Google shouldn't have fired him

Google
tIcU55

Go to company page Google

tIcU55
Aug 7, 2017 46 Comments

I disagree with 90% of the document that he wrote but I think Google was wrong to fire him. All he did was put forth a contrarian argument and provided some evidence (how legitimate I don't know / is debatable)

I try to imagine how I would feel if he had said "there's empirical evidence that suggests Asians on average are more introvert and may help explain why Asians are not as represented in leadership positions"

I would be skeptical and a bit offended but I'd explore the argument and data to see if it has merit. What I wouldn't do is call for him to be fired for stereotyping.

Am I thinking about this wrong or was this an overreaction on Google/ some Googlers part?

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 46 Comments
  • Intel
    yAIG75

    Go to company page Intel

    yAIG75
    This is absolutely not an overreaction. And major fucking props to every woman who walked into work at Google (and every other tech company) on Monday and excelled at their jobs despite too many people around them thinking that they're unfit because they're women.
    Aug 7, 2017 12
    • Netflix
      AqEe56

      Go to company page Netflix

      AqEe56
      We got into this mess because you said she doesn't understand the doc. That is a shitty way to talk to someone.
      Aug 8, 2017
    • @yAIG75 reading comprehension impacts both genders 😂, can't help if you are aiming to misinterpret/get offended. The entire doc was structured to attempt a civil discussion on the matter but people like you misinterpreted it and blew it out of proportion, misplacing what you assumed.
      Aug 8, 2017
  • Apple
    ankU649

    Go to company page Apple

    ankU649
    Agreed, his points may or may not be valid, but if you are fired for speaking your opinion on a matter it basically means there is no freedom of speech without punishment for not conforming to what the corporation wants.
    Aug 7, 2017 14
    • Intel
      yAIG75

      Go to company page Intel

      yAIG75
      It. Was. On. Company. Resources.

      google is 100% within their rights to fire him. he is not protected. he said some stupid shit, they fired him.
      Aug 10, 2017
    • Apple
      ankU5437

      Go to company page Apple

      ankU5437
      I mean every employment is at-will in California so they have the rights to fire him for whatever reason. However, that doesn't make it right. This issue seems to personal for you, so I will let it....
      Aug 11, 2017
  • Lyft
    UfJX03

    Go to company page Lyft

    UfJX03
    You're thinking about it like a sane person who is comfortable with opposing viewpoints
    Aug 7, 2017 1
    • Lyft
      UfJX03

      Go to company page Lyft

      UfJX03
      However it's hard to blame Google. They saw what happened to Uber and were acting in their own self interest
      Aug 7, 2017
  • Apple
    NLLJ0815

    Go to company page Apple

    NLLJ0815
    People have the tendency to oversimplify things in order to take a side. Because we seem to have a 'need' to take a side, on everything. Sides are intrinsically a 'black or white' approach, and a lot of things are a bit more complicated than that.

    The reaction of most people, who over simplified the content of the manifest and extracted from it the single idea of the author thinking that women are unfit for certain positions, proves the point he's trying to make.

    The author claims a couple of things: the biological differences between genders go further then having a penis or a vagina, and that being said he still advocates for diversity.
    People omitted the second claim, and treated the first one as the Roman inquisition treated Bruno's claim that earth wasn't the center of the universe.
    One of his proven points by people's reaction is that we take morals to the extreme, in all directions.
    Assuming that we all know there are exceptions to every 'rule', I think a better approach would have been to answer the author claims by scientific and statistical data. If that data contradicts his claims, case closed. Otherwise, as he said, we can't have an honest conversation about certain things because morals turned them into tabu.

    To make it clear, I'm not saying his claims are right or wrong. I don't know. I don't have the data. But even if the are wrong, he didn't sound discriminatory.
    He seemed to me he was addressing the side effects of taking a clearly good concept, idea and intention as it is diversity to the extreme of making it a moral issue, where you end up changing the standards in order to highlight that concept. It stops being effective and starts sounding more like a brochure selling point.

    Saying that women are (statistically speaking because there will always be cases that won't fit in the statistic) less suitable for certain things because of biological differences, it's like saying short people are less suited to play basketball for biological reasons (despite the fact there are some amazing short basketball players).
    Again, the key is in having a scientific and statistical base on that claim, and it's not coming from hatred but from a pure analytical view.
    Aug 8, 2017 0
  • If he published his opinion as a blog, that would be a different story I guess. He documented his views and circulated in the office. Was he trying to specifically point out something?
    Aug 7, 2017 5
    • Amazon
      ccccccc

      Go to company page Amazon

      ccccccc
      I dun feel compelled to defend the author. but "kind of said" is your interpretation.
      Aug 8, 2017
    • Tableau
      BlueAngel

      Go to company page Tableau

      BlueAngel
      He implied that women are poor engineers because they are more emotionally connected. But almost all software is a group activity and it's a benefit to feel connection to other people you're working with. Here's a quote "relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts.." he is using the stereotype of women being emotional as why they aren't good engineers, when top level success depends on people skills, understanding the others emotions and motivations.
      Aug 8, 2017