Many Google employees disagree with the firing of the memo writer

[DonFerrari]

Soundwave said:

DonFerrari said:

Someone could arguee that he said they were inferior. But he were talking more about difference in interest and not in capacity, and that the capability distribution of the male and female population are different but there is a very big overlap. So in a way even arguing he said women are inferior he didn't said all women are inferior to men. It would be like a female could be better than any male and vice-versa at something, but on the average population men are better with math and woman are better at team work and things like that. But that hiring anyone based on the steriotype would be dumb, same on policies, each of those would need to look at each individual person traits. But aknowledging the differences between people and groups they could tailor better their diversity driver in a way that would attract more individuals of that group they want without having to make discrimination.

Like, if a reason for females to not thrive to CEO positions or engineering is the long hours and stress, allow someone to be part-time engineer without discrimination, take a little of the burden of the CEO so that a mother can have the position without leaving the childs behind, etc.

Women can't handle stress huh? I'd like to see a man take four hours to push a baby out of his asshole and see how cool he is under pressure, lol. How many men can deal with a baby yelling in their face for 20+ hours a day? I'd say working in an office is child's play compared to that. 

To be honest too the math thing is not really my experience, in my experience the girls in my junior high and high school classes often scored higher in math. White males ironically were actually probably the lowest testing group. 

A lot of these studies are not conclusive. IMO most of this stuff is because of cultural issues, girls are pushed very hard to like certain types of things from a young age, as are boys, but if you reversed that I would say in many fields you would probably see a flip. 

I believe you already got your answer on stress so I won't go there.

You take your opinion and your personal experience as statistics so it's useless to point how wrong you are... unless I would decide to say women are dumb because I had better grades than any female in my high school IN EVERY SINGLE SUBJECT.

Stop pushing your opinion as fact. The very single fact point in the memo that on almost ALL countries the same phenomenon is observable through out history shows that it isn't simply a cultural thing. Each country is very different from one another, but most of them will have several similarities that comes from the real standard for people from biological level. Like murder not being condoned, about any place you go they only accept that or honor that in case of war or defense, but there isn't any significant culture that support killing of your own family.

Soundwave said:

nanorazor said:
Google should have gave a proper warning instead.

The damage was done. Other female employees were already complaining that they didn't want to work with him and that's fair on their part IMO. 

If you're a white man, would you want to work alongside someone who believes you to be biologically inferior and easily rattled by stress? Probably not. 

Even if Google has to settle out of court it's easily worth it to prevent more spread of poor PR ... they are a company that makes products after all that are used by a lot of women (go figure) and that kind of toxic PR would've likely led to a boycott of their products/services if Google did not act. And that is the free market. People can vote with their wallets, and when over 50% of the marketplace is women, you better bet your ass that group carries a lot of sway. 

Yep the stress of a memo is so big you have to take the day off.

Well I'm sure there are a lot of women here in the company that think I'm inferior than then just by being a man and all that "potential hapist" as well. I still come to work and don't ask them to be fired.

That only shows people doesn't understand thing, aren't accepting freedom of speech and only reacts without any understanding in knee-jerk.

Soundwave said:

StarDoor said:

Red herring fallacy. Women aren't constantly giving birth throughout their entire lives, so it really has no bearing on anyone's average ability to handle stress. Especially as childbirth is female-exclusive and a necessity for any species' continued existence. Obviously women are biologically equipped to handle that, otherwise the species would die off. Why not compare stressful situations that women and men actually experience?

To be honest too the math thing is not really my experience, in my experience the girls in my junior high and high school classes often scored higher in math. White males ironically were actually probably the lowest testing group. 

A lot of these studies are not conclusive. IMO most of this stuff is because of cultural issues, girls are pushed very hard to like certain types of things from a young age, as are boys, but if you reversed that I would say in many fields you would probably see a flip. 

It seems you have issues in separating individuals from averages, hence your reliance on anecdotes.

In reality, the statement "men, on average, are better at math than women" is supported by statistical evidence:
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/2013/TotalGroup-2013.pdf

Whether you look at SAT, ACT, PISA, or any other standardized test, males do better in the math section. In the SAT data, we can see that the gap has been a little over 30 points for the past 40 years. This difference is even more pronouced at the higher ends, because females have a slightly smaller standard deviation, meaning that their scores are more concentrated around the average, with less at the very high or very low levels of performance. For example, while there are 90 males for every 100 females in the 500-590 range (slightly above average,) there are 165 males for every 100 females who scored 700 or above.

I'm not even sure why you brought up race at all, as no one was discussing that. Was that supposed to be a "Take that!" against white guys or something? In any case, your anecdotes go against the actual data which show that white males score the third highest of any group, only behind Asian males and Asian females.

The studies are only inconclusive to people who feel threatened by the conclusions.

Once again, you conflate individuals with collectives. Either you did not read the memo at all, or you did not understand its contents. Human traits occur in a bell curve distribution, so there will be significant overlap even if group averages are different. This is why people should be judged as individuals rather than as groups. Of course, the author barely even mentioned abilities at all, and merely commented on the differences in personality and interests that could lead to differing outcomes, so your nonsense about anyone being "biologically inferior" is just purposeful mischaracterization of the argument.

Pretty sure he citied things like women not being able to cope with stress and other factors. The bottom line is this ... this guy might be able to program but he's not socially the brightest bulb in the pack. 

Unless he wants to work at a gay club or plans to immigrate to Saudi Arabia, maybe it should have dawned on him that he probably would have to work alongside women, and such a memo likely wasn't going to be a big hit with the women he'd have to work with making him a corporate liability plain and simple. 

Nope he didn't said women can't cope. He said they are less willing to cope with stress just to get the status of the top positions, since you know, there are options to those carreers that may please them a lot more.

So should we fire all left-wing people on a company that think people on the right are facists, heartless, egotistics, money hungry people? Because that is on a much personal and direct form. Because you see, saying only left wing are good people and that EVERY right wing is bad is a lot more direct attack than saying women in general are less interested in that work which doesn't mean their females coworkers aren't, but that several women that aren't there just aren't because they don't really want it.

Soundwave said:

Slimebeast said:

You still seem to have problems with understanding differences on the group level versus the individual level.

If Damore claims that the underrepresentation of women at Google is largely explained by the fact that women on average are being less interested in things versus people, and are less competitive and assertive than men are on average, why should women who work there feel attacked as individuals?

And are you truly so dogmatic that you refuse to believe that women could be more prone than men are to neuroticism and to certain forms of stress?

What I found most HILARIOUS about this entire Google "anti-diversity" memo hysteria.....is when all those precious, snowflake types couldn't go to work that day! The memo was "violence", so they had to avoid work. If that isn't NEUROTIC and not being able to handle "stress" (in this case, the ONLY person under stress was the guy who was unjustly fired, HELLO!), I don't know what it.  Absolutely priceless.

Those are pretty vague comments. I'd say the "stress" of working in a fucking office is pretty tame compared to the stress of pushing a baby out of your vagina, or having a screaming todler in your face for 18 hours a day, but that's just a wild guess. I think women can cope with stress just fine, probably moreso than men in many differing ways honestly.

But lets base it all on a study on toddlers who stared about objects for a seconds? 

There is no definitive "study" that shows one way or the other, it's more likely in my opinion that a lot of our gender roles are simply culturally based. If you had an island where you raised 50 kids and you highly incentivized work with computers for women and hair styling for men, I think women would probably domiante the computer field in that scenario. It's not neccessarily anything to do with genetics. If testoreone is the key then why do the highest testoreone men tend to avoid "nerdy" jobs like computer programming like the plague. These are mostly cultural constructs and since the culture is changing (and it always is and always will continue to do so) so too can business culture. 

In any case, this dude basically killed his career since he likely can't be hired by any high profile company in his field now without controversey and no corporation needs that bullshit. 

You keep with you "my opinion contradicts studies".

Why don't you try the case of a boy that suffered mutilation on the penis when he was a toodler and the psycologist oriented the family to raise him as a girl and see how much the forcefull upbring was inneficient on changing the interest and biology of the boy.

And it's funny that we are so fast to accept that male are genetically stronger on phisicall level than women and that black are above white and asian on phisical also on genetic level... but it is totally unaceptable that there may be inteligence and capability differences between groups on genetical level as well.