>be me
>be engineer
>every day I come into work I am beaten over the head because I am a white cis male and I need to check my privilege
>get emails from upper management that I need to to check my privilege
>start noticing new hires completely out of there league, unprepared, and unqualified for their position.
>a large majority is put under me
>be so brainwashed at this point to just say whatever for now
>months later I've had enough, the people under me don't listen to what I say because of my privilege.
>get beaten over the head even more by my boss because shit isn't getting done.
>try to explain that the new hires aren't any good, and need to be replaced
>boss says that they cant, something about affirmative action against oppressed groups
>decide to write an entire thesis of why he is wrong and why this company will go in the shitter if things don't change, that this place is an echi chamber, and that nothin I say is taken seriously by anyone.
>CC bosses boss to make sureservations I get heard by someone who accually matters
>Mfw I accidentally cc my team
>Mfw they send that all over the company saying how misogynistic racist and sexist it it because I'm a white cis male
>Mfw they leak that email
>pic related, its me
Be me
Other urls found in this thread:
assets.documentcloud.org
dailymail.co.uk
gizmodo.com
twitter.com
yes
Try to survive on that job but if I were you, I'll start looking another job ASAP
Google the name in the file name.
Uhh typical white cis male who thinks he's better than everyone. Do the world a favor KYS
TL;DR: self centred, doesn't listen to or work well with peers, ignores corporate and legal policy.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Good luck finding a job, snowflake...
LOL GUYS EH CALLED HIM A SNOWFLAKE THE ADMAN ACTUALLYDID IT HE ISSO CLVER
How dare this man try to intelligently comment on the overarching differences between the sexes... When did we lose Google?
When classical liberals died
As much as he is right, and as much as i agree with him this issue is quiet simple:
He broke the house law, so he gets punished.
It's sad to see a talented man get fired, but from the companies perspective it only makes sense.
The possible damage to the reputation heavily outweights the one guy they had to sacrifice.
But if that company is being accused of being an echo chamber that silences ideas, does it not validate his point further?
google is full of fucking retards.
barricade all the doors and burn the place down, fucking degenerates.
I dont think anyones denying this
how does one make google and facebook have a "hard" 404?
destory their servers?
The big problem where your ideas differ from googles (or any other quickly offended group for that matter) is the perception of freedom:
You think freedom includes having an unpopular opinion; an opinion which might even be negative about others.
They think freedom only includes positive opinions, negative opinions are largely discarted as hate speed.
Those two world views don't work together, so no - if we exclude "hate speech" from the range of (valid) opinions then no, this doesn't validate anything.
How can you type so much and miss the point of the question you 'answered'
He also missed the the point of a rhetorical question.
>cc's your team instead of boss
you deserved it
[spoiler]the same thing would of happened if you sent it to the boss anyway[/spoiler]
Let me break it down:
> stated that google silences ideas
If we assume as a company that such ideas only include positive remarks [see company policy] anything else is hate speech.
If we go further and see we have an employee that spreads hate speech we must react accordingly and fire him.
For a company it isn't invalid to dismiss any points that were made when they were part of hate speech because any partial acceptance of his points would put the company policy to the question which they didn't and probably won't change in the forseeable future.
>does it not validate his point further?
No it doesn't. He broke the company policy and payed the price for it. Sometimes it's really that simple.
You're making a irrelevant distinction. This isn't about positive, negative or hate speech. The issue here is that an employee believes his right to public speech extends into the private (in this case, corporate) domain. RIght, or freedom, of speech are curtailed by legal and moral responsibilities within an employment space. For example, employees may be asked to sign nondisclosjre agreements so not to leak trade secrets to competitors. political speech is curtailed within the armed forces (one cannot campaign in uniform).
So this isn't wrongly "discarded as hate speech". The employee failed to uphold the responsibilities an d agree TSN he signed on as condition as an employee.
You broke it down which only further showed you are somehow to stupid to answer a basic question. Q, Is googling firing someone with differing views an example of an echo chamber? A. Yes. You mislabeling it as hate speech, or even them mislabeling it as hate speech does not defend or make the silencing of opposing views not actions of an echo chamber. Company policy can be an echo chamber. Go to summer school or something if this sorry ass explanation is a break down
You deserve it faggot.
mfw you can both enforce company policy and still be an echo chamber. The two are not exclusive.
>So this isn't wrongly "discarded as hate speech". The employee failed to uphold the responsibilities an d agree TSN he signed on as condition as an employee.
I don't really get it, please re-formulate again.
posting in an underrated thread
Well that's what a company policy is supposed to do: To dictate a set of rules which are to be followed, so everyone aligns with this set of rules. If you don't like it switch companies.
I'm constantly killing myself with a shotgun because I was born white straight and male. OP should too. You see, by killing myself every day I something something to end racism. You see?
You are a dumb shit OP but not a bad guy. Try not to pollute the gene pool with any spawn though.
What a surprise most companies are echo chambers thanks for confirming my statements you are so smart
Shills gonna Shill
Please understand that i'm only speaking from the perspective of google which i don't agree with. I just understand their reasoning.
>You mislabeling it as hate speech, or even them mislabeling it as hate speech does not defend or make the silencing of opposing views not actions of an echo chamber.
Yes, they silence opposing views to their company policy, call it an echo chamber if you want - it doesn't really make a difference.
The only facts to be looked at are: He broke the companies policy and paid the price for it.
OP fucked up by getting caught
PROTIP don't get caught
Maybe you should focus more on working rather than presenting your opinion / world view in a productive environment though.
>be dumbass
>spend workday writing memo about politics
>get fired
RIP
>muh diversity of opinion
you alt-right fags have gone full SJW haven't you?
>muh workplace as a venue for sociopolitical soapboxing
people are actually mad this retard got fired?
Dumb fuck I was being sarcastic. POC etc who gripe 'white privilege' etc are just alienating the white male left and also shoring up the opinions of the white make right. Both do nothing to help POC themselves (crybabies)
He should of just wrote a paper explain how his underlings were shit (specifically them and not the whole gender)
say something like "Diversity is important however, A, B, and C are under preforming and are under qualified for X, Y, Z reasons)"
Rather than splurge out and accidentally reveal your "nazi" agenda
>get emails from upper management that I need to to check my privilege .
Maybe upper mgmt should check their math.
Op here, don't worry I consistently choke myself with a belt everyday.
To the people in the thead thinking I'm actually the guy, please smash whatever device you are browsing with. Maybe the bait was too good. I just wanted to start the conversation, and the company policy vs. Free speech is a good debate.
However, this was leaked not by him, but somebody that did not agree with him, in a (successful) attempt to get him fired. THAT person broke company policy, but it's my opinion the Google is running a PR campaign against the guy, by getting bloomberg, other online media outlets, to call him alt-right and a whole bunch of other buzzwords to get people to not read his actual memo.
And also kind of to cover up the fact of a bigger security issue that there is a leaker in their midst.
the jewnited states of america everyone!
Don't be sad OP all the people that you raged against they will run Google just fine. As for you, well you'll never work in this town (Silicon Valley) again unless you go trans gender and start wearing a vibrating buttplug
The vibrating butt plug doesn't sound too bad
How does questioning company policy equal breaking it?
The tumblr invasion is real
My only solace is that silicon valley is crashing hard as we speak
You're fucked m8
Source:
dailymail.co.uk
>The following is an extract from engineer James Damore's lengthy memo
>Women, on average, have more:
>Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing).
>These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics.
>Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness.
>This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Note that these are just average differences and there's overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women's issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support.
>Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.
That's literal sexism, which IS breaking the company policy.
Also autism.
How is that sexist? Talking about female psychology is sexist now?
Yeah, he fucked up. But a big question nobody seems to be asking:
In that environment, how long will it be before search results not agreeable to the mantra begin to get filtered out?
Yes. Truth or not, you can't go around saying "women shouldn't work here because they are women".
HOW? He literally cited that part of his email to back up what he was saying. I guess facts are sexist now?
What is Google going to do? "Yeah, he's right. Let's lose all these women. We made a big mistake hiring them"
Can you imagine the backlash? They got painted into a corner. They had to respond. Way it goes.
Yes, any sentence going "gender x has characteristic y is sexist". That's the definition of sexism.
>I'm constantly killing myself with a shotgun because I was born white straight and male.
pic slightly related
No he's saying you shouldn't hire women because there women. if a woman has a CVs as good as the men looking to work for Google then it's not an issue when looking at the merits of the individual.
> mfw they will actually do something about it, but you still sacked
We are saying the same thing. Wtf are you arguing with me for?
agree
How if psychologists will tell you the exact same thing.
I stopped working as HR because too many times happened things like pic related
It's almost like no one arguing against the guy actually read the paper and understood it. Heck go figure.
Silly rabbit, truth doesn't mean shit. This is the society we live in now.
Poor pepe voluntarily risked his employment just to let his other coworkers know how he feels about woman - fortunately he has fellow neckbeards online to cry for him. Sad.
That definition only works if men and women are equal and only our environment affects how we turn out. Which any one can see is not true
He worked there for 4 years. He probably saw his job getting harder and harder as Google strived to be more and more diverse. If your job gets harder, and you suddenly have a bunch of underlings that don't know what the fuck they're doing, and they're all minorities, one would hope you'd draw the parallel that Google was hiring less than the best in order to fill some kind of diversity quota. I'm sure they were still hiring the best they could, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were hiring the best.
And he's gotten job offers from Gab and Wikileaks at least.
Tough shit then. While the current situation isn't ideal with the complete ignorance of biological differences it certainly is better than the sexisim which was present some 50 years ago with shit like "lol women can't drive a car" while they prove today that they can do that. We can hope that with a better biological understanding we will at some point reach a more qualified opinion whether gender qualifies a person for a job or not.
>point out how forced diversity hires are killing the company
>be white CIS male while doing so
Yeah he's literal, actual Hitler. 100% DNA match
The fact you just accept the environment that has been created for people to work in speaks a lot about you.
Read .
If you're shit at your job and you happen to be a women, it's not sexist you just fucking suck and need to go somewhere else. It's really that simple. In reality this is a fact that applies to everyone but SJW's just don't understand that I guess.
is the actual email available to read somewhere? I have a feeling it's nowhere near as bad as news is saying but I want to read it
Women never had it hard in the west. Never.
Women have always had everything handed to them, and they still bitch.
I'm just glad there are no women doing mechanical engineering its hard enough working with idiots for time to time let alone women who aren't even able to lift an heavy object
Yeah, I always wondered why no one claiming "Men and women are equal in every way" ever looked at how EVERY CIVILIZATION IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD has had men in charge and women as support.
That's not patriarchy, that's every culture in the history of the world independently forging the most efficient and successful system out of 20000 years of trial and error.
You're the kind of person who defends dumb asses for being dumb - you unemployed too?
Holy fuck it's not about whether your gender qualifies you for the job that's not what I'm arguing. I'm saying that if psychologists and biologists say that women are prone to be better than men at artsy shit and men are better than women at digging fucking holes and building stuff, and PROVE IT. How is it sexist? Simple answer. It's not.
The initial reason of the feminist movement wasn't about having it hard or easy. It's about the freedom of women to persue their dreams, which is the top or maybe even the top two parts of this pyramid.
Well, they haven't had it hard comparatively (to like, Africa and rural Asia), but they do have a history of being laid to the wayside even when they have legitimate contributions.
That said, it's gone from "I want to be respected as an individual" to "I want to be treated equally" to "I want to be treated equally even when I don't deserve it" to "I want to be treated as a superior."
found it after a bunch of digging.
gizmodo.com
Being a woman in the western world in the past 100 years has been life on easy mode.
And yet they still bitch.
Is it any fucking wonder why there's such a giant pushback against feminism?
Can you provide ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE of a woman in CURRENTYEAR who isn't allowed to "pursue her dreams"? JUST ONE EXAMPLE?
It's definitely not hate speech or derogatory in any way.
At worst, it casts doubt on the notions of equality stemming from possible biological predispositions.
Chill my man, i accept the fact that men are better at digging holes. I just want to make you understand that if a company decided to have an anti-sexist policy it will tell you against any amount of however convincing proof that being male or female has no impact on a workers ability to dig holes because such a notion would be sexist, which would put the company policy into question.
Women have never "been laid to the wayside" in the western world. What fucking feminist propaganda have you been reading?
You may want to consult tumblr for a complete list, i'm sure they're happy to give you entire books of it.
Things like suffrage, and property ownership, and inheritance of estates, and control over their own chastity and things like that. Those are relatively new things for women.
I'd bet Hilary Clinton would love to claim that, but she's a lying cunt.
Just tell them to check Jewish privilege, at least that's real
You are retarded. I am not defending him. He did fuck up. How is questioning the environment he works in defending him?
Another bit of evidence for the public to understand the nastier side of Big Tech. His error was assuming good will at Google. A more cynical approach would have kept him from openly stating such things to other employees. At this size, change does not come from within.
Every single part of this post is bullshit. Every single word of it.
When we're up against retarded, unwavering horseshit like the kind you are spewing here, the only response is a no-compromise one.
Socjus and feminism are in the minority, and people are beginning to figure it out. When your fucktarded marxism goes on the chopping block, don't expect us to compromise with you.
You realize that men did everything before women's sufrage. Not one great civilisation of the past had armies of women while men cooked and raised child. Women where never strong enough to take the role of men so it's hardly supprising that they where not seen as equal to men and now they are seen as equal they don't perform equally. Why can't we let them do what they are good at and men do what they good at. why force people to treat everyone equal even though we know they will be bad and not able to keep up in some jobs.
There's already a strong pivot beginning to happen - you see it in midwestern and southern US girls. They're at least smart enough to try to angle back to the traditionalist mindset (while keeping some modern perks, of course).
>his email is about the problem with "shaming dissenters into silence" and that doing so suppresses open discussion
>all news coverage shames him and suppresses open discussion
>mfw the media writes him off as a sexist shit and refers to his email as a "manifesto", like the guy is Anders Breivik.
I swear this shit is turning me in to a tinfoil hat alex jones follower
Maybe we have different definitions of "relatively."
For me, "relatively" means "in the last 100 years." Which everything I said is categorically true.
I assume for you, "relatively" means "in the last 20 years," in which case everything I said is categorically false, or at least outdated.
Men have never had the right to vote, it has always been dependent upon signing up for selective service.
Women have had the right to vote much, much longer than men.
>Not one great civilisation of the past had armies of women while men cooked and raised child.
Arguing that historical background is equal to moral validity is just wrong. Humans make mistakes.
>Women where never strong enough to take the role of men
Are you talking about musclemass? That's because of hormones. Give each 10 year old girl steroids from now on and we'll fix this "problem".
Or are you talking about personality? In which case i'd agree. The only reason women were obedient is because they were raised like this.
>and now they are seen as equal they don't perform equally.
As mentioned our current evaluation of biological impact on qualification on a subject isn't perfect, but it sure better than what we had 50 years ago.
>Why can't we let them do what they are good at and men do what they good at?
Social pressure is a bitch. Imagine you'd live in a world where it's socially frowned upon to do something cool, instead everyone tells you to do [insert boring shit]. I'm sure you wouldn't love it either.
>why force people to treat everyone equal even though we know they will be bad and not able to keep up in some jobs?
I personally don't believe women are stupid, that being said i'm all for hiring women. If they can't compete: Fire them again. That's the world how it should be.
If he wanted to "question the environment", he should have brought that up internally rather than looking for neck beard sympathy points by posting it online. Maybe he should have started an all male union, or hell, perhaps he should have tried working his way into a position he could make some of the hiring decisions he feels are appropriate. Instead, he penned a whiny letter on why his life essentially sucks because woman, and failed to provide any reasonable avenue for public discourse because he decided to 'question his environment' in the most autistic and unproductive way possible (leading to his unemployment).
Honestly, this dude's plan is working well. Triggered neckbeards around the US have already donated $60,000 to this guy.