[Discussion] James Damore and the Google Manifesto

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.

Tanglebones wrote:

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 sort of thing happens a lot. There was a period of time when I was little girl when I was bullied in school. I didn't feel my physical life was threatened, but it was relentless and went on every day for weeks, months, even the years I was at that school. Whenever I attempted to tell my family about it, I was either met with useless advice such as, "Ignore it and it will go away" or they would turn it all around on me, insisting that it must have been something I did to provoke it, and would tell me to stop doing whatever it was I was doing to cause it. This reaction was much more hurtful than the actual bullying, so I eventually learned to just shut up about it and suffer through it all in silence until I was finally able to get into an academic program that allowed me to transfer away from that school and away from those people. I had no issues whatsoever with bullying at the new school.

Now decades later, I have every reason to believe that if I ever confronted my family with it, they would claim to have no idea anything like that was going on. Which would likely be true, but true only because they didn't take me seriously and didn't listen.

Now imagine if you throw sexual harassment or racial bigotry on top of it all, and being in a situation where you can't just "move away" from being female or from having a skin color different from the dominant race. You end up just living with it, more often than not, and rarely discussing it, because people who don't experience it themselves don't see it as any big deal, and it's a very exhaustive task to have to keep trying to explain to people over and over and over the harm that is being done on every level, and yes, even sometimes a very dangerously physical level up to and including death threats and being killed for having the audacity just to speak up.

James Damore wrote:

...the facts.

Suzanne Sadedin wrote:

IMAGE(http://dailywrestlingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rock-SD-moments-gifs-001.gif)

This programmer thinking he knows more about biology than a biologist is like a software engineer thinking he knows more about human nutrition aw shit

I'm a woman in tech, let me ladysplain the Google memo

I thought this was a good read, particularly the parts about "divide and conquer" and how the sections on the "average" woman aren't okay.

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.

Part of the problem is that I've never found an adequate way to explain to someone who hasn't experienced it how these problems wear on you day after day and leave you exhausted and stressed (on top of everything else that might naturally leave you exhausted and stressed). Most experiences of sexism are not a big deal in isolation, it's the constant hammering that gets to you.

I feel like the conversation goes like:

Woman: So the man interrupted me mid-sentence and then explained to the group exactly what I was in the middle of saying, except everyone listened quietly to him.
Man: Yeah, that sucks. I had that happen to me once.
Woman: I mean, this happens multiple times in nearly every meeting for my entire life, including when it's a meeting I called to present specifically on work that I did.
Man: Have you tried being more assertive?

Gremlin wrote:

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

Thank you so much for this. As I read it, I had the looming realization that I've done exactly this in the past far too much.

It's not the mistake that destroys you. That's typically minor and fixable. But refusal to admit error usually leads to diving down dark and intellectually dishonest paths to try to rescue one's correctness.

peanut3141 wrote:

It's not the mistake that destroys you. That's typically minor and fixable. But refusal to admit error usually leads to diving down dark and intellectually dishonest paths to try to rescue one's correctness.

This is literally the story of my life. I empathize with people that struggle here. It can be very difficult. But on the other hand, it's often easy to tell who is trying and who isn't.

Demyx wrote:

I'm a woman in tech, let me ladysplain the Google memo

I thought this was a good read, particularly the parts about "divide and conquer" and how the sections on the "average" woman aren't okay.

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.

Part of the problem is that I've never found an adequate way to explain to someone who hasn't experienced it how these problems wear on you day after day and leave you exhausted and stressed (on top of everything else that might naturally leave you exhausted and stressed). Most experiences of sexism are not a big deal in isolation, it's the constant hammering that gets to you.

I feel like the conversation goes like:

Woman: So the man interrupted me mid-sentence and then explained to the group exactly what I was in the middle of saying, except everyone listened quietly to him.
Man: Yeah, that sucks. I had that happen to me once.
Woman: I mean, this happens multiple times in nearly every meeting for my entire life, including when it's a meeting I called to present specifically on work that I did.
Man: Have you tried being more assertive?

QFT. My job has become much more meetings-focused where I've been put in charge of keeping people on task and moving the meetings along to keep from spiraling into a bunch of side discussions. I've basically had to change my whole approach from my natural way of speaking into a bossy tyrant. This was made even more clear to me recently when one of the plant supervisors was introducing me to a new team lead told him "Listen to her in the meetings if you don't want to lose a limb, but really she's nice on the inside, just talk to her outside of the meetings to find out."

I kinda hate that I have to be two very different people to get my job done.

Tanglebones wrote:
Rave wrote:

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.

Sorry you feel like I've been using this thread to stroke my ego. I was trying to be as genuine and honest in every post I made.

I don't know if my poor writing skills don't really get what I am trying to say in posts very well. Or maybe I am not as nice a person as I think.

I am not to familiar with the posters on the boards everyone is an icon to me, I don't put a lot of thought into the sexual orientation of the person I am speaking to. I try to judge the content of the post on the post not on the person making it. So again if I have some how been offensive to the women posting I'm sorry truely. Honestly the posts come from the icons people use, it's a fault of mine I guess.

As for the comments about my family, I'll just say not everyone's a victim. I'm not going to justify my family relationship here because you don't like my posts.

I did read a lot of the posts and articles (haven't looked at that hulk?? thing yet) and appreciate anyone who took the time to talk/argue with me. Unless someone has something directly related to one of my posts or me though I'll avoid posting (I know I said this yesterday but conversation pulled me back) anymore on this.

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Rave wrote:

I am not to familiar with the posters on the boards everyone is an icon to me, I don't put a lot of thought into the sexual orientation of the person I am speaking to. I try to judge the content of the post on the post not on the person making it. So again if I have some how been offensive to the women posting I'm sorry truely. Honestly the posts come from the icons people use, it's a fault of mine I guess.

This is a good summary of why I don't post here much anymore. There are already plenty of other places on the internet where strangers have disembodied arguments with cardboard cutouts of people they don't care to know more about.

I'd like to think that if you're choosing to post here instead of shouting into the void that you're more well-rounded than that, but apparently I'm too idealistic, and I appreciate that you're being upfront about it.

It must be nice to not have to put a lot of thought into who you're talking to, though. I honestly can't relate to that.

The closest analogy I can make to what women and minorities experience in the workplace (and life in general) is that it's like having a chronic illness. It's a problem that was thrust upon you by forces beyond your control, it never goes away, and is a constant source of stress 24/7. It inevitably becomes a filter through which you see the world.

Sure, there are things you can do to manage the symptoms, but there's no cure. And people who don't suffer from it have a very hard time understanding all of this, so they don't take you seriously when symptoms act up, they think you're making it up and often they try to minimize your pain. So what happens? You just stop talking about it because you're so tired of people not getting it, not understanding. Having a chronic illness, I get it when I think about workplace harassment in this way.

Rave like I said before I appreciate your perspective, I think you're sincerely here to learn, and don't really deserve the criticism directed at you. But when you focus on the critiquing the details of the message, rather than the message itself, it does sound like you're not totally listening. If you want me information, instead of saying why must you use this language, it doesn't seem accurate, it's better to ask, "when you say x, what do you mean?" Or something like that. Asking for clarity is a better approach than implying judgment on someone's explanation of their personal experience.

Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

The closest analogy I can make to what women and minorities experience in the workplace (and life in general) is that it's like having a chronic illness. It's a problem that was thrust upon you by forces beyond your control, it never goes away, and is a constant source of stress 24/7. It inevitably becomes a filter through which you see the world...

So much this. While not equating it to death threats, it should not be assumed to be simply an occasional upsetting nuisance. There is a certain degree of resignation, of despair, and hopelessness, in knowing that you'll be facing it day in and out, in any number of ways... sometimes, it's like metaphorical death from a thousand papercuts that never stop coming.

An average workday of having your own work field mansplained to you, to being interrupted / talked over, to having to assert your boundaries to protect your personal life, having men attempt to intimidate you (happens a lot in my office at the courthouse), belittle you, demean you, ogle you, sneer at you... the ridiculous emotional labor forced on you in order to be a 'team player' that is just assumed to be your purview...

Every day I work I deal with one or more of these. It isn't surprising, and it isn't usually worth it to complain. You pick your battles. I've rambled long enough, and I could go on, but my point is that mine is not a rare case. So many women deal with this every day. It is absolutely, positively exhausting. Disheartening. And many times, frightening.

Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

In fairness, it protects some more than others.

Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

cheeze_pavilion wrote:
Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

Can't speak for everyone, but if I thought anyone on this site was an out-and-out mysoginst or racist I would report the things they said to mods and expect it was handled in some fashion. At least adjudicated.

I wouldn't call them a mysoginist. So my one vote is that it's partly process. Also words matter. Otherwise what are we doing here?

DSGamer wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

Can't speak for everyone, but if I thought anyone on this site was an out-and-out mysoginst or racist I would report the things they said to mods and expect it was handled in some fashion. At least adjudicated.

I wouldn't call them a mysoginist. So my one vote is that it's partly process. Also words matter. Otherwise what are we doing here?

Talking to people who are, literally in some cases, stating that words DON'T matter.

The cognitive dissonance is f*cking staggering.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

Can't speak for everyone, but if I thought anyone on this site was an out-and-out mysoginst or racist I would report the things they said to mods and expect it was handled in some fashion. At least adjudicated.

I wouldn't call them a mysoginist. So my one vote is that it's partly process. Also words matter. Otherwise what are we doing here?

Talking to people who are, literally in some cases, stating that words DON'T matter.

The cognitive dissonance is f*cking staggering.

Are you accusing me of having "f*cking staggering" cognitive dissonance? I promise you I'm not. I realize that arguing in good faith with people who aren't is difficult and frustrating. There's a burden to dealing with people like that if you want to remain civil.

DSGamer wrote:
Dr.Ghastly wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

Can't speak for everyone, but if I thought anyone on this site was an out-and-out mysoginst or racist I would report the things they said to mods and expect it was handled in some fashion. At least adjudicated.

I wouldn't call them a mysoginist. So my one vote is that it's partly process. Also words matter. Otherwise what are we doing here?

Talking to people who are, literally in some cases, stating that words DON'T matter.

The cognitive dissonance is f*cking staggering.

Are you accusing me of having "f*cking staggering" cognitive dissonance? I promise you I'm not. I realize that arguing in good faith with people who aren't is difficult and frustrating. There's a burden to dealing with people like that if you want to remain civil.

Are you the one arguing that this asshole's manifesto and other such things cause no harm? No? Then there's your answer.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
Dr.Ghastly wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
Certis wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:
Garden Ninja wrote:

No personal attacks. This includes labeling community members. - Certis

Calling a misogynist a misogynist is not a personal attack. It's a statement of the facts.

You consistently siding with bigots and modding marginalized people for failing to be deferential to said bigots is a large part of why a great many of us do not feel safe in GWJ. I thought we were supposed to be better than the internet at large.

You don't get to decide who someone is. You can call out the behavior and give your reasons why, but you don't get to label the individuals here. It's an incredibly important distinction and it protects everyone.

The subject matter itself suggests an explanation--when someone labels another poster as a bigot, they're saying that person makes this a hostile posting environment. They're asking HR (i.e. the mods) to fix the environment by getting that person out of here. When you don't get that person out of here, people see you as a boss who won't move the problematic person out of the office.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

Can't speak for everyone, but if I thought anyone on this site was an out-and-out mysoginst or racist I would report the things they said to mods and expect it was handled in some fashion. At least adjudicated.

I wouldn't call them a mysoginist. So my one vote is that it's partly process. Also words matter. Otherwise what are we doing here?

Talking to people who are, literally in some cases, stating that words DON'T matter.

The cognitive dissonance is f*cking staggering.

Are you accusing me of having "f*cking staggering" cognitive dissonance? I promise you I'm not. I realize that arguing in good faith with people who aren't is difficult and frustrating. There's a burden to dealing with people like that if you want to remain civil.

Are you the one arguing that this asshole's manifesto and other such things cause no harm? No? Then there's your answer.

I'm confused. I didn't weigh in on the manifesto. I weighed in on whether it's cool to call someone a mysoginist vs. having that discussion over PMs with a mod. Why did you reply to me if that wasn't for me?

I was referring to Malor/Rave talking about how words don't matter and that THEY have cognitive dissonance on this.

In the thirteen years I've been running the site I've been consistent in asking people to call out the behavior rather than just slapping labels on the poster. If nothing else, it's a conversation killer.

"The things you're saying are misogynistic, here's why," actually keep us moving. Posting "You're a misogynist" and leaving it at that might feel good but it it sucks in a debate and discussion forum. Especially when it's your only contribution to the thread.

The post also said "And you completely lack the ability of introspection" which was a personal attack. That's the whole of it.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:

I was referring to Malor/Rave talking about how words don't matter and that THEY have cognitive dissonance on this.

So I beg you, next time please don't reply to me without being clear I wasn't being responded to. Things are so heated right now I assumed it was a retort to what I said.

Or is this a procedure thing? Are you just trying to say that people need to ask you or the mods to make that person leave the thread/forum/site with a PM, and not with a post?

That would be preferable to asking moderators to read your mind, yes.

Certis wrote:

In the thirteen years I've been running the site I've been consistent in asking people to call out the behavior rather than just slapping labels on the poster. If nothing else, it's a conversation killer.

"The things you're saying are misogynistic, here's why," actually keep us moving. Posting "You're a misogynist" and leaving it at that might feel good but it it sucks in a debate and discussion forum. Especially when it's your only contribution to the thread.

I think the point is that, even granting for the sake of argument that the quality of the discussion will suffer, it's worth that loss in quality if the discussion makes people feel more safe here.

Maybe the solution is to let the people whose humanity is under 'debate' have whatever kind of conversation they want, and if we think it's a crappy conversation, then that's our problem.

Or just go full Thunderdome. I can't help but think that this middle-of-the-road approach makes most people unhappy.

Or just PM a mod (Hyp, Dee or myself) if you believe there's an issue or you don't feel safe.

That's about all the pontificating on moderation we need to derail with in this thread. Anyone is welcome to PM a mod if they want to discuss further.

I appreciate it, Certis, and I say this with the utmost respect - some conversations need to be had in the open not via pm.

Frankly after the cheeba debacle not all of us trust the moderation, which, with good intent, seems to favor the polite bigots.

SallyNasty wrote:

I appreciate it, Certis, and I say this with the utmost respect - some conversations need to be had in the open not via pm.

Frankly after the cheeba debacle not all of us trust the moderation, which with good intent seems to favor the polite bigots.

This. New posters who maybe don't feel comfortable PMing the guy who runs a podcast they're a fan of (for example) are supposed to what, just hope it's all been resolved and everyone feels comfortable? Pretty big bummer that the response to people not feeling safe posting is "you're doing it wrong."

Doesn't it still work to use arguments and not labels?

"Everything you just said feels mysoginist to me".

"I wish you would stop saying racist things like X which is racist because Y".

"I'm bouncing from this thread if you keep saying things that belittle women and minorities. This is not what we stand for here and this kind of talk is not something I give my time for, nor something our community should be subjected to".

There are ways to say you don't like the things a person says without saying "you are X". No?

DSGamer wrote:

Doesn't it still work to use arguments and not labels?

I dunno, let's test it.

"Everything you just said feels misogynist (ed.) to me".

"Gosh, people always say women take things too seriously. Am I just perpetuating this notion if I post it? Hmm, it is how I feel, so am I showing my belly and opening myself up for harassment here? This didn't end well that other time, or that one other time, or especially that time. Nah, never mind." /deletes post draft

"I wish you would stop saying racist things like X which is racist because Y".

"I'm not making an actual request here, just expressing my feelings. But folks probably going to lose their cool at 'racist' because lord knows no one ever sees that and calmly realizes I'm just calling out their behavior and has a moment of self-reflection. So they're going to take it personally no matter how carefully I word it, and then I am going to feel like a chump because I did the female-coded 'I wish/wouldn't it be nice' thing that people call out as being passive-aggressive. And the last thing I want to hear with this whole thing, and someone freaking out at me because they think I called them a racist, is 'have you tried being more assertive?' I just don't even have it in me for that today. Ehhhh f*ck it" /deletes post draft

"I'm bouncing from this thread if you keep saying things that belittle women and minorities. This is not what we stand for here and this kind of talk is not something I give my time for, nor something our community should be subjected to".

"Ok, that feels better, I'm sticking up for my friends here. ...actually, that feels kind of gross now, it's going to come off as holier-than-thou and I'll probably get called out for mini-modding. Plus now it's kind of a lie because here I am devoting all this time to thinking about thinking about how it's coming across when I already think this entire line of conversation is a waste of time. ...actually, yeah, no one's going to read it anyway until some dude posts the same thing. May as well step back and wait for that to happen. If people are going to think of themselves as allies, it would be cool if they drew the fire for once. I can't really afford to be seen as confrontational if people read me as female because even a tinge of holy-warrior might get me GGers on my doorstep, and I sure don't want to get swatted because there are a lot of muslim families and black people in my apartment building." /deletes post draft

There are ways to say you don't like the things a person says without saying "you are X". No?

There are lots. I'm not into labeling people, even a little. But none of these made it through my personal filtering system successfully.