leaks so
poor cutie he looks like Adrien Brody in the pianist 2002
Personally, my GAYDAR exploded on him.