HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

This is false. Damore did not get fired "because he thinks women are inferior" which is a simplistic, uninformed, and cartoonish version of the controversy. Damore was fired by Google for writing about scientifically supported sex differences and the social ramifications of those differences:

https://youtu.be/agU-mHFcXdw

⬐ salvar

Brushing all of this off as "scientifically supported sex differences" is quite simplistic, uninformed, and cartoonish by itself.

⬐ wyclif

Brushing all of what off? The controversy itself? No, that's not what I did at all. I recognise that it's controversial; I simply don't think most people commenting on it have read Damore's memo, especially if "women are inferior to men" is the mangled message they managed to extract from his writings.

> Does anyone have a reliable source on this?

Initially, he submitted the document as a feedback for a “diversity summit” he attended. Here's the source:

https://youtu.be/agU-mHFcXdw?t=9m15s

> I do not read his words as "google is illegally discriminating".

FWIW, he has said this more directly in an interview: https://youtu.be/agU-mHFcXdw?t=331

"They were telling us about a lot of these potentially illegal practices that they've been doing to try to increase diversity."

"What kind of practices?"

"Well, basically, treating people differently based on what their race is, or gender --"

"Oh, you mean racism."

"Yeah, basically."

"Mmhmm, I see. And it was ultra-secret and unrecorded in what manner?"

"So-- most meetings at Google are recorded, anyone at Google can watch it, we're trying to be really open about everything, except for this. They don't want any paper trail for any of these things."

"Whoa, okay, why?"

"Because, I think, it's illegal. I mean, as some of the internal polls showed, there were a large percent of people that agreed with me on the document. And so if everyone got to see this stuff, then they would really bring up some criticism."

As an additional perspective, here's an interview from James' perspective[1]. The interviewer is clearly fairly bias and holds the same viewpoint which is unfortunate but I think hearing James' perspective on the purpose of the document is interesting.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agU-mHFcXdw

⬐ holtalanm

This is an interesting video to listen to, but as you said, the interviewer is most definitely leaning a certain direction.

That being said, I am not informed enough on the topic of gender differences to actually weigh in on who is right or wrong in this situation.

⬐ typicalbender

I am certainly not either, I just think people grabbed their pitchforks impulsively and painted him as a misogynist monster without hearing his side of the story. From the interview it sounds like the document was sparked from an internal diversity meeting that was dubious in its intent. Whether that is actually truth or not who knows but I get the impression James was trying to have a discussion and present some evidence but ended up getting roasted instead of having the discussion he was hoping for.

The issue aside, the hypocrisy in this whole situation is really what pisses me off. James appears to be soliciting discussion and trying to consider both point of views while the masses simply took whatever the media headline was an ran with it without considering both sides.

⬐ holtalanm

I do agree with you on this. It really seems like he was trying to promote/encourage a discussion around diversity.

Also, it sounds like he _actually_ was more asking for feedback from a specific group within Google that in-turn decided to circulate it within the company as a whole.

The most troubling thing is the claim that James makes about the 'super secret, unrecorded meeting' that he attended within Google that prompted this paper in the first place. If that meeting really did take place, that is a sign of systemic racism/sexism within Google at some of the highest levels. If. I have no idea who to believe in this situation. An investigation into the company may be called-for.

⬐ notahacker

If his desire is to spark reasoned debate, then Jordan "gender neutral pronouns are Evil Marxism" Peterson and Stefan Molyneux probably aren't the best choices of interviewers to help him with that, unfortunately

It's entirely possible that as he said, he wanted to spark some reasoned debate and he's just made a few mistakes (and got particularly unlucky with Gizmodo cutting his charted caveats) but it's equally possible that he knew exactly what reaction he was likely to provoke and aimed for just beyond the line of what would be considered acceptable.

(I have no insight into what he thinks or how he's been treated, but if I wanted an open discussion on the merits and shortcomings of Google's diversity policies, I'd probably start by suggesting that quotas are nearly always bad and male/female inequalities in STEM start long before people apply to Google, not with an essay insisting that men are more suited to software roles because biology and that Google's promotion of the view that attitudes contribute towards gender imbalances is left wing bias that threatens my psychological safety.)

⬐ skoocda

Here's the full interview[1] - the above comment linked a shortened version.

For reference, this is Dr. Jordan Peterson, the University of Toronto professor who was fired a few months ago for his stance on using gender pronouns. He's a strong proponent of free speech, which he touches on in this discussion.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU

⬐ hefty

> was fired a few months ago for his stance on using gender pronouns.

He wasn't fired. The university sent him two warning letters and then backed down from taking any action. He's still teaching psychology there.

⬐ sintaxi

Looks like the other post got flagged. There seems to be people doing their best to not have this topic discussed.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14967529

⬐ tontonius

would be interesting to see a list of all the google memo links that got flagged/removed today...

⬐ sintaxi

Agreed. The reaction is the real story here as far as I'm concerned.

⬐ tomp

Check out http://hckrnews.com/ - it keeps all stories on HN frontpage, even flagged and downvoted ones (AFAIK).

⬐ boona

Wow, according to this, HN is hard at work at suppressing the Google Memo news story.

⬐ tomp

HN users (not admins) - although I imagine the objective isn't "supressing the story" as opposed to "suppressing drama".

⬐ johansch

How can you tell?

⬐ None

None

⬐ chippy

I suspect many people flag because they are getting tired of the drama, and that many articles submitted are very similar news reports covering the same ground.

However this video interview of the memo writer is newsworthy and I think extends the discussion more - at least for those who did not read the memo, they can hear the author speak about it.

⬐ chippy

I wonder when Damore will be giving interviews on traditional video media? And I wonder how they will represent it. I certainly hope he gets interviewed by rational people who oppose his views. It appears that Google's YouTube is where these news breaks first, and also that he is interviewed first by allies.

⬐ Goladus

Peterson tentatively suggested that he ought to consider giving it a shot.

⬐ ntuch

The evergreen professor didn't get any mainstream interviews, did he?

⬐ boona

Tucker Carlson on Fox had him on. Fox is one of the only MSM sources where you can discuss free speech openly.

⬐ yahna

ha!

You realize the bias at fox makes CNN look like the pinnacle of respectable journalism?

⬐ yahna

ha!

You realize the bias at fox makes CNN look like the pinnacle of respectable journalism?

⬐ boona

I recognize they're biased, but they allow discussion about free speech. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.

⬐ rapsey

> I wonder when Damore will be giving interviews on traditional video media?

Hopefully never.

> And I wonder how they will represent it.

By misrepresenting his views like they have so far. He does not look like he is ready to face anyone in the absurd format of what has become news on TV.

⬐ yahna

Okay, then why not a podcaster who's not part of the right wing echo chamber?

Why not someone more "legitimate" who's still capable of a fair discussion instead of shouting. A newspaper interview perhaps.

⬐ neilellis

Wouldn't it be so much better if the 'flagged' message would say 'flagged as offtopic' like Stack Overflow ...

Then at least we can be reminded that that's the main reason for flagging.

I realise the irony ...

⬐ chippy

Submissions are flagged by users. I think most users here are becoming fed up with this story (even if this video is worth a watch in my opinion). I've observed admins unflagging submissions on a regular basis.

⬐ coreyp_1

Why is this flagged, and why do the submitted links keep disappearing? (This video in this link is incomplete, the full video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDuVF7kiPU)

The full video is very well put together, including links to the scientific papers discussed. This is a high-profile event at one of the largest internet tech company in existance, and it has a bearing on every one of our lives.

So why is it being flagged and removed everywhere?

⬐ manigandham

> Why is this flagged

I think we all know why...

⬐ pottersbasilisk

Admins need to unflag this.

Damore deserves his own words in the face of everyone spinning his words.

⬐ have_faith

Something discussed in the video. Google held "secret" diversity meetings, secret from the perspective of all meetings are usually recorded at Google and made available but these ones where specifically not apparently. James mentions that these meetings where used to discuss (allegedly) illegal hiring practices.

I'm not from the US, but as far as I understand what's generally labelled "positive discrimination" isn't just legal, is it not highly promoted? Just trying to understand what could be mean't from illegal if these hiring practices are widespread and encouraged.

James Damore also spoke with Jordan Peterson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agU-mHFcXdw