41–50 of 57 posts
I am reading Corporate Confidential by Cynthia Shapiro. It's highly relevant to this situation. Also, for those who have read it, this particular situation becomes an extremely interesting case study on exactly what not to do when you are working at any company.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
What an absurd interpretation. If anything the guy appears to be very quiet and shy. Having said nothing sexist at all up till now, in the memo or otherwise, insinuating that this guy picked a fight and had some sort of outburst in front of the thought police, all based on the use of the word "that"?! Hah!
Frankly, as additional details and background have come out—and the more he speaks—it seems increasingly evident his motivations were less than virtuous.
FTA: > Damore said: "I went to a diversity programme at Google, it was ... not recorded, totally secretive. I heard things that I definitely disagreed with in some of our programmes. I had some discussions there, there was lots of just shaming, and 'No you can’t say that, that's sexist' and 'You can't do this.' That is, he took a bland corporate diversity training class and tried starting fights. The tell here is "yo…
This whole thing has been a wonderful example of trolling, in the old-school sense where you say something superficially calm and reasoned but which will inflame passions and start a big argument. We are so prone to evaluating messages based on their form. If someone is ranting and cursing and shouting, we fundamentally assume that they're irrational. If someone speaks calmly and clearly and uses objective wording we…
I don't think it matters. As far as I am aware, no part of the business, or any part of this industry, is trying to help people understand why they should change their behavior and thinking towards women. The only thing I see is a sort of 'behavioral training' that tells you how to think and act, without helping you gain the empathy and compassion, or even rational arguments, needed for this to be a willing act. Do what we tell you to do or you're fired, we don't care if you believe it.
This sets back the whole cause because it makes silent angry people who stew until they get shamed at a retreat and then churn out ignorant manifestos they are subsequently fired for writing. If the company gave a shit, they would do more to help change minds, not just silence them.
Maybe their retreat was supposed to do that. But it sounds more like people there were hostile rather than compassionate, and didn't do their job to help these people understand. And now the alt-right has a new poster boy to push their propaganda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This whole thing has been a wonderful example of trolling, in the old-school sense where you say something superficially calm and reasoned but which will inflame passions and start a big argument. We are so prone to evaluating messages based on their form. If someone is ranting and cursing and shouting, we fundamentally assume that they're irrational. If someone speaks calmly and clearly and uses objective wording we…
> this guy felt shamed. Was that because the people were actually shaming him? Or was it because they stated facts that this guy feels shamed by? I don't think it matters. As far as I am aware, no part of the business, or any part of this industry, is trying to help people understand why they should change their behavior and thinking towards women. The only thing I see is a sort of 'behavioral training' that tells yo…
I mean, OK. I agree, that would work. But you honestly don't think that's what we're trying to do here? It's hard. People are jerks. All we simpering SJW's are saying is while people are still jerks, would it really hurt so much if they were forced not to act like it in ways that actively hurt things?
You're saying that people's opinions are the problem and that doing this thought police stuff isn't changing them, so it's not a solution.
Isn't the actual problem, though, that women (c.f. this very thread) don't feel comfortable or welcome in tech careers? How is the inner mental landscape of a bunch of dudes going to fix that? Isn't the "real" solution to, y'know, actually make things better for women in this industry?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This whole thing has been a wonderful example of trolling, in the old-school sense where you say something superficially calm and reasoned but which will inflame passions and start a big argument. We are so prone to evaluating messages based on their form. If someone is ranting and cursing and shouting, we fundamentally assume that they're irrational. If someone speaks calmly and clearly and uses objective wording we…
Exactly. Really, this is the strongest, best-constructed and best-applied "anti-SJW screed" we've seen yet. Gamergate sucked young-white-male-techies in, but made no sense to anyone else. This is the spin they should have taken from the beginning. "Guy got fired by Google for making perfectly reasonable points about why women aren't good at tech" is something every conservative can get behind. Clearly Google messed u…
He said on average, as a group, they are less interested in tech, but that we should treat everyone as individuals.
That's not very controversial, now is it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This whole thing has been a wonderful example of trolling, in the old-school sense where you say something superficially calm and reasoned but which will inflame passions and start a big argument. We are so prone to evaluating messages based on their form. If someone is ranting and cursing and shouting, we fundamentally assume that they're irrational. If someone speaks calmly and clearly and uses objective wording we…
It's a "wonderful example of trolling", not because of the presentation, but because the content is controversial? To me it seems the man is trying to change the accepted political view rather than to spark controversy for the sake of it. Both approaches spark controversy, only the latter is trolling.
For example, here's a part that really stood out for me:
"Note, the same forces that lead men into high pay/high stress jobs in tech and leadership cause men to take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths."
Superficially, this is a perfectly reasonable thing to say. The quoted statistic is true, and the proposed causal relationship between a drive for status and more male presence in these jobs is at least a believable reason for why there are so many more men in these jobs.
But taking a step back, it's a complete troll. The manifesto is supposedly about gender and diversity at Google, where there are very few coal mining, garbage collection, or firefighting jobs, and very few work-related deaths. So why is this even in here? It's not related to the topic at hand, it doesn't give us any useful information, and it's not going to help persuade anyone of anything.
The only answer I can come up with is: it's there to provoke. It's practically begging for ladies to thank men for doing important, dangerous jobs that women won't do, and using an emotional argument in the form of dead people to push it. It's a faux-dispassionate way to say "we're dying for your sins, ladies."
This is a big part of the art of the troll: you stick in little irrelevant asides that are built to provoke. When done well, these asides are factual and appear relevant.
This tweet was unsurprisingly prescient: https://twitter.com/campster/status/894749657091284992
Surprising (or maybe not so surprising) what kind of Youtuber he went to: > Damore made the comments in his first major interview since being fired, to alt-right YouTube personality Stefan Molyneux.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Really, this is the strongest, best-constructed and best-applied "anti-SJW screed" we've seen yet. Gamergate sucked young-white-male-techies in, but made no sense to anyone else. This is the spin they should have taken from the beginning. "Guy got fired by Google for making perfectly reasonable points about why women aren't good at tech" is something every conservative can get behind. Clearly Google messed u…
He never said women are not good at tech. He said on average, as a group, they are less interested in tech, but that we should treat everyone as individuals. That's not very controversial, now is it?
That's, yeah, rather controversial. How would you feel if your coworker and all his friends (c.f. all you guys posting here) felt that you were sub-par? Would you tell your female coworkers this to their face? "I don't think your gender is not good at tech per se, but you personally were hired from a too-large pool of candidates and that makes you not as good at your job as I am. You probably shouldn't have been hired".
At first I just thought he was oblivious to some degree—regardless of his document's veracity, it was clearly a case of "wrong time, wrong place." Furthermore, it's one thing to "stand on principle, even if you stand alone", but there's also something to be said for "choosing which hill to die on"... Frankly, as additional details and background have come out—and the more he speaks—it seems increasingly evident his m…
You mean he wanted to change an extreme leftist policy he disagreed with?
Oh noes. What a monster!