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

[Orange Joe]

I never said they lost. But I'm not the one desperately hoping he can't sue.

No you're the one attributing sentiments that no one really feels about the case.


I'm here discussing it because it is interesting to me and passes time for me. I have no personal interest on whether some idiot from Cali can sue his old boss.

There is no "desperate" or "hoping" here.

If he gets to take it to court, great. Even better if he wins, But I personally don't see it happening.

[Martymark]

It is illegal to fire someone for bringing awful press to a business?

Then they should fire the employee who leaked the memo, and sue newspapers for lying about what it said.

[igualitarist]

This is a dishonest dodge. His claim is that an 80/20 discrepancy in favor of men can in part be explained by biological differences in women's abilities. You don't get points because he doesn't actually use the word "worse"--he didn't have to.

No, this is dishonest. He claims that biological factors may also explain the discrepancy in favor of men in STEM fields, and we may be making a mistake considering only cultural factors on this equation.

[Deleted]

"Women aren't as frequently represented in tech or leadership in part due to biological differences regarding their preferences and abilities."

I.e. women are less well equipped for technology and leadership positions by virtue of being women.

It's not hard.

No, I'm not seeing it.
If we prefer it less, we'll be less represented. Doesn't say anything about capability or equipment to perform well or be "less suited".

Why we prefer it less is a more interesting question that has to do with historic asymmetries and education.
But as is presented, including both abilities with preferences, I don't see what you're concluding.

[Endus]

Differ=/=worse

But keep trying.

When you're saying those differences in biological ability result in lower representations in tech and leadership roles, you're explicitly saying those differences make them "worse" at those things.

He might not have used the term "worse", specifically, but he was arguing they were worse, regardless. Synonyms exist, y'know.

[Elegiac]

You pulled that out of an area where he talks about distribution of stats. He doesn't say women are bad, men are good. He's saying by biological design it's more likely a man will have the characteristics suited for that field than a woman will. Doesn't mean there aren't women engineers who are good. Doesn't mean there aren't shitty male engineers.

Despite there being no evidence to suggest that women are intellectually less suited for STEM since all the 'studies' to that effect don't control for social factors.

Kay', Felicia.

[pionock]

Man, imagine if there was actually statistical evidence regarding the discrepancy in physical strength but nothing indicating as such for intellectual faculties in certain fields beyond the impacts of sociocultural bias.

- - - Updated - - -



Do you know what "abilities" means?

So are you saying that sociocultural bias explains why there is an even bigger disparity in the Scandinavian countries when it comes to professions like nursing and engineers? The same Scandinavia that did everything they could to eliminate any possible factor in men and women's choices in careers?

[Saucexorzski]

I'd say that white men of all backgrounds have benefited for so long from de facto affirmative action that their perspectives are more than adequately represented. I'm sure that anything that seeks to take the thumb off the scales for white men feels threatening, but, as has been said elsewhere, there's a difference between feeling sorry for yourself and actually being a victim.

If putting a thumb on the scales is bad, why do you propose that as the solution?

[ro9ue]

Despite there being no evidence to suggest that women are intellectually less suited for STEM since all the 'studies' to that effect don't control for social factors.

Kay', Felicia.

It has nothing to do with intellect. It has to do with interest.

[igualitarist]

Doesn't make it any less bullshit, lol.

Why the idea men and women have biological differences so hard to accept ?

[Dextroden]

No you're the one attributing sentiments that no one really feels about the case.


I'm here discussing it because it is interesting to me and passes time for me. I have no personal interest on whether some idiot from Cali can sue his old boss.

There is no "desperate" or "hoping" here.

If he gets to take it to court, great. Even better if he wins, But I personally don't see it happening.

Sweet. I think he has a case. He could totally get dismissed or lose.

But saying "at will" doesn't dry up his case anymore than "right to work" counters pay disputes.

[Elegiac]

It has nothing to do with intellect. It has to do with interest.

Which is not what Damore was claiming. Shocker.

[agentsi]

I don't buy that. Sure there will be some exceptions, but I think a far bigger issue is the a subgroup of white males with a narcissistic victim complex who misconstrue giving the other demographic groups a chance as racism/sexism towards them.

I am not convinced that there is anywhere in the world that a white male has a harder time achieving success than any other demographic. The so called "discriminatory practices" that are often touted generally serve to help level a playing field which a strong pro-white male bias to start with.

Company policies aimed at balancing demographics aren't about creating discrimination, it's actually the complete opposite, just that a lot of people can't or won't see it. Here's an example:

One canditate is a white male. Like most other white males, he was born into relatively well off family and was given all the things he needed, even from before birth, to help him get ahead of those born into less fortunate circumstances. Unsurprisingly, for very little effort on his part, he does well at school and goes to university where he puts in a moderate amount of effort and scores in the top 5%.

The other canditate is a black female, born and raised in a single parent environment where mom has to work 3 shifts just to keep their heads above the proverbial water. She goes to a shitty school, is given no additional help to grow and learn and everything is a struggle. Against the odds she gets good enough grades to make it to university (barely) and then has to work extra hard to try and keep up in spite of her inferior school education. On top of that she has to work nights to pay for her studies and to support her now-out-of-work mother. She graduates with a pass mark.

Now, when it comes to the job market, of course the white male wants to be judged according to his marks. But in the end who would the better canditate for the job be? The guy who barely had to raise a sweat to achieve his success? Or maybe the girl who shed blood sweat and tears to get to where she did?

Honestly, it's not even a contest. The better employee will almost certainly be the one with the better work ethic. And there is no way in hell you're going to establish that simply by looking at grades. You have to consider the context of each individual. Simply put, lower grades from a person who comes from a disadvantaged background might often mean more than higher grades from someone who comes from a more priveleged background. That is not "unfair discrimination". It's the opposite.

Holy sh*t dude... You are racist beyond words, and have an EXTREMELY distorted view of reality.

News flash, there are MORE white people living in poverty than any other racial group in America. But when this is put into percentages, other races APPEAR to be larger. Which is why most statistics use percentages instead of raw numbers. If gives the illusion of white people being the least poor. In fact, it's this way for everything. Since when is being white and poor been beneficial? It's NEVER been about race, it's about class. If you're born into a poor family, there is an EXTREME likelihood that you will be poor when you grow up. This has zero to do with race. Most white males are not born into that life, in fact an extremely small percentage are. Education is not stressed in these communities, white or black, in the poor areas. It's just not. Social acceptance is a far bigger commodity, and the only way to get that is to be dumb and fit in. If you do well in school in these poor areas, you will be treated like sh*t, literally.

My family grew up on government assistance for most of my life, it wasn't until I was 14 that my mother / step-father were able to stand on their own feet and provide without help. 99% of my friends that I grew up with, still live in that lifestyle because that's all they know. Somehow, I was able to move beyond that, but my brothers, and most of my other family wasn't as lucky.

So stop your bullsh*t hatred for white people, it has nothing to do with them. Blame the people who keep the poor poor, by limiting our education, perpetuating racial stereotypes, and genuinely trying to make us all hate one another. Because those people, are working on you very well. Seriously, stop being racist, it's f*cking disgusting.

[Dextroden]

I also can read English and can easily see he was talking about biological ability, too. Since he said so. Using the words "biological" and "ability", before you make up more nonsense about how paraphrasing is "lying", which is wackadoodle nonsensery.



The issue isn't that he's talking about "statistical distributions". It's that he had no credible evidence to back his assertions of of why a weighted distribution is a natural outcome.

It is when used by you to introduce new words like misogyny.

Surprised you haven't gone lower and called him a Nazi yet.

[Hiricine]

To OP- I normally would not think that Damore has a shot. That being said, Google is based out of California, and the courts/Juries there are infamously completely insane along with the legislation in the state. If hes got a shot anywhere its there, even without knowing any of the specific claims hes trying to make.

[Elegiac]

So are you saying that sociocultural bias explains why there is an even bigger disparity in the Scandinavian countries when it comes to professions like nursing and engineers? The same Scandinavia that did everything they could to eliminate any possible factor in men and women's choices in careers?

Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.

[Dextroden]

Holy sh*t dude... You are racist beyond words, and have an EXTREMELY distorted view of reality.

News flash, there are MORE white people living in poverty than any other racial group in America. But when this is put into percentages, other races APPEAR to be larger. Which is why most statistics use percentages instead of raw numbers. If gives the illusion of white people being the least poor. In fact, it's this way for everything. Since when is being white and poor been beneficial? It's NEVER been about race, it's about class. If you're born into a poor family, there is an EXTREME likelihood that you will be poor when you grow up. This has zero to do with race. Most white males are not born into that life, in fact an extremely small percentage are. Education is not stressed in these communities, white or black, in the poor areas. It's just not. Social acceptance is a far bigger commodity, and the only way to get that is to be dumb and fit in. If you do well in school in these poor areas, you will be treated like sh*t, literally.

My family grew up on government assistance for most of my life, it wasn't until I was 14 that my mother / step-father were able to stand on their own feet and provide without help. 99% of my friends that I grew up with, still live in that lifestyle because that's all they know. Somehow, I was able to move beyond that, but my brothers, and most of my other family wasn't as lucky.

So stop your bullsh*t hatred for white people, it has nothing to do with them. Blame the people who keep the poor poor, by limiting our education, perpetuating racial stereotypes, and genuinely trying to make us all hate one another. Because those people, are working on you very well. Seriously, stop being racist, it's f*cking disgusting.

You can't be racist against white people, so sayeth the patron saint of racism Endus.

Or maybe I'm just paraphrasing.

[ro9ue]

When you're saying those differences in biological ability result in lower representations in tech and leadership roles, you're explicitly saying those differences make them "worse" at those things.

He might not have used the term "worse", specifically, but he was arguing they were worse, regardless. Synonyms exist, y'know.

Seems like you always want to put words in peoples mouths. Doesn't mean worse, could just mean lack of interest.

[Shaderas]

Eh, I guess I'm kind of in the middle. I don't know if I want him to win, or know that he will win; however, I think Google should use this as a wake up call, to make sure they make their workplace better for everyone (including white conservatives). Some of the screenshots shared, seemed pretty bad to me, but not necessarily enough to warrant a judgment against Google. Also, we're only getting what was shared, so we don't know what may have led up to those particular conversations that we only got to see the plaintiffs side of (screenshots that they posted as evidence).

From the evidence presented (and again, I strongly emphasize that we've only gotten to see the side of the story presented by the plaintiff thus far), it does paint a picture that if you are white and conservative, Google could care less about your opinions, and doesn't really want to hear from you. *shrug* I'll probably get flak from both people on the left and people on the right in here... to make an informed judgment though (for myself), I would need more information about what went on before the screenshots of those conversations that were shared (was the person inciting, using racist/sexist talk himself?)....

Just my two cents.

[Endus]

It is when used by you to introduce new words like misogyny.

Arguing that women's "abilities" are biologically less suited to broad-scale things like "tech and leadership" is definitively misogyny.

Shame on me for correctly labelling something. What next, attack me for saying an apple is "a fruit"?

Surprised you haven't gone lower and called him a Nazi yet.

You apparently enjoy mental masturbation, but could you at least do it in private? Nobody wants to see that.