Can somebody tell me why it is so important to get more woman into technology companies in the first place? Nobody seems to care to get more of them into the coal mining industry.
People don't want meritocracies and they don't want equality of opportunity, they want parity, huh, I wonder why they don't fight for 50% women in plumbing? Or as bricksmasons? People should go into what they're interested in, that's why there will never be absolute parity. That's ok.
To be fair, having a "female perspective" can be useful when you're designing things for the general public (remember, men and women are different). So, there is value in having women be a part of the decision-making process seeing as they will be a significant portion of the users of the final product. Coal mining doesn't really have that concern. The problem is that you cannot simultaneously hold that there is genuine value to having men and women working on something *and* that they're not different in any way. The value of such diversity is a direct product *of* their differences.
Feminists look at a man's life like it's a buffet table. They all want the sirloin, but beans and rice ? Fuck that you can keep beans and rice. 99% of brick layers are men, never heard about the complaints regarding the lack of women in that field huh ? No shit, it's a hard low paying job. They just want to good shit.
I do not like Emily Chang's manner of questioning James Damore. It sounds like an interrogation for a criminal suspect. As a journalist she should show her objectivity in her interviewees. The questions she asked just shows her lack of intelligence compared to James Damore's. James Damore - you did great!
Yup. James Damore did indeed do a great job of quietly conveying and clarifying his views and staying cool. True journalist show objectivity in their interviews, but most of those have left us. The new generation of "journalists", on both sides don't even try to be objective. Her accusations of him being an Alt-Right or that little sob story about the little girl was low. But that usually means that James Damore's logical argument had already won, because the interviewer tried to go for the emotive victory instead. I think the worst part of the interview was when she claimed there was no scientific evidence for his conclusions, despite the numerous citations he already alluded to in his document. It shows her bias considering that she completely ignored these numerous scientific studies because she disagreed with them, and yet completely agreed with the OPINION of one of the "experts" they interviewed.
Emily Chang was trying so hard to trip him, and she tripped herself. Emily Chang is not a "journalist", she has no objectivity. It was funny watching Emily strike out. Every question she asked was put out like an attack based on her own biased emotions. Silly little girl. She assumed she was dealing with a sexist, racist, Nazi, fascist, etc. because that's how Big Brother Google and Big Brother MSM are spinning it. That's clearly not who James Damore is. Emily Chang fell flat on her face, deserved to fall flat on her face, and I enjoyed watching it.
@ Karen K: I agree, and I'm not convinced she even read the memo beforehand either: which is odd, if it's really so harmful. I guess she had to show she's 'on the right side,' or 'down with the programme' - as it were.
I don't appreciate the way she asks questions as though it's a given that he's anti-diversity, or anti-woman. Those are smears made by people who didn't read his words. He handled himself brilliantly in this interview though.
Europa Man I did a scan of group team pictures. ..IF there was a male...his spot in the picture was always ALWAYS AT THE BACK with his head barely noticible. WHAT shocked me was the number of people who obviously thought that attention seeking presentation of them self was outrageous to the point THE PICTURES LOOKED LIE HALLOWEEN COSTUMES. pictures I used were non professional and spur of the moment. Interesting ...Bte...MOST MALES....WHERE NON WHITE...... So. I think his point is excellent
Does George Soros own shares in Bloomberg too? As of 'the current year' he now owns shares in Alphabet Inc (Google/RUclips's parent company)... I wondered why all this shit was happening was RUclips and Google. Now it makes sense.
The interviewer is asking some rather dumb questions. He is objecting literally racist and sexist hiring practices at a multi-million-dollar company and she is just "Are you trying to discourage girls from going into tech?". Like why is that even an argument at this point? If those practices are real, then they are absolutely inacceptable, no matter the race / gender ratio at the company.
"If those practices are real ..." Dear, they are VERY real. And it starts from the moment the female child is born. I know it might be easy to think society is past that, or such things are unacceptable, but unfortunately (and fortunately) it's not your reality, so these experiences women claim they face are often seen as "exaggerated" by people who haven't experienced it themselves.
MyAkachi you are delusional biases are always towards women and minorities in the west especially in fields where they're underrepresented and even in fields where they're overrepresented
Every ratio can't be 50/50. That's not practical. Sometimes when I see people saying these like "women hold only 30% of the jobs in so-and-so industry/firm" I roll my eyes, because in some industries it's the other way around as well, and 50:50 might not be attainable. However, I am intrigued as to how you describe an extreme feminist as someone who wants 50:50. How does wanting 50:50 make one an "extreme feminist"? So, what? Normal feminists should just sit down and request 10% of opportunities? I'm just trying to wrap my head around your logic. I'm pretty sure an extreme person would be requiring 70:30, 80:20, heck even 60:40. No one wants to be treated unequally, not even you, I bet! So the fact that you're so upset that half the world's population want to not be treated in an inferior way is quite depressing.
Why do you even want to get into tech, it's a shit job. I am a programmer and it's not an easy job at all, long hours, pay is ok but you sacrifice a lot. You also think I got the job, simply because I am a white man? I am competing against those other men too and they sometimes try to keep me down. My boss treis to pay me as little as he can, make me work as long as possible, this is just capitalism. I realize, that I have to compete and I accept that. You strike me as a pretty weak person, seems like you expect everything to be handed to you. You want to be in a leadership position just because? You have to actually work for that. Also what keeps you from starting your own company? And what big hurdles are there in university let's say? You just write exams, if you are good, you will pass them. My professors didn't even see my name on the exams, just my student number, but somehow they probably magically knew I am a white man.
QuantumSnare yes...the OSTRICHES have their head stuck and are flapping and squawking rather than discussing. This is what happens when HAVE A PRESIDENT THAT RACE BAITS...BOOGIE MEN EVERYPLACE.
She is trying to make him and people in the future afraid of speaking out about things the left doesn't agree with. You never hear a reporter saying about someone who defends Islam 'You're seen as a hero by ISIS, what do you think about that?'
D See Ker Don't believe this reporter read the memo. Much better, in depth analysis of the memo, and discussing it with James, would be with Jordan Peterson.
I'm surprised that you find this remarkable. This has been going on every single day since approximately the beginning of the first Clinton term in office in 1993.
If young girls and women are discouraged from entering the tech industry because of this, they didn't deserve to be in it in the first place. If you are a true engineer, you don't give two fucks about this identity politics bullshit.
It's not just about the publicity. The company shames ideological diversity. There's little point in having many people of many different backgrounds if you fire them when they don't think the same. They've hindered their ability to grow as a company. I think "shot themselves in the foot" is the perfect expression for this. Their policies are racist and sexist, blindly following in favor of their indoctrinated drones as that is the effect of being in an echo chamber. They don't need to lose public support to fail when the way their company works doesn't exactly benefit them. In the same way any communist society would crumble for such an echo chamber, google will too.
This may help Google with their other discrimination lawsuits; they can point to this and say see, we're trying so hard we're getting dissention in the ranks; we're trying so hard some employees think our methods are illegal. On the other hand, I hope this guy gets 10s of millions in a wrongful termination suit.
Emily Chang :"We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" - WRONG! We need more talented people in technology. Not women or men! There is no importance of getting more men, women or transgenders into technology! Technology need engineers - that is the whole point James was trying to make.
That's because you've translated her comment ""We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" as meaning getting more women into tech, despite their ability or competence, which isn't the case.
+MyAkachi No, we just don't think that we need more of X race or Y gender in anything, because we don't judge people based on those things. We should treat people equally. I know this is a scary idea, but not acting sexistly is the best way to avoid sexism.
If it's important to get more women in Technology, then it should be equally as important to get them into garbage collections and sewer works (99.9% male dominated). But that's right, its not about equality, it's about special treatment.
I'll believe feminism is about equality when I see the feminist push to get more men in jobs dominated by women, like elementary school teachers, nurses, and hotel maids. Never saw a male hotel maid, and if boys are raised by single women, more positive male role models in elementary schools become even more important. Not to mention that Canadian study that found the when teachers grade anonymously; they don't know the gender of the person when correcting papers and tests; boy's grades go up a full letter grade. We need more male elementary school teachers so boys get a fair shake.
David, thats like saying the reason Muslims kill is because of islamophobia. What the fuck. It doesnt matter what we say, the left will call us sexist. The only thing Marxists deserve is ridicule at best
You will be surprised the amount of barriers women face in that field as well; try and look it up. You make it sound like they are running in the other direction, but not really, there are many physically qualified women (who meet military standards in strength & fitness) who go into that field.
The gentleman defended himself and interviewed brilliantly. The interviewer was trying hard to make him look bad and he answered everything thoroughly. Good job
By the way, as a Software Engineer my self, I can tell you for-sure. on behalf of every single Nerd out there - WE WOULD LOVE and WELCOME MORE WOMEN INTO OUR FIELD. There is no conspiracy to keep women out. never was , never will be. We Nerds only love two things: women and computers. It boggles my mind how on earth is now socially acceptable to actually believe that - there is a "grand evil conspiracy & sexism" by nerds to keep women out of "tech" when have we gone completely insane?
It's the second-rate women who aren't good enough but still think they're entitle to a job at Google who make all the trouble. The top women programmers who apply get hired and then perform without further controversy. The second-rate women who get hired are back to complain again later because they don't think they were promoted fast enough. When I was a programmer (sadly, not at Google), almost all the women I worked with were great, but some were just a lawsuit waiting to happen. And a woman who could not do the job? Not worth my career to get rid of her; the rest of us just did her work.
The two best programmers in my course was me and a fellow woman programmer but yes in general most women in my course though initially enthusiastic bright and good at mathematics, were just eventually realizing that they were not that interested in computers. They indeed were better in co-operating, when the project demanded more than two people. but overall they had better things to do. After the university, not many choose to Code as a career. Free people when given the choice will choose based on both their biological and character attributes. It's exactly the same why there are not many female construction workers or many straight male make-up artists. my wife always talks about her dream becoming an air-hostess The left has indeed become the new Nazism. sadly, because I always thought my self as a liberal. But free speech and scientific method is something above any ideology for me.
He researches, writes, and sounds like a very honest and brilliant guy. As to looks, I think he's cute, but that his appearance is irrelevant. Amazing that he got into the diversity training "classes." Must be because he's Jewish? Because my understanding is that firms generally are barring the evil white males from such classes.
The woman questioning him seems emotionally unstable, flapping her arms, squinting her eyes, shaking her head, and tonality of her voice. This guy answered very intelligently and calm. All points proven through action. Bravo.
I`m a woman and I 100% back James Damore, no one should be penalised or fired because they express their opinion and especially when the intent wasn`t malicious, Google management handled this totally wrong and in the long run reflects badly on women who generally want to get jobs through merit not privilege.
@@Annie-zd7mx pointing out a couple of outliers does not disprove Damore the slightest. Same for the myth of the tech world being female dominated until the 80s: wrong! The women working in it were mostly doing a secretarial job - think of putting data into excel spreadsheet or the like, not actual engineering and comparing them do Lovelace or Hopper is disrespectful, dumb, dishonest or a mix of the three.
"We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" NO. Stop pushing your bullshit on people. Meritocracy is simply the best choice of action.
Em Chang interviewed Megan Smith, ex Google Tech-xec as "proof" women just as tech-able. MS was wearing sport jacket/men's shirt, no make-up, hair a bit unkempt. Looked her up on Wiki. She married another woman. So this engineer may have a bit more male chemistry than the usual woman? IOW, a self-defeating, non-representative example.
She also mentioned head of RUclips Susan Wojcicki, whose sister is married to one of the co-founders of Google. Surely nepotism played no rule in her ascension at Google.
Just because some women can make great tech professionals doesn't mean that all of them can. Like they guy says if a girl is interested and has the aptitude to joining a tech company then she should absolutely do it. But we shouldn't lower the qualification standard for women just to get a 50/50 mix. Equal treatment means equal qualification requirements.
Google was started in her basement. Literally. But yeah, reduce her success to the fact that her sister later married (and divorced) one of the google cofounders.
The problem is that you're assuming the bar is lowered just for women to get in. It's not. Period. Ask any HR personnel, and they'll let you know this just doesn't happen. No one's saying all women can make great tech professionals; just the way no one's saying all men can make great doctors.
She is not asking questions. She just want to James to self-prove her malicious speculation that he is a sexist, racist, bigot, or whatever by digging traps.
Yep. The guy just wants to let the facts do that talking, but he's getting bombarded with loaded and hostile questions the entire interview. When you're getting bullied pushing back is the right move.
He was probably trying to carefully answer the questions based upon the advice from his lawyer as well. That may have slowed him down abit besides the hostile nature of the questions.
Annie "reading his shit research" (in your words) does not constitute proof. However, it does constitute a level of reasoned understanding (if we agree on the meaning of "reading"). You're not too bad at trolling. Welllll kinda average, but when we're talking populations, there are 40-60% trolls with less skills than yourself, no?
@@Annie-zd7mx first of all, Annie, she's an interview, she isn't supposed to be so confrontational, second, this guy is incredibly intelligent and his points are valid
Emily Chang - thank you for interviewing James Damore and giving him a chance to present his views. Having said that, your tone, especially in the last half of the interview was very confrontational, combative and unprofessional. Take some queues from Betty Liu.
I just read the memo. He was fired for asking questions and providing solutions based on his perspective and experience. He wasn't all right. He wasn't all wrong either. He shouldn't have been fired for that. I don't think he would have had this internal memo not been made public. Framing and politics. Bad press.
@Annie Some people deserve top be patronized, like people who don't bother even trading a 10 page document in preparation for an interview with the author. Also people who never make a point about the science instead making smears but want us to believe they made robots for a living.
Annie.....So you are a cat lady ? Try expressing yourself without talking about smelling farts. Grow up please. Sorry you lost your dad. Your immature comment made me suspect you were a child. Maybe you are ?
Holy tits! I have dealt with the same kind of people during the student strikes in my country a few years ago, being a student myself. No matter how hard you try to show them how to research, to understand different point of views and to communicate it to people, they only give in to their own selfish beliefs. That is for both people against and for the strikes. I guess burning cars, insulting, hitting people and breaking public property really helps get your point across, right? It mainly discredit your point of view, as you are as much of an asshole as your opponent is. It really made me hate people more and more. Did people really forget Martin Luther King or are they too daft to understand his methods?
I have four daughters. I beg to get them to go into engineering and tech....not interested. Maybe women don't want to do tech....just like all my daughters don't. Wake up people. Women want to do what they want to do. I read Damore's memo and he is spot on and was very unbiased. People need to stop the PC nonsense and wake up.
This young man is more intelligent thoughtfull and genuine than any of the talking heads in the MSM. and for exposing all the Science Deniers on the left I applaud him.
What about Cars? What percent of women Engineer/design (Engines, Materials, Aerodynamics, Battery tech) at GM, Ford, BMW, Porsche? Maybe 5%? (maybe 1%). Isn't it just Glamorous San Fran PC Google with housing/playpen benefits, and not 'tech'? Do they want to do Robotics in Indiana? No.
I believe the focus here is on tech because this channel is called .... Bloomberg Technology. Gender disparity in engineering-related roles, such as in automobiles, exist (due to various CULTURAL and not biological reasons), and if you want to learn about that in various industries, go read the Financial Times, or BBC, or something. The stories are there. Or better still ... go ask ANY friend of yours who is female and STEM-trained.
Gender disparities in various industries do exist. But it isn't necessarily due to discrimination. A lot of the disparities, if not most, are the result of people's career choices, and those choices aren't entirely the result of culture. While there's certainly some cultural influence, there's also some biological influence. How big of a part either plays is hard to say (there's a lot on non-linear dynamics involved), but you cannot say with any scientific backing that biology does not play a role. That is, quite simply, anti-scientific.
Some women are so good it's scarry. Some women belong in another line of work, but woe to the man who says so. So among women, there's more dead weight.
I used to hire people for a software development company. I got hundreds of resumes. One, yes, only one person of all those resumes of people that applied as a programmer, was female. We can sit around talking about the scary patriarchy and how there's no difference between men and woman, but at the end of the day, I still remember when I took C++ in college with a class of 60 other students and 1 was a woman. If women want to be engineers, great, but I feel like SJWs are just so angry that men and women want different things and they can't use that anger to lash out at women, so they look at who ever else they can blame for it.
James, you are a scholar and a gentleman! Absolutely nailed the interview! Don't let them slander you and don't even defend yourself from their slanderous accusations, don't say "I'm not a bigot", ask them: "why would you say such a thing?" and then destroy their arguments. Ad hominems will get them nowhere!
Poor guy. I don't like how she's trying to frame him into a devil. I must say he handled himself excellent. Quite frankly, a lot of what he said made sense. He did not say that women underperform men in tech. What he did say is that on average women prefer life-work balance over leadership roles. Which google's own statistics support since there are so few women in leadership despite google proactively placing women in those roles.
I understand the Google side of the story but it should never fire this smart young man for telling the truth. Google should instead tell him that diversity is more important even than having just the top professionals that are mostly white men.
Perhaps not. But the western tradition is based on free speech and free thought. Those are - implied and explicitly - our values. To drastically change those in favour of fashionable left-wing views is an assault on what most of the populace consider universal rights.
There is a difference between the legal right to free speech and the principle of Free Expression. The latter has defined the advance of history/technology/human rights. If someone murders someone murders someone in antarctica, were allowed to condemn it without a nagging "there is no antarctic courts!"
Obviously this person who is interviewing him couldn't even be bothered to take five minutes to read the document before she asked him questions. In the document he makes multiple suggestions about how Google can get more women into tech.
"Alt right" is another meaningless term now, just like "bigoted", "racist", "xenophobic", and "homophobic". When you call people these terms any time they disagree with you, and whether or not these terms actually have anything to do with the person or opinion, the terms totally lose their meaning. Sad!
Chang asked the most "basic" and legitimate questions: why he wrote the memo, how he felt about the firing, what was his claim of science research which is the crucial part of his claim in the memo, how will his memo impacts future women and girls in the tech industry...The audience, at least majority of them, unlike you guys, are not Demore enthusiasts, meaning they are not following every details of this case. By asking these basic question, the audience can hear directly from Demore about his positions and whether he has thorough or any understanding of the impact of his memo. Chang did the interview in such fashion so she would not put any words in his mouth, so to speak. Every word and defense of the memo comes directly from Demore. She did a proper and good interview. The interview is not meant to be a propaganda piece for the alt-right in case you miss the point.
8:10 He's right when he says "if you are interested in technology, then pursue it" and that "It's a great field". That goes for everyone. Good advice from this young man. I am a female techie. It is a good field for all, if you are interested. Give it a try. -- I think that companies should stop limiting programmers to just CS degrees, btw. I got my start without a CS degree and instead had an intense training course to become an ALC programmer years ago. There has always been difficulty finding people who can make programmers, so they should extend where they look vs just pure CS degree folks.
I'm a man and I have no interest in math and science. In fact, they were my worst subjects in school. I applaud him though, for standing his ground against the progressive agenda.
The interviewer has an IQ at least two standard deviations lower than the man being interviewed. She seemed out of her depths throughout the interview when confronted by facts and comically kept making her little stupid frown as she continued on her original interrogation angle despite the facts.
In this video, it seemed that the interviewer was trying her hardest to not understand what he was saying. She kept trying to redirect the conversation to him being a bigot.
Geez, so this video is now about the interviewer? Can't believe how many people are salty over her questions. Interviewers purposefully ask questions that may seem silly for someone that is already knowledgable on the subject. Why? Because it gives the interviewed person the opportunity to talk about things a lot of people probably don"t know or understand. It is by no means a reflection of the intreviewer level of understanding.
Annie There are some great women who were pioneers in the field. That's a moot point. There are tons of great men who were pioneers in the field. Again a moot point. I was reading a number (okay lots!) of your replies looking for your opinion / stance on what variables you believe explain the massive (and let's not understate this, it's the biggest disparity in just about any field) difference in participation in software development, engineering, computer science. Is it your hypothesis that by and large the variable is unconscious bias? Answer directly and honestly, like a computer.
This interviewer is awful. He didn't even say the things she tried to make viewers think he said. He wasn't against diversity, he was against not blaming the employer for lack of diversity. Women are the reason why there are more men than women in tech. And he is not wrong!
For those who are criticizing the interviewer here, think a little harder. As a journalist, I know that the best thing an interviewer can do for a beleaguered person in controversy - especially one who is not familiar with media ways -- is to present to that person all of the unfair, baseless, and unkind accusations that are being alleged by others -- one by one, allowing the person to respond clearly to each. Which is what James Damore does here. Good going.
Its funny, My room mate came home from work the other day, and asked if i had heard the news about the google guy who wrote a manifesto. I didnt read the memo written by James Damore until earlier today, so I had no knowledge of it when my room mate asked me about it. He described it as a vile sexist hate piece. I dont think he read it, but merely heard about it on a left wing show at work. This is what happens when people do not look into things for themselves. My room mate isnt the smartest person or anything, but had he read this memo by James he would not have commented on it the way he did. I dont know why but some people need to condemn things as evil to make themselves feel virtuous. Why cant we just objectively look at things and not call each other names for having differences of opinion ( which was actually what James is trying to get at in the piece)
Why would he change his opinion at all? His statements are true. Emily's are not. I thought she was piling on with her SJW talking points, but no interest in learning anything she didn't already believe. What he is saying is what many have experienced for expressing their opinions in the work force. A woman or a minority might consider meeting the requirements for the job. He is qualified for the job he did. Some are less qualified for the job they do. They have been trying to get women into the tech fields for as long as I can remember. I'm 60, was graduated in the 70s, and they told little girls they could be anything they wanted to be. This man was not sending the wrong message to anyone except the whiny crybabies that are currently blaming their choices on someone else. Who could that be? White men. They have this capability factor that sets standards very high for others. But, Google is irrelevant. They are tools for social transformation, which is based primarily on false accusations. Unless blacklisted by the corporate controllers, he won't be a former engineer for very long. You can ask Emily who they are.
Why doesn't anyone point out that the process of Google giving preferential treatment to females is discrimination pure and simple? In a logical world, the person wanting such an agenda would be more likely to be fired for such an "offensive" opinion than the person wanting the hiring practice to be gender neutral.
why nobody point out in the mainstream media that the country with highest numbers of women in tech/science/math is Iran ? could it be that the secret is a good old patriarchy ? :-)
How Googles managers handled this just made his point! They purged a dissenting voice from their left wing echo chamber. I am a green leftist stay at home dad btw.!
This host isn't understanding him. He isn't saying that women shouldn't work at Google. He's saying that people should be hired based on their skills, not their gender. He's just saying that women generally choose not to go into tech because they GENERALLY have interests in other things (similar to why women generally don't choose to become mechanics). He's not saying that women should not be allowed. What the hell is wrong with her?!
James Damare was too polite in this interview. He should have asked her if she had read the offending article and ask her to explain what she thought was incorrect about it.
there is a big difference between encouraging woman and minority's to enter certain fields and discriminating against peoples sex or skin color to force more woman and minority's into those fields. one is illegal.
Can somebody tell me why it is so important to get more woman into technology companies in the first place? Nobody seems to care to get more of them into the coal mining industry.
People don't want meritocracies and they don't want equality of opportunity, they want parity, huh, I wonder why they don't fight for 50% women in plumbing? Or as bricksmasons? People should go into what they're interested in, that's why there will never be absolute parity. That's ok.
To be fair, having a "female perspective" can be useful when you're designing things for the general public (remember, men and women are different). So, there is value in having women be a part of the decision-making process seeing as they will be a significant portion of the users of the final product. Coal mining doesn't really have that concern.
The problem is that you cannot simultaneously hold that there is genuine value to having men and women working on something *and* that they're not different in any way. The value of such diversity is a direct product *of* their differences.
Just a matter of time before ideologues double-down on their social engineering and FORCE women and men into jobs they have no interest in.
It's because people believe equality of outcome is a good thing. Plain and simple: It's because some people are just stupid.
Feminists look at a man's life like it's a buffet table. They all want the sirloin, but beans and rice ? Fuck that you can keep beans and rice. 99% of brick layers are men, never heard about the complaints regarding the lack of women in that field huh ? No shit, it's a hard low paying job. They just want to good shit.
I do not like Emily Chang's manner of questioning James Damore. It sounds like an interrogation for a criminal suspect. As a journalist she should show her objectivity in her interviewees. The questions she asked just shows her lack of intelligence compared to James Damore's. James Damore - you did great!
Karen K Very well put.
Yup. James Damore did indeed do a great job of quietly conveying and clarifying his views and staying cool. True journalist show objectivity in their interviews, but most of those have left us. The new generation of "journalists", on both sides don't even try to be objective. Her accusations of him being an Alt-Right or that little sob story about the little girl was low. But that usually means that James Damore's logical argument had already won, because the interviewer tried to go for the emotive victory instead. I think the worst part of the interview was when she claimed there was no scientific evidence for his conclusions, despite the numerous citations he already alluded to in his document. It shows her bias considering that she completely ignored these numerous scientific studies because she disagreed with them, and yet completely agreed with the OPINION of one of the "experts" they interviewed.
That's the media for you. MSM being biased and anti-centrist and conservative isn't a conspiracy.
Emily Chang was trying so hard to trip him, and she tripped herself. Emily Chang is not a "journalist", she has no objectivity. It was funny watching Emily strike out. Every question she asked was put out like an attack based on her own biased emotions. Silly little girl. She assumed she was dealing with a sexist, racist, Nazi, fascist, etc. because that's how Big Brother Google and Big Brother MSM are spinning it. That's clearly not who James Damore is. Emily Chang fell flat on her face, deserved to fall flat on her face, and I enjoyed watching it.
@ Karen K: I agree, and I'm not convinced she even read the memo beforehand either: which is odd, if it's really so harmful.
I guess she had to show she's 'on the right side,' or 'down with the programme' - as it were.
I don't appreciate the way she asks questions as though it's a given that he's anti-diversity, or anti-woman. Those are smears made by people who didn't read his words. He handled himself brilliantly in this interview though.
Europa Man I did a scan of group team pictures. ..IF there was a male...his spot in the picture was always ALWAYS AT THE BACK with his head barely noticible. WHAT shocked me was the number of people who obviously thought that attention seeking presentation of them self was outrageous to the point THE PICTURES LOOKED LIE HALLOWEEN COSTUMES. pictures I used were non professional and spur of the moment.
Interesting ...Bte...MOST MALES....WHERE NON WHITE......
So. I think his point is excellent
bloomberg is in the swamp too.
Does George Soros own shares in Bloomberg too? As of 'the current year' he now owns shares in Alphabet Inc (Google/RUclips's parent company)... I wondered why all this shit was happening was RUclips and Google. Now it makes sense.
soros dcleaks and the emails. U guys know its nothing new.
This is what people mean when they say fake news. its deliberately misleading
The interviewer is asking some rather dumb questions. He is objecting literally racist and sexist hiring practices at a multi-million-dollar company and she is just "Are you trying to discourage girls from going into tech?". Like why is that even an argument at this point? If those practices are real, then they are absolutely inacceptable, no matter the race / gender ratio at the company.
"If those practices are real ..." Dear, they are VERY real. And it starts from the moment the female child is born. I know it might be easy to think society is past that, or such things are unacceptable, but unfortunately (and fortunately) it's not your reality, so these experiences women claim they face are often seen as "exaggerated" by people who haven't experienced it themselves.
MyAkachi you are delusional biases are always towards women and minorities in the west especially in fields where they're underrepresented and even in fields where they're overrepresented
RaffiNGO The extreme feminists and regressive left (I am a green lefty btw.) want every ratio to be 50/50. And they want to make it law!
Every ratio can't be 50/50. That's not practical. Sometimes when I see people saying these like "women hold only 30% of the jobs in so-and-so industry/firm" I roll my eyes, because in some industries it's the other way around as well, and 50:50 might not be attainable. However, I am intrigued as to how you describe an extreme feminist as someone who wants 50:50. How does wanting 50:50 make one an "extreme feminist"? So, what? Normal feminists should just sit down and request 10% of opportunities? I'm just trying to wrap my head around your logic. I'm pretty sure an extreme person would be requiring 70:30, 80:20, heck even 60:40. No one wants to be treated unequally, not even you, I bet! So the fact that you're so upset that half the world's population want to not be treated in an inferior way is quite depressing.
Why do you even want to get into tech, it's a shit job. I am a programmer and it's not an easy job at all, long hours, pay is ok but you sacrifice a lot. You also think I got the job, simply because I am a white man? I am competing against those other men too and they sometimes try to keep me down. My boss treis to pay me as little as he can, make me work as long as possible, this is just capitalism. I realize, that I have to compete and I accept that.
You strike me as a pretty weak person, seems like you expect everything to be handed to you. You want to be in a leadership position just because? You have to actually work for that. Also what keeps you from starting your own company?
And what big hurdles are there in university let's say? You just write exams, if you are good, you will pass them. My professors didn't even see my name on the exams, just my student number, but somehow they probably magically knew I am a white man.
James Damore is very right
Ol Dirty Bastard Maher yup I support him as well and I am a minority. A lot of ppl are misrepresenting what he is saying and it is distasteful.
you mean *very bright
I think he means very correct.
you cant say that dude, youre gonna get fired too!
QuantumSnare yes...the OSTRICHES have their head stuck and are flapping and squawking rather than discussing.
This is what happens when HAVE A PRESIDENT THAT RACE BAITS...BOOGIE MEN EVERYPLACE.
This poor guy. I’m going to start moving away from Google products.
Is this possible, don't have other tech companies not this "problem"? I think Apple is just the same as Google, but there it stays inside the company.
Apple and Google isn't all that's out there.
I'm looking for alternatives. I don't feel safe with my data in the hands of such vitriolic ideologues!
just charlie Apple is exactly the same
You'd have a better shot giving up water.
to the reporter: YOU are conveying those bad things with all this alt-right hysteria, the memo does not!!
She is trying to make him and people in the future afraid of speaking out about things the left doesn't agree with. You never hear a reporter saying about someone who defends Islam 'You're seen as a hero by ISIS, what do you think about that?'
of course that is her tactic, that's what their tactics always are.. brand anyone with dissenting opinions as part of the 'alt-right'.
Absolutely right I nearly spat wine all over the monitor at that line. She clearly knows nothing of the alt-right and never read the memo.
D See Ker Don't believe this reporter read the memo. Much better, in depth analysis of the memo, and discussing it with James, would be with Jordan Peterson.
Wow, that interviewer is something else. Incredibly loaded questions.
Look into her eyes, you can see her mind is full of ideological fuck.
Her eyes and body language do tell it all, another brainwashed feminist cultist.
So, when did you stop beating you wife?
I'm surprised that you find this remarkable. This has been going on every single day since approximately the beginning of the first Clinton term in office in 1993.
If young girls and women are discouraged from entering the tech industry because of this, they didn't deserve to be in it in the first place. If you are a true engineer, you don't give two fucks about this identity politics bullshit.
Google decided to run their company like a kindergarten instead of a buisness. So they will follow in the footsteps of yahoo.
lmao, well said!
They will not recover because they will follow their policy, to the ground and beyond.
I doubt it, if anything it will make them more money. You will be surprised how good, bad publicity is.
It's not just about the publicity. The company shames ideological diversity. There's little point in having many people of many different backgrounds if you fire them when they don't think the same. They've hindered their ability to grow as a company. I think "shot themselves in the foot" is the perfect expression for this.
Their policies are racist and sexist, blindly following in favor of their indoctrinated drones as that is the effect of being in an echo chamber. They don't need to lose public support to fail when the way their company works doesn't exactly benefit them. In the same way any communist society would crumble for such an echo chamber, google will too.
This may help Google with their other discrimination lawsuits; they can point to this and say see, we're trying so hard we're getting dissention in the ranks; we're trying so hard some employees think our methods are illegal. On the other hand, I hope this guy gets 10s of millions in a wrongful termination suit.
Emily Chang :"We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" - WRONG! We need more talented people in technology. Not women or men! There is no importance of getting more men, women or transgenders into technology! Technology need engineers - that is the whole point James was trying to make.
Exactly. If they're not talented or skilled enough to get into google they can go and work/train somewhere else for a while.
That's because you've translated her comment ""We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" as meaning getting more women into tech, despite their ability or competence, which isn't the case.
+MyAkachi No, we just don't think that we need more of X race or Y gender in anything, because we don't judge people based on those things. We should treat people equally. I know this is a scary idea, but not acting sexistly is the best way to avoid sexism.
Rodionov Dmitry why Emily looks like she almost want to cry when she cant push her point across?
If it's important to get more women in Technology, then it should be equally as important to get them into garbage collections and sewer works (99.9% male dominated). But that's right, its not about equality, it's about special treatment.
we need more talented women as escorts and pornstars. that's some jobs that only women can do.
I'll believe feminism is about equality when I see the feminist push to get more men in jobs dominated by women, like elementary school teachers, nurses, and hotel maids. Never saw a male hotel maid, and if boys are raised by single women, more positive male role models in elementary schools become even more important. Not to mention that Canadian study that found the when teachers grade anonymously; they don't know the gender of the person when correcting papers and tests; boy's grades go up a full letter grade. We need more male elementary school teachers so boys get a fair shake.
David, thats like saying the reason Muslims kill is because of islamophobia. What the fuck. It doesnt matter what we say, the left will call us sexist. The only thing Marxists deserve is ridicule at best
Also in prisons: 90% male dominated. Equality is equality ;)
You will be surprised the amount of barriers women face in that field as well; try and look it up. You make it sound like they are running in the other direction, but not really, there are many physically qualified women (who meet military standards in strength & fitness) who go into that field.
The gentleman defended himself and interviewed brilliantly. The interviewer was trying hard to make him look bad and he answered everything thoroughly. Good job
he looks like a very honest and brilliant guy
By the way, as a Software Engineer my self, I can tell you for-sure. on behalf of every single Nerd out there - WE WOULD LOVE and WELCOME MORE WOMEN INTO OUR FIELD. There is no conspiracy to keep women out. never was , never will be.
We Nerds only love two things: women and computers.
It boggles my mind how on earth is now socially acceptable to actually believe that - there is a "grand evil conspiracy & sexism" by nerds to keep women out of "tech"
when have we gone completely insane?
It's the second-rate women who aren't good enough but still think they're entitle to a job at Google who make all the trouble. The top women programmers who apply get hired and then perform without further controversy. The second-rate women who get hired are back to complain again later because they don't think they were promoted fast enough. When I was a programmer (sadly, not at Google), almost all the women I worked with were great, but some were just a lawsuit waiting to happen. And a woman who could not do the job? Not worth my career to get rid of her; the rest of us just did her work.
The two best programmers in my course was me and a fellow woman programmer but yes in general most women in my course though initially enthusiastic bright and good at mathematics, were just eventually realizing that they were not that interested in computers. They indeed were better in co-operating, when the project demanded more than two people. but overall they had better things to do. After the university, not many choose to Code as a career.
Free people when given the choice will choose based on both their biological and character attributes.
It's exactly the same why there are not many female construction workers or many straight male make-up artists.
my wife always talks about her dream becoming an air-hostess
The left has indeed become the new Nazism. sadly, because I always thought my self as a liberal. But free speech and scientific method is something above any ideology for me.
He researches, writes, and sounds like a very honest and brilliant guy. As to looks, I think he's cute, but that his appearance is irrelevant. Amazing that he got into the diversity training "classes." Must be because he's Jewish? Because my understanding is that firms generally are barring the evil white males from such classes.
it's not his looks. it's his deeds.
The woman questioning him seems emotionally unstable, flapping her arms, squinting her eyes, shaking her head, and tonality of her voice. This guy answered very intelligently and calm. All points proven through action. Bravo.
@@Annie-zd7mx what's wrong with being a Trump voter, Jesus, you're the simpleton
I`m a woman and I 100% back James Damore, no one should be penalised or fired because they express their opinion and especially when the intent wasn`t malicious, Google management handled this totally wrong and in the long run reflects badly on women who generally want to get jobs through merit not privilege.
+Annie nothing of what you said refutes what Aditi K said nor what James Damore has said. What a pointless comment.
@@Annie-zd7mx pointing out a couple of outliers does not disprove Damore the slightest.
Same for the myth of the tech world being female dominated until the 80s: wrong! The women working in it were mostly doing a secretarial job - think of putting data into excel spreadsheet or the like, not actual engineering and comparing them do Lovelace or Hopper is disrespectful, dumb, dishonest or a mix of the three.
Interviewer is the one in need of firing.
This guy is way too smart and knowledgeable for many people to handle
"We've talked a lot about importance of getting more women in technology" NO. Stop pushing your bullshit on people. Meritocracy is simply the best choice of action.
Em Chang interviewed Megan Smith, ex Google Tech-xec as "proof" women just as tech-able. MS was wearing sport jacket/men's shirt, no make-up, hair a bit unkempt. Looked her up on Wiki. She married another woman. So this engineer may have a bit more male chemistry than the usual woman? IOW, a self-defeating, non-representative example.
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_Smith#Personal_life
She also mentioned head of RUclips Susan Wojcicki, whose sister is married to one of the co-founders of Google. Surely nepotism played no rule in her ascension at Google.
Just because some women can make great tech professionals doesn't mean that all of them can. Like they guy says if a girl is interested and has the aptitude to joining a tech company then she should absolutely do it. But we shouldn't lower the qualification standard for women just to get a 50/50 mix. Equal treatment means equal qualification requirements.
Google was started in her basement. Literally. But yeah, reduce her success to the fact that her sister later married (and divorced) one of the google cofounders.
The problem is that you're assuming the bar is lowered just for women to get in. It's not. Period. Ask any HR personnel, and they'll let you know this just doesn't happen. No one's saying all women can make great tech professionals; just the way no one's saying all men can make great doctors.
This Bloomberg TV anchor tried to run a SJW hit job on James but the lad fared well against it.
My God this woman is so condescending. Emily Chang seems like an extremely irritating, rude and dislikeable person.
She is not asking questions. She just want to James to self-prove her malicious speculation that he is a sexist, racist, bigot, or whatever by digging traps.
See, google has "diversity", just not diversity of thought.
He should have at least once just said "You didn't actually read my memo, did you?"
Yep. The guy just wants to let the facts do that talking, but he's getting bombarded with loaded and hostile questions the entire interview. When you're getting bullied pushing back is the right move.
He was probably trying to carefully answer the questions based upon the advice from his lawyer as well. That may have slowed him down abit besides the hostile nature of the questions.
Annie
"reading his shit research" (in your words) does not constitute proof. However, it does constitute a level of reasoned understanding (if we agree on the meaning of "reading").
You're not too bad at trolling. Welllll kinda average, but when we're talking populations, there are 40-60% trolls with less skills than yourself, no?
What a misleading, deceitful, and biased report. Shame on the reporter for being openly one-sided and confrontational
@@Annie-zd7mx first of all, Annie, she's an interview, she isn't supposed to be so confrontational, second, this guy is incredibly intelligent and his points are valid
@@Annie-zd7mx Sure, a senior engineer with 6 years of experience in Google working on complex projects "knows nothing about computer science".
She is clearly emotional about this topic and unable to be objective.
Annie you are an angry little woman that is dripping with bias and letting her emotions get the best of her in every comment you make its obvious.
You just described 99% of people
Emily Chang - thank you for interviewing James Damore and giving him a chance to present his views. Having said that, your tone, especially in the last half of the interview was very confrontational, combative and unprofessional. Take some queues from Betty Liu.
That woman is a terrible person. She thinks He is wrong, and you can hear it. She proves his points.
I just read the memo. He was fired for asking questions and providing solutions based on his perspective and experience. He wasn't all right. He wasn't all wrong either. He shouldn't have been fired for that. I don't think he would have had this internal memo not been made public. Framing and politics. Bad press.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think was bad in the memo?
The point of his memo is lost on this interviewer
@Annie Some people deserve top be patronized, like people who don't bother even trading a 10 page document in preparation for an interview with the author. Also people who never make a point about the science instead making smears but want us to believe they made robots for a living.
When you try and slay a dragon, sometimes it eats you. Tough kid.
"Aren't you worried that your opinion will make little girls cry?" Unbelievable.
What James Dalmore did not understand is, no matter how logical and clever you are, you are not allowed to question cultural Marxism.
John Tonks I'm actually pissed off at the shit he's getting from the media.
Annie....Did you ever meet your father ?
Annie.....So you are a cat lady ? Try expressing yourself without talking about smelling farts. Grow up please. Sorry you lost your dad. Your immature comment made me suspect you were a child. Maybe you are ?
+Annie is a "child" in her 60s.
Holy tits! I have dealt with the same kind of people during the student strikes in my country a few years ago, being a student myself. No matter how hard you try to show them how to research, to understand different point of views and to communicate it to people, they only give in to their own selfish beliefs. That is for both people against and for the strikes. I guess burning cars, insulting, hitting people and breaking public property really helps get your point across, right? It mainly discredit your point of view, as you are as much of an asshole as your opponent is. It really made me hate people more and more. Did people really forget Martin Luther King or are they too daft to understand his methods?
I have four daughters. I beg to get them to go into engineering and tech....not interested. Maybe women don't want to do tech....just like all my daughters don't. Wake up people. Women want to do what they want to do. I read Damore's memo and he is spot on and was very unbiased. People need to stop the PC nonsense and wake up.
This young man is more intelligent thoughtfull and genuine than any of the talking heads in the MSM. and for exposing all the Science Deniers on the left I applaud him.
James making completely valid points. This woman is so self-righteous and I'd bet money she didn't even as much as skim through his document.
What about Cars? What percent of women Engineer/design (Engines, Materials, Aerodynamics, Battery tech) at GM, Ford, BMW, Porsche? Maybe 5%? (maybe 1%).
Isn't it just Glamorous San Fran PC Google with housing/playpen benefits, and not 'tech'? Do they want to do Robotics in Indiana? No.
I believe the focus here is on tech because this channel is called .... Bloomberg Technology. Gender disparity in engineering-related roles, such as in automobiles, exist (due to various CULTURAL and not biological reasons), and if you want to learn about that in various industries, go read the Financial Times, or BBC, or something. The stories are there. Or better still ... go ask ANY friend of yours who is female and STEM-trained.
Gender disparities in various industries do exist. But it isn't necessarily due to discrimination.
A lot of the disparities, if not most, are the result of people's career choices, and those choices aren't entirely the result of culture. While there's certainly some cultural influence, there's also some biological influence. How big of a part either plays is hard to say (there's a lot on non-linear dynamics involved), but you cannot say with any scientific backing that biology does not play a role. That is, quite simply, anti-scientific.
I guess it's around 15%, but when we talk about extremities, like extremely good engineer, kind of genius spending *all* the time on work - 1%.
Some women are so good it's scarry. Some women belong in another line of work, but woe to the man who says so. So among women, there's more dead weight.
Men have outscored women by 30+ points, for 40+ years, on the Math SAT.
Period.
Excellent answers by James Damore! Very honest & respectful. I have no idea how can some people be so angry at him.
I used to hire people for a software development company. I got hundreds of resumes. One, yes, only one person of all those resumes of people that applied as a programmer, was female.
We can sit around talking about the scary patriarchy and how there's no difference between men and woman, but at the end of the day, I still remember when I took C++ in college with a class of 60 other students and 1 was a woman. If women want to be engineers, great, but I feel like SJWs are just so angry that men and women want different things and they can't use that anger to lash out at women, so they look at who ever else they can blame for it.
Bloomberg should be ashamed of themselves.
James, you are a scholar and a gentleman! Absolutely nailed the interview! Don't let them slander you and don't even defend yourself from their slanderous accusations, don't say "I'm not a bigot", ask them: "why would you say such a thing?" and then destroy their arguments. Ad hominems will get them nowhere!
Poor guy. I don't like how she's trying to frame him into a devil. I must say he handled himself excellent. Quite frankly, a lot of what he said made sense. He did not say that women underperform men in tech. What he did say is that on average women prefer life-work balance over leadership roles. Which google's own statistics support since there are so few women in leadership despite google proactively placing women in those roles.
I understand the Google side of the story but it should never fire this smart young man for telling the truth. Google should instead tell him that diversity is more important even than having just the top professionals that are mostly white men.
Actually, I disagree.
Wow! This interviewer has no idea what she is talking about. Wonder what she would be asking a female if she had written this memo?
Anyone betting whether the interviewer didnt read the memo?
Yet another hit piece.
This kind of crap is why people don't trust the media.
James stood up like a champ.
#boycottGoogle #freespeechmatters
Marcel Magi There's no inherit right to free speech in the workplace. Google is a PRIVATE company, and they have the right to fire him.
Perhaps not. But the western tradition is based on free speech and free thought. Those are - implied and explicitly - our values. To drastically change those in favour of fashionable left-wing views is an assault on what most of the populace consider universal rights.
There is a difference between the legal right to free speech and the principle of Free Expression. The latter has defined the advance of history/technology/human rights. If someone murders someone murders someone in antarctica, were allowed to condemn it without a nagging "there is no antarctic courts!"
I know. Unfortunately. Sigh.
That reporter should apologize for the manner in which she asked these questions
Obviously this person who is interviewing him couldn't even be bothered to take five minutes to read the document before she asked him questions. In the document he makes multiple suggestions about how Google can get more women into tech.
"Alt right" is another meaningless term now, just like "bigoted", "racist", "xenophobic", and "homophobic". When you call people these terms any time they disagree with you, and whether or not these terms actually have anything to do with the person or opinion, the terms totally lose their meaning. Sad!
I hope he sues the shit out of Google.... & Wins to the point of taking over Google.
This guy is a Hero, Google has lost a lot of respect from me.
Everything he says makes perfect sense.
Chang asked the most "basic" and legitimate questions: why he wrote the memo, how he felt about the firing, what was his claim of science research which is the crucial part of his claim in the memo, how will his memo impacts future women and girls in the tech industry...The audience, at least majority of them, unlike you guys, are not Demore enthusiasts, meaning they are not following every details of this case. By asking these basic question, the audience can hear directly from Demore about his positions and whether he has thorough or any understanding of the impact of his memo.
Chang did the interview in such fashion so she would not put any words in his mouth, so to speak. Every word and defense of the memo comes directly from Demore.
She did a proper and good interview. The interview is not meant to be a propaganda piece for the alt-right in case you miss the point.
What an abysmal interviewer. Fortunately Damore was prepared to deal with her agenda based questions.
There aren't enough women in construction, lets do a march for more women in construction!
So did this woman not read his memo, or was she just being purposely ignorant and vindictive?
Great example of modern "journalism" right there. Nothing but smear questions with an accusatory lean trying to get a rise out of him.
I see comments are being deleted.
James Damore is too nice to this interviewer. All she does is fall back onto emotional blackmail. Credit to him for being so polite and reasonable.
If I were Elon Musk, I would hire this guy.
The more I listen to this engineer, the more convinced I become that he's right, albeit I can see how his memo can be easily misinterpreted.
8:10 He's right when he says "if you are interested in technology, then pursue it" and that "It's a great field". That goes for everyone. Good advice from this young man. I am a female techie. It is a good field for all, if you are interested. Give it a try. -- I think that companies should stop limiting programmers to just CS degrees, btw. I got my start without a CS degree and instead had an intense training course to become an ALC programmer years ago. There has always been difficulty finding people who can make programmers, so they should extend where they look vs just pure CS degree folks.
If I was CEO of Google, I would have hired him back and said sorry for firing him in the first place.
Emily Chang framing of this topic was unprofessional and one sided.
Wholeheartedly agree and it infuriates me
I'm a man and I have no interest in math and science. In fact, they were my worst subjects in school. I applaud him though, for standing his ground against the progressive agenda.
The interviewer has an IQ at least two standard deviations lower than the man being interviewed. She seemed out of her depths throughout the interview when confronted by facts and comically kept making her little stupid frown as she continued on her original interrogation angle despite the facts.
James Damore is a legend for this. His memo is genius, and he was proven right by being fired.
"Our company has a problem with diversity of opinions!"
"NO WE DON'T! YOU'RE FIRED!"
Bloomberg was trying to trap/shame him. Damore stood his ground.
In this video, it seemed that the interviewer was trying her hardest to not understand what he was saying. She kept trying to redirect the conversation to him being a bigot.
Geez, so this video is now about the interviewer? Can't believe how many people are salty over her questions.
Interviewers purposefully ask questions that may seem silly for someone that is already knowledgable on the subject. Why? Because it gives the interviewed person the opportunity to talk about things a lot of people probably don"t know or understand. It is by no means a reflection of the intreviewer level of understanding.
He’s not saying women are worse in tech than men, he’s saying that he’s women are less likely to choose tech as a career path!
This is good practice for him. They'll come at him much stronger than that next time. Stay firm and honest as you are, james.
James Damore did nothing wrong - but, google sure has.
Aren't we violating women's rights when we can't accept women don't want to be computer engineers?
Annie
There are some great women who were pioneers in the field. That's a moot point. There are tons of great men who were pioneers in the field. Again a moot point.
I was reading a number (okay lots!) of your replies looking for your opinion / stance on what variables you believe explain the massive (and let's not understate this, it's the biggest disparity in just about any field) difference in participation in software development, engineering, computer science. Is it your hypothesis that by and large the variable is unconscious bias?
Answer directly and honestly, like a computer.
This interviewer is awful. He didn't even say the things she tried to make viewers think he said. He wasn't against diversity, he was against not blaming the employer for lack of diversity. Women are the reason why there are more men than women in tech. And he is not wrong!
This lady with her "skeptical" face the entire interview lol
Facts don't care about your feelings. Sorry feminists.
When science doesn't fit your worldview, reminds of the Catholic church vs Galileo.
For those who are criticizing the interviewer here, think a little harder. As a journalist, I know that the best thing an interviewer can do for a beleaguered person in controversy - especially one who is not familiar with media ways -- is to present to that person all of the unfair, baseless, and unkind accusations that are being alleged by others -- one by one, allowing the person to respond clearly to each. Which is what James Damore does here. Good going.
This profoundly emotional and infantile reaction has in fact proved his thesis.
Its funny, My room mate came home from work the other day, and asked if i had heard the news about the google guy who wrote a manifesto. I didnt read the memo written by James Damore until earlier today, so I had no knowledge of it when my room mate asked me about it. He described it as a vile sexist hate piece. I dont think he read it, but merely heard about it on a left wing show at work. This is what happens when people do not look into things for themselves. My room mate isnt the smartest person or anything, but had he read this memo by James he would not have commented on it the way he did. I dont know why but some people need to condemn things as evil to make themselves feel virtuous. Why cant we just objectively look at things and not call each other names for having differences of opinion ( which was actually what James is trying to get at in the piece)
Interviewer is biased and well out of her depth.
Journalism these days is very weak. Interviewers or stories no longer seek the truth but seem rather to confirm the bias of the interviewer/ writer.
Why would he change his opinion at all? His statements are true. Emily's are not. I thought she was piling on with her SJW talking points, but no interest in learning anything she didn't already believe. What he is saying is what many have experienced for expressing their opinions in the work force. A woman or a minority might consider meeting the requirements for the job. He is qualified for the job he did. Some are less qualified for the job they do. They have been trying to get women into the tech fields for as long as I can remember. I'm 60, was graduated in the 70s, and they told little girls they could be anything they wanted to be. This man was not sending the wrong message to anyone except the whiny crybabies that are currently blaming their choices on someone else. Who could that be? White men. They have this capability factor that sets standards very high for others. But, Google is irrelevant. They are tools for social transformation, which is based primarily on false accusations. Unless blacklisted by the corporate controllers, he won't be a former engineer for very long. You can ask Emily who they are.
Why doesn't anyone point out that the process of Google giving preferential treatment to females is discrimination pure and simple? In a logical world, the person wanting such an agenda would be more likely to be fired for such an "offensive" opinion than the person wanting the hiring practice to be gender neutral.
This guy speaks his heart, I can tell that. He's saying what he believes in.
Former liberals and leftists, you're all welcome to come over to the Right side. We're open for discussions and exploring novel ideas.
What a dishonest interviewer
I'll bet Asian Women can be just as good as Black Men in professional basketball!!!! DIVERSITY NOW!!!!
why nobody point out in the mainstream media that the country with highest numbers of women in tech/science/math is Iran ?
could it be that the secret is a good old patriarchy ? :-)
How Googles managers handled this just made his point! They purged a dissenting voice from their left wing echo chamber. I am a green leftist stay at home dad btw.!
god damn reporter is trying to turn this into a hit piece rather than a discussion.
he is the one who says the world is round while the fascists scream blasphemy
He seems like a nice guy
Fuck google
I thought it was quite dishonest of Susan Wojcicki to exploit her daughter the way she did in her response to James Damore's memo...
Bad interview imo, loaded questions that somehow this dude handles brilliantly for somebody with so little screen time.
This host isn't understanding him. He isn't saying that women shouldn't work at Google. He's saying that people should be hired based on their skills, not their gender. He's just saying that women generally choose not to go into tech because they GENERALLY have interests in other things (similar to why women generally don't choose to become mechanics). He's not saying that women should not be allowed.
What the hell is wrong with her?!
James Damare was too polite in this interview. He should have asked her if she had read the offending article and ask her to explain what she thought was incorrect about it.
there is a big difference between encouraging woman and minority's to enter certain fields and discriminating against peoples sex or skin color to force more woman and minority's into those fields. one is illegal.