The studies provide no support for the last part one, which is what (rightly) got him in trouble.
Misogynists are already on the right, for the most part. Just like those who believe black people are inherently genetically inferior in intelligence. These aren’t mainstream scientific theories. But trying to change their mind is fine with me. So is mockery. So is shaming them. All these strategies can work - I’ve personally seen each one be successful in some circumstances. Good for Google and shame on Damore.
Between 1972 and 2010, society changed in ways which gave women more opportunity to engage in the occupation of their choice (or at least that is the assumption), while people’s biology did not. But the study found little change in women’s participation in thing-oriented professions, suggesting the differences may be due to biology, not society. It also found there was an increase of women in high status occupations, which supports the idea that opportunity did increase.
Then why is it so horrible and terrible and termination-worthy to find the evidence for one such difference convincing?
These aren’t black and white issues. Opportunity may have increased in many fields, but may not have increased as much in other fields. This certainly doesn’t say anything about biology, not when society is still so biased against women and girls.
There is no such evidence for these assertions by Damore. It’s not credible to suggest he’s just some disinterested observer following the science. His words in his letter, and his subsequent actions, show that he’s just an old fashioned chauvinist looking for ways to support and justify his chauvinism.
Indeed. They are not black and white, but your response to someone supporting one side of the debate is to call him an asshole and fire him. That’s crazy. For issues that really are black and white, perhaps it may be appropriate, but I’ve just shown you there is indeed evidence in support of his position (and you have advanced none against it).
I can guess what happened. He read a bunch of material from the alt-right, found that the consensus of the scientific community was much different from that advanced in diversity seminars, and read a load of arguments that sounded convincing and linked to scientific studies as evidence. He didn’t get to see arguments for the opposing view, or the very good evidence of discrimination, because people like you consider in unacceptable to discuss alternatives, and the alt-right certainly aren’t going to show it to him.
And Damore is the tip of the iceberg. The person who was naive enough to take Google at their word and write a memo about it. You can bet there are a lot more people who believe the same things but keep their mouths shut unless around others they think are sympathetic. I support your aim for a better society, but you’re fighting the wrong battle. You’re winning the battle and losing the war.
Damore isn’t some guy looking for answers, or “supporting one side of the debate”, or just finding some other evidence convincing. He’s a chauvinist asshole, by his writing. He wasn’t fired for looking for answers, or for “supporting one side of the debate”, or for finding certain evidence convincing. He was fired for chauvinist asshole writing that he deliberately spread in his workplace. Those are different things.
Just because there are scientific studies on things does not automatically make them mainstream. Unit 73 and Josef Mengele conducted “scientific” studies, too.
Well, the OP cited some studies that don’t reference Danmore. She also mentions that there is reason to consider those studies apart of Danmore’s actions. So we can call out Danmore all day long for being a jackass. Doesn’t move the conversation forward. But perhaps that’s just my take on how conversations like this tend to evolve.
This particular side discussion has been about whether the firing of Damore (not Danmore) was justified or not. The OP feels it was unjustified. But you appear to agree with me – he deserved to be fired. So why all this weirdness about insisting this isn’t about Damore, when what we’re specifically talking about is what Damore wrote and what happened to him?
No, not really. It’s about whether it’s acceptable to discuss the ideas he wrote about, and support either side of the argument, or is only one unified opinion allowable?
Discuss any ideas you want, and support any “side” you want. But you may get push back to what you say – that’s a necessary part of free speech. Some “sides” are misogynistic, some are racist, some are not. There are probably ways to write about the ideas Damore wanted to write about without being a chauvinistic asshole, but Damore’s writing was chauvinistic assholery. Note that about a billion people have probably discussed these ideas on about every different “side” without being fired – Damore was fired for spreading chauvinistic assholery around in his workplace, not for exploring an argument or following the evidence.
