Damore vs Google

I had the displeasure of reading this today. The title was an obvious misnomer.
"Google is being sued for discriminating against men & women. Both can't be true."
In a pre-feminist world, I would agree. That ain't the world we live in now.

Also of amusement was the sub header, "Thought experiment". A rigorous gedankenexperiment was beyond the pale. This was surely to be trash dressed up as journalism. Woe.

"Many of Damore’s claims rest on the premise that Google was violating the law by maintaining "rigid" hiring quotas for women and minorities. But private companies are allowed to take race and gender into account during hiring in a flexible way, particularly to remedy groups’ underrepresentation in their workforces. And Damore’s more specific allegations about Google’s hiring practices don’t necessarily support his claim that they were too rigid."

Again, this would be plain as day in a sensible world. What we have here is ideological bullshit. Perfectly permissible to run with.

"But taking steps to ensure a diverse hiring pool is not the same as maintaining an illegal hiring quota, and encouraging women and racial minorities to compete for jobs isn’t the same as guaranteeing they will be hired."

It's like emptying out a slops bucket. The stench won't hit until it all runs out.

"Meanwhile, in the wage discrimination case, lawyers and the federal government are arguing that the company systematically discriminates against women when it comes to both pay and opportunities."

We all know what this means. A simple case would be a business of 9 women & 1 man. If the man is on above average pay and position - it is discrimination. Never mind the rest of the picture. Selective vision is crucial.

"but equal pay case plaintiff Kelli Wisuri alleges that women comprised half of some sales-related jobs because those were low-pay, low-status jobs into which Google channeled women, even when they were qualified for more advanced positions."

Notice the key omission of MORE qualified. This is an irrelevance in the feminist world. I want it - so give it to me.

"In other words, what Damore sees as evidence of anti-male sentiment, Wisuri cites as evidence of Google’s bias against women."

The two 'thought experiments' do not run under the same rules. Refer back to the hiring gymnastics.

"Re-reading Damore’s screed, it's easy to understand the negative reactions: Relying on a list of controversial or debunked studies, it argues against the idea that “gender gaps imply sexism,” instead suggesting that the men’s innate “higher drive for status” explains the dearth of woman in tech."

Hmm, more idiotic denial. These things cannot be acknowledged. To do so would send the pantomine into a horror movie. We cant scare away the next generation of luddites who have only argumentative qualities on their side. Technically, she is correct in her status argument - but it gives the game away. Women should be given status. Men must earn it.

"In other words, Google says that Damore was fired not for being a conservative, but for undermining his women colleagues and making it harder for them to do their jobs."

The job in question is the domination of Google via hypergamy. Frankly, I'd be happy to see it happen, and Google waste away into the cesspit of politics it has become. Good riddance.

James Damore and David Gudeman 161 page behemoth complaint
Donate your now worthless crypto to Igroki

ETH 0x31e0da9a8f3083ecbcba7d941d0a6e394ccf657b

LTC M85Q9RxzRZcDjYk8U72rnqhHyCVG3yZVdz

XRP rPvKH3CoiKnne5wAYphhsWgqAEMf1tRAE7?dt=5407

Big Deal