Google Shows It's Woke on Diversity- James Damore Lawsuit

[cordex]

If anything, he's actually "pro-woman" in that he makes suggestions that would promote more female participation and advancement on the tech side.

Yep.  I'd call it at worst constructive criticism.

[Perd Hapley]

If anything, he's actually "pro-woman" in that he makes suggestions that would promote more female participation and advancement on the tech side.

It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.

And, like most people, you left off the second part of that vision statement...

"As long as everything things, feels, and believes the same thing without dissent."

Well that clears it up. 

[Ben]

It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.

I also blame the MSM as well as the left, (but I guess that's redundant). All the usual players took information on the memo from out of context quotes on the various progressive social media sites (who were also calling it a "manifesto", which the MSM also took up). Had the MSM read the entire memo, they wouldn't have perpetuated the very misleading talking points of the left. Or if they did read the entire memo and then just kept using the out of context portions, then I guess one more data point on "fake news".


The fact that Google did have the entire memo and still did what they did, speaks volumes about them.

[Perd Hapley]

I also blame the MSM as well as the left, (but I guess that's redundant). All the usual players took information on the memo from out of context quotes on the various progressive social media sites (who were also calling it a "manifesto", which the MSM also took up). Had the MSM read the entire memo, they wouldn't have perpetuated the very misleading talking points of the left. Or if they did read the entire memo and then just kept using the out of context portions, then I guess one more data point on "fake news".

Like the news outlet that took SLPC's slanderous mischaracterization of a religious liberty group at face value?

[Ben]

 

[Perd Hapley]

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/08/10/weird-right-a-search-for-james-damore-on-google-news-wont-autocomplete/

[Angel Eyes]

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/08/10/weird-right-a-search-for-james-damore-on-google-news-wont-autocomplete/

Actually, it does.

[RevDisk]

Couple thoughts

- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum. Even, ESPECIALLY, when the company asks for your open and honest opinion. You lie. You lie hard, you lie long. You lie about lying. The company policy is the bestest policy and anyone who disagrees is a counterrevolutionary criminal that should be sent to Siberia. I even wore a Soviet hat to the Six Sigma training and was denouncing coworkers who were not sufficiently dedicated to the glorious Sigma revolution. The instructor thought it was a nice hat.

- California has a bazillion laws on the book. And it's not a right to work state. So there's even odds that they illegally fired him. It's disputed.

- Google did not help matters in their public comments denouncing the guy. That's a healthy settlement offer if Google's lawyers are smart. I'd demand somewhere between five and ten mill to shut up and disappear.

[Ben]

Couple thoughts

- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum.

Was it actually a company forum? Not doubting you, just not sure as there seem to be several versions. The one I heard is that he emailed the memo to only something like ten specific people (I'm assuming his bosses and whatever group Google assigns for employee suggestions and what have you) And someone there hit the "forward" button and it took off from there.

To me, there would be a big difference between posting to a company forum that all the employees could read, and sending it to targeted individuals because you just wanted to help and did not in fact want the thing spread far and wide without explanation or background.

[RevDisk]

Was it actually a company forum? Not doubting you, just not sure as there seem to be several versions. The one I heard is that he emailed the memo to only something like ten specific people (I'm assuming his bosses and whatever group Google assigns for employee suggestions and what have you) And someone there hit the "forward" button and it took off from there.

To me, there would be a big difference between posting to a company forum that all the employees could read, and sending it to targeted individuals because you just wanted to help and did not in fact want the thing spread far and wide without explanation or background.

I'm sure it will be covered in the lawsuit. I'm ignoring the details from the media, because they range from out of context to purely fabricated. Gist everyone agrees on is Google wanted a discussion on diversity and whatnot. And someone leaked someone else giving an honest sourced opinion. And now everyone is piling on the guy, including Google.

Stupidity comes at a price. This guy is going to learn it, quickly. Again, he may win a settlement. Or Google could spend 10x the settlement on their legions of lawyers to send a specific message.


Play stupid game, win stupid prize.

[cordex]

I'm sure it will be covered in the lawsuit. I'm ignoring the details from the media, because they range from out of context to purely fabricated. Gist everyone agrees on is Google wanted a discussion on diversity and whatnot. And someone leaked someone else giving an honest sourced opinion. And now everyone is piling on the guy, including Google.

His story is that he went to diversity training and didn't like what he saw and he felt it was counterproductive, unscientific, and likely illegal as it encouraged the perpetration of sexism and racism in hiring and employee development.  He posted his thoughts on an internal Google employee discussion group.  It was forwarded from there.  This was not an official thing at all.

[KD5NRH]

http://www.dailywire.com/news/17400/google-hiring-less-white-men-progress-robert-kraychik

In other news, Daily Wire obviously hiring FEWER people who passed English class.

[Angel Eyes]

Google CEO schedules all-hands meeting to discuss/spin the Damore firing, then cancels it:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-cancels-all-hands-meeting.html

We had hoped to have a frank, open discussion today as we always do to bring us together and move forward.

"... which is why we fired the last guy who tried to have a frank, open discussion."

[RevDisk]

His story is that he went to diversity training and didn't like what he saw and he felt it was counterproductive, unscientific, and likely illegal as it encouraged the perpetration of sexism and racism in hiring and employee development.  He posted his thoughts on an internal Google employee discussion group.  It was forwarded from there.  This was not an official thing at all.

Damn stupid either way.

Seriously. He's likely correct that was counterproductive, unscientific and illegal. He likely had good motivation and clean intentions. He's probably not even really a puppy kicking sexist cisgendered oppressor. But speaking up against that is akin to declaring yourself a Satanist at the height of the Spanish Inquisition. You shouldn't be surprised if they declare you a heretic and burn you at the stake, even if you had good intentions, well sourced material and are ultimately correct. Ideology doesn't work like that and he should have known better.

Google is very closed minded, intolerant and bigoted. With sexist policies. Pointing that out to ANY company will result in a quick firing. Usually the smarter ones have good enough lawyers and/or managers to make it look unrelated to an employee pointing out such things. Or at least plausibly enough to avoid a settlement

Likely they see it as cheap for the PR.

[Ben]

Google CEO schedules all-hands meeting to discuss/spin the Damore firing, then cancels it:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/10/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-cancels-all-hands-meeting.html

"... which is why we fired the last guy who tried to have a frank, open discussion."

I like this part:

And some are worried that you cannot speak out at work freely. All of your voices and opinions matter...and I want to hear them.

Also the part about "some of you wish we would do more." So do more what? Instead of firing the guy, take him to the prison down in level 47 of the Google lair?

[LadySmith]

"It puts the diversity on its skin, or else it gets the hose again."

This is so creepily accurate.

It's become increasingly clear to me that the Left is actually anti-woman, while at the same time they're anti-man. And anti-child. And anti-white. And anti-black. They just seem to be anti-human, promoting everything that hurts us all, while opposing nearly anything that will help make things better.

So is this.

[K Frame]

Various news channels are now blaming "threats" from the Alt Right for causing Google to cancel its koombayah meeting.

[Pb]

Google has the right to hire or fire anyone they want in my opinion, just like any other employer.

And by exercising that right in this case, they have once again outed themselves as a pack of evil hypocrites. 

[RevDisk]

Apparently what folks noodled out, google was worried they wouldn't be able to control the narrative at a large meeting. Better to have a ton of much smaller meetings that are more easily staged, controlled, scripted. If something goes off the rails, it's an isolated incident. They can learn as they go and prune out dissenting opinion without it impacting everyone.

They have an absolute right to crush internal dissent and be politically biased as hell. I'm not knocking that. But they've in the past tried to portray themselves as "good guys" rather than say, Evil Big Bad Microsoft. Hilariously now, Apple is the enemy of geeks and MS is the plucky do-gooder more often than not. Except their Windows 10 team, which are so evil that Satan, Zombie Hitler and Pluto have gotten restraining orders against them.

[Ben]

But they've in the past tried to portray themselves as "good guys" rather than say, Evil Big Bad Microsoft.

This is what irks me the most. If they were honest about bias against certain viewpoints, or even just outright said "we will not hire conservatives" (not that the employee was conservative), at least they're being honest. But when their HR mission statement is "We embrace all viewpoints" then they fire the guy, nothing they say carries weight with me. If they really embraced all viewpoints, they would be reprimanding or "counseling" the employees that attacked this guy. Possibly starting with the CEO.

[Scout26]

Couple thoughts

- Dude was a complete moron for posting honestly in a company forum. Even, ESPECIALLY, when the company asks for your open and honest opinion. You lie. You lie hard, you lie long. You lie about lying. The company policy is the bestest policy and anyone who disagrees is a counterrevolutionary criminal that should be sent to Siberia. I even wore a Soviet hat to the Six Sigma training and was denouncing coworkers who were not sufficiently dedicated to the glorious Sigma revolution. The instructor thought it was a nice hat.

Oh, pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease tell me there is video of that.  I will pay money to watch it.




And the reason they cancelled the big meeting is Lawyers.  Damore is going to get a big payout.  The last thing Google's lawyers wanted is video of Google's CEO, standing up on stage, shoving his foot in his mouth, as "Plaintiff's Exhibit #1".

[Angel Eyes]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

In his memo, Damore cites a series of studies, making the case, for example, that men tend to be more interested in things and women more interested in people. (Interest is not the same as ability.) Several scientists in the field have backed up his summary of the data. “Despite how it’s been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate,” Debra Soh wrote in The Globe and Mail in Toronto.

Geoffrey Miller, a prominent evolutionary psychologist, wrote in Quillette, “For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate.”

...

Of course subtlety is in hibernation in modern America. The third player in the drama is Google’s diversity officer, Danielle Brown. She didn’t wrestle with any of the evidence behind Damore’s memo. She just wrote his views “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.” This is ideology obliterating reason.

Bolded for truth.

[makattak]

 

[grampster]

This is what irks me the most. If they were honest about bias against certain viewpoints, or even just outright said "we will not hire conservatives" (not that the employee was conservative), at least they're being honest. But when their HR mission statement is "We embrace all viewpoints" then they fire the guy, nothing they say carries weight with me. If they really embraced all viewpoints, they would be reprimanding or "counseling" the employees that attacked this guy. Possibly starting with the CEO.

^^^^^This.

[Scout26]

Google Diversity Queen's initial response to the memo.  ("Plantiff's Exhibit #2 Your Honor....")

    Affirming our commitment to diversity and inclusion—and healthy debate

    Googlers,

    I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.

    Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I'm not going to link to it here as it's not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.

    Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we'll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said.”

    Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that's why I took this job.

    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. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.

    I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves — TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.

    Thanks,
    Danielle

The bolded part would be the literal "Money Quote".