The Manifesto Mr. Damore wrote, it's implications, facts, or opinions, the hostile work environment it creates, the action of Google firing him, and the consequences of all of the above.
-
I'm not entirely certain that the opinion of people who agree with Damore's poorly sourced, faulty logic is one that people should feel free to express and talk about in company meetings. This isn't a matter of "you don't agree with me, so shut up", it's a matter of "you have proven repeatedly that you don't know what you're talking about and are demanding that we put your ignorance on an even level of consideration with actual information". People who want to talk about how women are more emotional and men are more technical, thus gender gap in engineers really shouldn't feel entitled to be taken seriously. The lack of self-awareness - that by saying women aren't suited to tech like men while not realizing that these assumptions are exactly what women talk about when they say they're discouraged from entering tech - would be comedic if it wasn't so pervasive and damaging.
There's a point at which he says that diversity of race/sex/etc isn't important, but diversity of viewpoints is.
As if the overlap of these things is not almost a perfect circle.
Are there biological differences in men and women? Sure. No one sane is denying that. The issues is how relevant those differences are vs how relevant other factors might be. Instead of saying "women are more interested in people, men are interested in things", maybe we should talk about how women who overcome this immense handicap* and show they are skilled and talented still face rejection and opposition simply for being women.
People like Damore feel like they need to boil everything down to political left/right points on a line because that means they can then say every opinion is inherently of equal worth, it's just a matter of "bias". Trying to frame the conversation around the wrong things and being specifically antagonistic about pointless and unrelated items shows that he was clearly gunning for a fight. You don't get to his position and have his viewpoints without knowing "man if I release this to the company, it's going to cause a lot of pushback". No, he - like a lot of "politically incorrect heroes" before him - specifically wanted to spark a fight because he can't use logic or facts to back up his points. He has to have some sort of opposition to point at to say "see, they're ganging up on me, I must be right!"
Meanwhile, women who complain about sexism in tech are told not to be so confrontational. Or less confrontational. Whatever level of assertive you are, ladies, is wrong. But Damore gets to put his hand to his forehead and declare he's a martyr while looking for a fainting couch on some craphead's YouTube channel.
(*edited to denote sarcasm here)
Now we will get to see what happens when a whole bunch of employees start taking it upon themselves to whistleblow anything and everything that even slightly triggers them. This is no longer about what is best for Google, it's about individuals making sure their chosen tribe gets to score points.
Have you considered the fact that the reason this gained traction was not because someone circulated something that "even slightly triggers them" and actually because it is hugely sexist and is an extremely good example of the problems women have to cope with and are often protected?
-
The "your stifling the marketplace of ideas by publicly shaming this guy" argument that many people (not just here) are using seems either disingenuous or just not thought through.
The marketplace of ideas only works if really bad ideas are viciously culled. If I were to claim that the earth isn't "round" or "flat", but is in fact shaped like a giant chocolate frosted doughnut, the marketplace of ideas framework says my idea *should* be mocked and my judgement on anything else *should* be suspect. Similarly mocking/shaming Damore for his reprehensible views is not stifling the marketplace of ideas, it's the marketplace of ideas working.
Now threats of violence, vandalism, etc. certainly aren't justified by this reasoning. Threats do stifle the marketplace of ideas. There are threats against the people who spoke out against Damore and implicit threats to anyone else who might want to speak up, and I am sure there are some people threatening Damore. These threats are examples of the marketplace of ideas breaking down.
I see all of those threats as very bad, but also very different from criticism of his ideas as abhorrent, questions about his fitness to work in the industry, or even statements that he is a bad person for holding the views that he does. I see the vast majority of Damore's critics (and all of his critics that I have seen here) engaging in criticism not threats.
I see the marketplace of ideas as very similar to the economic free market; both usually work pretty well, both are far from perfect, both suffer from over regulation, both require a certain amount of regulation to function. If a business can't function while following the rules about workplace safety, paying a minimum wage etc. the collapse of that business is a feature not a bug. If you can't advance abhorrent counterfactual sexist ideas without being ostracized from polite society, that is a feature not a bug.
@bandit
What exactly are you defending then? You are saying he should be free to be horrible because "freedom and marketplace of ideas" but we are saying free speech isn't free from consequences. You're defending ideas and hypotheticals while actual humans are being forced to suffer and be silent.
I get so tired of these longwinded defense of hypothetical "what ifs" that ultimately defend and empower bigots and misogynists.
I mean, I appreciate your participation and input but what is it you stand for, Burr?
As a Woman in Tech, I Realized: These Are Not My People - Bloomberg View
by Megan McArdle
The Google memo, saying women aren't very into engineering, reached a similar conclusion.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...
To be honest I read this and thought, "These aren't my people either". You get to a point, even as a male in the industry, where you want to do something else in your free time. That's when age-ism kicks in.
Sexism is rampant in the IT industry, but if there's any truth to the above it's that the industry selects for people willing to have no personal life as well.
@bandit
What exactly are you defending then?
I think it's that an idea's originator should get to control the dissemination of that idea? And that people for whom the idea was not originally intended shouldn't get to hear it or comment on it? Maybe? I'm not sure.
Bloo Driver wrote:bandit0013 wrote:Now we will get to see what happens when a whole bunch of employees start taking it upon themselves to whistleblow anything and everything that even slightly triggers them. This is no longer about what is best for Google, it's about individuals making sure their chosen tribe gets to score points.
Have you considered the fact that the reason this gained traction was not because someone circulated something that "even slightly triggers them" and actually because it is hugely sexist and is an extremely good example of the problems women have to cope with and are often protected?
Have you considered how frustrating it is to be told in this thread over and over "that it's sexist" when I haven't once disputed it, agreed that he should be terminated, and instead was warning about how the manner in which other people went about things is going to cause more issues for Google and it's workers?
Peace out. :)
I wasn't saying that because I thought you didn't know, I was saying that to point out how you were making a very bad equivocation.
But I've seen a couple people put forth that the pain caused by airing out this manifesto is worse than if it were kept quiet and I'm not at all sure that I agree. See, a huge amount of people think that there is really no issue with sexism and tech, or it's not that bad, or women are just being oversensitive. Airing it out into the sunshine gives a great opportunity to start a dialogue that look, here's the kind of attitudes we put up with on the regular. And it isn't just a he-said she-said story, it's something that was provably said at one of the most famous tech companies.
It's probably easy for many to think that the consequences of publicly airing this manifesto are worse because it doesn't seem to affect them personally if everything is kept quiet and the blatant sexism and toxic culture of the tech industry continues to go on perpetually. When questioned, they might agree that it's wrong, but yes, it's all better if no one really talks about it and it can somehow blow over on its own when the perpetrators of this toxic culture wake up one day and magically decide that they aren't going to be toxic anymore. Who wants violence anyway, and if a few billion women and other minorities have to suffer over the years, decades, centuries, while the perpetrators are figuring all of these things out on their own in this unintentional journey of enlightenment, then that's so much better (for me) than a few people getting doxxed or death threats or even *gasp* some consequence that could come to affect ME in some way. Horrors! Let everything please go back to the way it was before this happened, and quickly!
Great article. I hope people read.
I really like this quote from the article:
folks who feel safe at work don’t realize that what’s an interesting intellectual issue for them is sometimes quite literally life and death for women, people of color and other minorities.
nice although it's assumption Damore acted in good faith is massively under cut by his immediate jump to monetization and the alt-right.
nice although it's assumption Damore acted in good faith is massively under cut by his immediate jump to monetization and the alt-right.
Unfortunately, many of the people who defend Damore are assuming he's acting in good faith so it's a compromise you have to make if you want to discuss the topic. Also, you may be debating with someone who feels that the author's citations and logic should support themselves regardless of the intent of the author.
I'm seeing a bunch of commenters and political pundits elsewhere who are saying things like "I disagree with the memo but it had some points about the science--" Yeah. I'm going to stop right there and post these links:
I'm a woman in computer science. Let me ladysplain the Google memo to you.
Thanks for that link Gremlin. Was a really well written piece
I really like this quote from the article:
folks who feel safe at work don’t realize that what’s an interesting intellectual issue for them is sometimes quite literally life and death for women, people of color and other minorities.
I'm going maybe put myself in the targeting reticles again but honestly that's the one quote from the article that kind of puts me off. I'm speaking purely as someone living in Canada and what I think is widely considered fairly (still way behind where it should be rights wise) progressive. So I am not speaking about women in a lot of under developed countries.
I am trying to write this as delicately as possible, and will be more then willing to hear another side that maybe I am not seeing as a man. That said I see the statement of women feeling threatened for their life often at work, and it almost sells it as a life and death struggle. For me it almost tarnishes the actual argument. As mentioned earlier I have a daughter and wife, also a sister and mother, I have worked and am friends with many females. Never have any of them been physically threatened to the point of death at the workplace. I think when this type of language is used to make the stakes high it takes away from the very valid points about equal rights and discrimination. I don't doubt that there have been incidents like this but when used in such a sweeping generalization and charged language such as life or death that it actually takes something away from the argument.
Hopefully my meaning comes across, and I am again more then willing to hear differing opinions. Just stating what I feel as a 36 year old middle class dude.
I hope that dudes will take a break and let the ladies handle this response. I hope they feel comfortable enough with the question to do so.
I hope that dudes will take a break and let the ladies handle this response. I hope they feel comfortable enough with the question to do so.
I don't know. It is something that seems so obvious to me that I'm not sure that I even know how to argue it. It just IS. However, I will say that "life and death" isn't always about one's physical life being threatened as in outright murder, but in ways where one's life is effectively incapacitated in some way, such as with PTSD or emotional trauma. One's life becomes much "less" as a result of abuse in whatever forms such things take. Calling it a life or death thing is not an overreaction as one can be very much dead in spirit while still being physically alive.
SallyNasty wrote:I hope that dudes will take a break and let the ladies handle this response. I hope they feel comfortable enough with the question to do so.
I don't know. It is something that seems so obvious to me that I'm not sure that I even know how to argue it. It just IS. However, I will say that "life and death" isn't always about one's physical life being threatened as in outright murder, but in ways where one's life is effectively incapacitated in some way, such as with PTSD or emotional trauma. One's life becomes much "less" as a result of abuse in whatever forms such things take. Calling it a life or death thing is not an overreaction as one can be very much dead in spirit while still being physically alive.
Very fair thanks for the explanation and clarification.
I think this quote from the article helps clarify the more direct threat also:
"But it’s because women face a very real presence of physical violence when they are visible in digital communities. We men face shame and firing if we say the wrong thing. Women face the same plus rape threats, death threats, and all kinds of sustained harassment. So women can’t speak up safely and therefore they would have to watch their male colleagues discuss how a woman’s brain determines her interests. How impossibly maddening that would be."
Great quorate link gremlin. Ty.
Roughneckgeek thanks for the post, that is a very relatable and understandable story. I can see the injustice there and agree that many workplaces are still way behind with ethical treatment and equal rights.
I don't want to devalue someone's spirits being crushed or them feeling like they can't go on. Having the life or death thing explained that way helps clarify a little. I just think the way the language is sometimes used as an outsider trying to understand can be hard. I feel like it should be just as valid to say women have to deal with harassment that is intolerable in the workplace, without having to say things like life threatening. That language is being used to escalate something and conjure thoughts of a physical threat, when honestly an emotional threat is just as valid.
I think it would be much easier to get men (like me) actively into the fight for women's rights if the language was different. I can't relate to a woman having her life threatened at work I've never seen it, I have seen sexual harassment and know it is an all to real problem. The language is being used to catch the attention and show the threat but I still think in a broader sense it hurts a stance.
I can't relate to a woman having her life threatened at work I've never seen it, I have seen sexual harassment and know it is an all to real problem. The language is being used to catch the attention and show the threat but I still think in a broader sense it hurts a stance.
Why should you need to see it or relate to it to take it seriously? Why is exhaustive explanation required for empathy and respect basic humanity?
Rave wrote:I can't relate to a woman having her life threatened at work I've never seen it, I have seen sexual harassment and know it is an all to real problem. The language is being used to catch the attention and show the threat but I still think in a broader sense it hurts a stance.
Why should you need to see it or relate to it to take it seriously? Why is exhaustive explanation required for empathy and respect?
Personally I don't need to relate I do take it seriously I was using that as an example. I'm just explaining why I think these battle lines are sometimes drawn and saying why I think women are often met with hostility, or people like Damore get unwarranted defense.
I live in the real world where most people are more empathetic and respectful when they can relate or put themselves in someone else shoes. It's unfortunate but the truth.
I'm obliviously not going to change the language behind feminism, really I was just making a point about why that was the one quote in that article I had a problem with and why.
I'm sorry if I've come off as less understanding, agreesive or offensive in some way. Not my intent at all.
I'm sorry if I've come off as less understanding, agreesive or offensive in some way. Not my intent at all.
You're coming across as not wanting to show basic empathy for the several stories posted by women in this thread unless you have your hand held, your hair stroked, and your sensitive feelings protected from any possibility of having to hear hurtful words that cause you to question your worldview.
There's every chance your wife, daughter, hell, all the women in your life have either tried to talk to you about situations they've faced like this, and given up, or have just recognized that you're not going to believe them, and clammed up.
This may be a relevant read for people (who aren't the minorities in question):
Film Crit Hulk SMASH: On Criticism In The Intersectional Age
Do you want to know the contents of a memo that wouldn't have caused all this fuss?
"I'm concerned that our policies supporting diversity hiring aren't working as intended, I'd like to learn more and maybe be part of an effort to come up with better policies. Who would I talk to in HR about this?"
The fact that wasn't the sum total of the guy's memo speaks volumes.
I can't recall any particular time when I've felt my life threatened as in my co-worker might physically kill or assault me. I can recall many times when I've felt my livelihood threatened as in the fear of harassment or lack of opportunity driving me out of the tech world, and the worry about how I will support myself then. It's happened to better women than myself, that's for sure.
Despite graduating from a top school, I avoided most of the large, famous tech companies (like Google and Amazon) and all the trendy startups, because I've heard too many horror stories about treatment of women there (as well as lack of work-life balance). This has probably hurt my earning potential and career trajectory.
Even avoiding the notorious "techbro" environments there have been many times when I've been scared. One of my female co-workers noted to me the other day, "In college, when men got a C in a class they just shrugged it off and said 'eh, I don't really like that field anyway.' When women got a C they were devastated -- believing that they don't belong in coding at all."
I can corroborate. Every time I make a mistake, or don't want to work long hours because of an obligation, or have to ask a question that might be silly, or disagree with a co-worker in a meeting, I wonder if it is somehow proof that I don't belong here. When I'm giving a presentation about a design I created or some work I did, and questions get directed to a male co-worker who didn't even work on that project instead of me, I wonder what I could be doing better. I'm frightened to even ask for vacation, never mind a promotion or raise. I pounce at every ugly gruntwork assignment that no one else wants to prove that I am useful. It's tiring
I enjoy coding and like my job, but every day I worry that maybe I don't really belong and it's only a matter of time before the rug gets pulled out from under me and I have to find a new profession. I don't really know if it's truly different for men or if maybe they just don't admit it? I can't imagine life being any other way that constant overbearing anxiety, which is only partially related to my job. I guess I just don't know what it's like to actually feel comfortable and secure at work.
I hope that dudes will take a break and let the ladies handle this response. I hope they feel comfortable enough with the question to do so.
I am going to follow your advice. I think I have contributed to the discussion here, but I have also learned (and yes it took me a while) that I learn things I never knew I didn't know when I shut up and listen.
Pages