James Damore Suing Google, do you think he has a case?

[ati87]

Depends on if the court finds in his favor and what is in the documents.

If the court finds that Google does (or did) discriminate and the documents are evidence of that, he would probably be protected.

Discriminate for being what? Not white or asian since those two groups are the hired the most

https://www.statista.com/chart/10640...-demographics/

So he got fired for being a freaking asshole nothing more.

[Raelbo]

By whom?

The only studies which succeeded in linking anything useful to diversity suffer from heavy bias, the people which run those studies have questionable diligence, and it's hard to believe in their good faith when they earn their dollars by selling diversity programs / certification packages / consulting ...

Sure buddy. And what pray do tell is your informed basis for such a conclusion? Irony much?

[Shalcker]

Discriminate for being what? Not white or asian since those two groups are the hired the most

https://www.statista.com/chart/10640...-demographics/

Being hired the most doesn't mean you aren't being discriminated; it depends on pool of applicants.

See for example current DoJ investigation on Harvard admission practices.

[Deleted]

Google is a kind and caring overlord.

I for one welcome my kind and caring overlord.

[Darththeo]

Even if it was the reason he's fired, there's very little that protects an employee of a private company from being fired for their political views.

I am a writer, and I regularly see postings advertising positions for 'CONSERVATIVE-LEANING' or 'RIGHT-LEANING' writers as 'content creators', 'consulting correspondents' or similar drivel (read as: get paid pennies per word to write propaganda for us to feed to the masses). In James Damore's whacky fantasy land, these advertisements are tantamount to 'Latins need not apply' signs, considering they exclude liberals from being hired for those jobs, which would by his logic be a violation of federal antidiscrimination law.

It isn't. Being conservative or liberal is not protected, outside of a few specific, rare instances, most involving federal employment.

Yes, and no. It depends on the wording of the anti-discrimination laws in the state. My state listed religion and creed separately under the law, which would imply the non-religious definition for creed which is merely a fundamental set of beliefs which would protect you from being fired. However, even if you have the protections for creed, you don't have the right to express/spread said beliefs in the workplace.

[cparle87]

So from my understanding Google has the pretty standard "Tell the company what you think we're doing wrong so we can try to fix it together" shtick. Guy posts a memo about harsh anti-white discrimination. Memo goes around for weeks, is read by hundreds, no problems happening. Then someone else, not the author, gets ahold of it and leaks it to a journalist who publishes it. And Google retaliates against not the journalist who published what they knew was a private memo, not the guy who leaked what he knew was a private memo, but the guy who wrote a private memo which was exactly what Google asked him to do in the first place, point out something wrong that he is seeing. Even if there's found to be no discrimination, which seems unlikely cause the DoJ is getting involed, the man shouldn't have been fired for doing what he was asked to do.

Manager: "Hey Jim, what's the biggest problem you see in our company? Be honest, I want to know."
Jim: "Well, sir, there seems to be a lot of discrimination against white men."
Manager: "You're fired."
Jim: "..."

[Draco-Onis]

Being hired the most doesn't mean you aren't being discriminated; it depends on pool of applicants.

See for example current DoJ investigation on Harvard admission practices.

Jeff Sessions is just using it as a excuse no offense but he is a moron who just follows what Trump tells him regardless of the law. I put as much faith in his decision making as I would for his master Trump, the only thing he did right was recuse himself from the Russia investigation much else has been a train wreck.

[rda]

Jeff Sessions is just using it as a excuse no offense but he is a moron who just follows what Trump tells him regardless of the law. I put as much faith in his decision making as I would for his master Trump, the only thing he did right was recuse himself from the Russia investigation much else has been a train wreck.

You consistently cannot say anything coherent about the argument so you just immediately jump to discussing personas. Hint: neither Sessions nor Trump nor any other name is relevant. We are talking about a simple mathematical thing: if there are, say, 7:3 whites to non-whites applicable for the job and you discriminate against whites, you may arrive at the end result of 6:4 and you can't use the fact that there are still more whites than non-whites to say that you didn't discriminate. The latter has been your argument for the entirety of this thread and it is plainly wrong, this is very basic stuff.

[Levelfive]

So what do you say of expert psychologists who have agreed with what he said and defended him?

For example, what this person posted a few pages back:


TL;DW since you will probably not click the link: Psychologist Steven Pinker defends Damore, says that Damore's argument is correct, that the evidence he presents in defense of his argument is accurate and a "pretty good reflection of the literature" on the subject.

Steven Pinker is a world renowned intellectual and author, highly regarded by all in his field, and currently teaches/does his research at Harvard.

I like Steven Pinker but he is on the wrong side of the evolutionary psychology debate, and there are many many well regarded scientists who take an incredibly dim view of evolutionary psychology as it currently stands, who have themselves authored numerous meta-analyses of the current literature which demolish its research and methodology and conclusions--it's at best a soft science, and at worst a pseudoscience. Pinker also gets indignant in the video, insisting (like lots of people who defend Damore) that Damore never argues that women's abilities are in question, except he very specifically does. Pinker is flatly wrong, as is anyone else defending Damore with that claim and accusing others of not having read the memo: "I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership." Unless you think he's arguing that alleged biological differences in women's abilities make them better in tech and leadership, but they're still underrepresented, which he's clearly not.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...ho-Chamber.pdf

[Draco-Onis]

You consistently cannot say anything coherent about the argument so you just immediately jump to discussing personas. Hint: neither Sessions nor Trump nor any other name is relevant. We are talking about a simple mathematical thing: if there are, say, 7:3 whites to non-whites applicable for the job and you discriminate against whites, you may arrive at the end result of 6:4 and you can't use the fact that there are still more whites than non-whites to say that you didn't discriminate. The latter has been your argument for the entirety of this thread and it is plainly wrong, this is very basic stuff.

Your magical numbers have no basis in fact, the fact is you cannot argue that you are being discriminated against based on race and sex when you are overwhelmingly represented in positions of power. The silly notion of white racism is a joke and an insult to real racism that minorities are and have faced. But whatever helps feed your victim complex, if this was a liberal you would be calling them snowflakes.

[Karfal]

Everyone with a brain knew about this. He has a case, but not before the anti American judges on the west coast. Take it to the supreme court, doubt he could afford all those appeals though.

[I Push Buttons]

Discriminate for being what? Not white or asian since those two groups are the hired the most

https://www.statista.com/chart/10640...-demographics/

So he got fired for being a freaking asshole nothing more.

And?

SJWs often allege the NBA and NFL are racist organizations and discriminate against blacks despite >70% of players in both of them being black.

Asians are discriminated against in Ivy League admissions despite having far more representation at the schools relative to the size of their population compared to everyone else.

Women are 50% of the workforce and many claim they are discriminated against in the workplace everywhere.

Just because a certain subset of people make up a large portion of some organization doesn't mean that organization can't discriminate against them.

[Soxoffender]

I'd be surprised if this is intended as a real case and not some sort of grift to maintain relevance in culture-war circles. Per the linked article, Google is also being sued for discriminating against women so it'll be interesting to see how these two separate cases play out.

[matt4pack]

Your magical numbers have no basis in fact, the fact is you cannot argue that you are being discriminated against based on race and sex when you are overwhelmingly represented in positions of power. The silly notion of white racism is a joke and an insult to real racism that minorities are and have faced. But whatever helps feed your victim complex, if this was a liberal you would be calling them snowflakes.

Your whole premise is absolutely stupid. So because something might happen more often to one group it can be completely dismissed when it happens to someone in another group?

That is some ridiculous rational there. Then you cry about victim complex. People like you invented the victim olympics.

[Draco-Onis]

Your whole premise is absolutely stupid. So because something might happen more often to one group it can be completely dismissed when it happens to someone in another group?

That is some ridiculous rational there. Then you cry about victim complex. People like you invented the victim olympics.

Nope let me put it in terms you can understand imagine if a black guy sued the NAACP for racial discrimination against blacks.

[jdbond592]

People, he was not discriminated because he was a white male. How else did he get the job? He was fired because he was white, male and a conservative to boot!


Either he will win or he will soon file for bankruptcy. Either way, no tech company will hire him, ever. Perhaps he can get a job at fox news? This is how your throw your life away.

[Deleted]

https://youtu.be/6NOSD0XK0r8

Has anyone in this thread even listen to the guy speak, things said in this thread are borderline slander.

Yes Google literally having blacklists on you because you have a certain political view is discrimination, this is not a racial thing it's a political thing.

I feel downright sick reading shit in this thread because everyone is misrepresentating this guy.

[I Push Buttons]

Nope let me put it in terms you can understand imagine if a black guy sued the NAACP for racial discrimination against blacks.

Are you saying, if such a thing were to occur, his accusation of his rights being violated should be dismissed offhandedly with no trial/evidence?

That it is impossible for people to discriminate against someone of their own race?

[Draco-Onis]

Are you saying, if such a thing were to occur, his accusation of his rights being violated should be dismissed offhandedly with no trial/evidence?

That it is impossible for people to discriminate against someone of their own race?

It's impossible to claim you are being discriminated against and being stopped from advancing when the vast majority of the leadership and the organization is of your own race.

[I Push Buttons]

It's impossible to claim you are being discriminated against and being stopped from advancing when the vast majority of the leadership and the organization is of your own race.

So if there is a white CEO in a company that is 70% white people and white people hold most of the managerial roles.

And the CEO implements a diversity policy that says "no more whites will be promoted to managerial positions, we need diversity..."

That is not discrimination to you?