Google Memo Author James Damore Sues Company For Discrimination Against White Males

As a minority I'm glad to see people stand up against the BS 'ism' that are being exploited by the corporations and the MSM. I'm for equality and not for revenge or giving advantages based on sex or color of skin.

The only 'ism' these mighty superior ethical companies don't talk about or ensure to go out of their way to balance out is ageism. Strange enough with ageism usually comes experience , the desire to get compensated for it, corporate brainwashing losing its luster, nor the need to work 80 hour weeks for 40 hour wages to prove themselves.

Funny enough the superior 'ism' fighter (google) that they are, was going out of their way to make sure women were being hired for the company. However out of pure coincidence I'm sure, these women were also being under paid compared to their male counterpart. Now google faces a lawsuit for that as well.

Google, which also faces a suit for unequal pay. Earlier this month, four women plaintiffs, as part of a revised lawsuit, alleged that the company had asked for their previous salaries and had underpaid them compared to their male counterparts.

These corporations are using all 'ism' besides ageism to deepen their pockets and nothing more.

Damore, Gudeman, and other class members were ostracized, belittled, and punished for their heterodox political views, and for the added sin of their birth circumstances of being Caucasians and/or males."

Caucasians and males was mocked with 'boos' during company- wide weekly meetings" “Google’s management goes to extreme — and illegal — lengths to encourage hiring managers to take protected categories such as race and/or gender into consideration as determinative hiring factors, to the detriment of Caucasian and male employees and potential employees at Google,” the suit reads. "...

Not only was the numerical presence of women celebrated at Google solely due to their gender, but the presence of Caucasians and males was mocked with “boos” during company- wide weekly meetings."

I think there was a time where such practices and favoritism were needed , but I do think it is now being abused and bastardized by corporations for purely financial reasons and profits.

www.buzzfeed.com...

We can't be equal by not being equal.

a reply to: interupt42

We can't be equal by not being equal.

Well said.

a reply to: interupt42

You don't understand.
Being equal means punishing the guilty.
The guilty being white and male.

The best way to get over oppression is to oppress.
Makes perfect sense especially when you punish the children and grandchildren of the original oppressors.

“Google’s management goes to extreme — and illegal — lengths to encourage hiring managers to take protected categories such as race and/or gender into consideration as determinative hiring factors, to the detriment of Caucasian and male employees and potential employees at Google,” the suit reads.

Seems to me the guy has a pretty solid case here, Google does take proactive measures to hire certain races and genders in preference of others, with little regard for how good the candidates are at the job. That is the very definition of racism and unequal treatment. Of course in their mind it's moral because they need to increase diversity at any cost because that is the ultimate virtuous goal. Funny how you don't see anyone complaining about a lack of women in physical labor jobs... perhaps some jobs just naturally attract more men than women.

Damore also says that he felt forced to attend and participate in diversity training events and that he was threatened and insulted by his coworkers following the publishing of his memo.

Lol. I think this guy strapped the tin foil to his head a bit too tightly.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Damore also says that he felt forced to attend and participate in diversity training events and that he was threatened and insulted by his coworkers following the publishing of his memo.

Lol. I think this guy strapped the tin foil to his head a bit too tightly.

Why?

political issues have been bi-polarized to the point that their is no tolerance for each other. He went against the grain , the majority in the company and clearly got punished for it .

Just look around here on ATS and the amount of intolerance the left has toward the right and vice versa . I can easily see him being intimidated and threatened by his coworkers for going against the grain.

a reply to: interupt42

I highlighted why I think what I think. He's complaining because he was forced to attend diversity training classes. That # comes standard in a corporate environment. Then if you have diversity issues yourself you may end up having to take additional training classes for punishment. There is nothing discriminatory about it.

This guy released a manifesto to the company about his beliefs and was fired for it. Buzzfeed, for their effort, seems to be trying to paint this guy as level headed but he just comes off as a kook who believes too much # he reads on the internet.

I can easily see him being intimidated and threatened by his coworkers for going against the grain.

That really isn't Google's problem though. If he didn't report the intimidation to the chain-of-command then it is on him to deal with it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then if you have diversity issues yourself you may end up having to take additional training classes for punishment

No, nothing wrong with that.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

He's complaining because he was forced to attend diversity training classes. That # comes standard in a corporate environment. Then if you have diversity issues yourself you may end up having to take additional training classes for punishment. There is nothing discriminatory about it.

So he was punished for it according to you, so why the tin foil hat comment?

Buzzfeed, for their effort, seems to be trying to paint this guy as level headed but he just comes off as a kook who believes too much # he reads on the internet.

Right because Google is mostly known to hire kooks and give them eight performance bonuses and $150,000 per year in stock bonuses since he started working at the company .

I'm sure your kook and tinfoil comment had nothing todo with him being a conservative and your immediate response to throw objectivity out the window.

originally posted by: interupt42
So he was punished for it according to you, so why the tin foil hat comment?

Because when you go to work for a corporation, you sign a bunch of agreements and forms agreeing to the company's equal employment policy. Part of that is agreeing to retraining if you cause any problems. Having been punished with a retraining doesn't warrant a lawsuit, but this guy seems to have adopted a persecution complex about the whole thing.

Right because Google is mostly known to hire kooks and give them eight performance bonuses and $150,000 per year in stock bonuses since he started working at the company .

Companies, unless they deal with traumatic things, tend to not give their employees regular psyche evails. If he is performing well that is all they care about.

I'm sure your kook and tinfoil comment had nothing todo with him being a conservative and your immediate response to throw objectivity out the window.

Again. I explained why I don't trust the guy; if you want to put words in my mouth then I'll just stop talking to you. I'm not putting words in your mouth right now. Am I? What if I say that the only reason you trust this guy is because he is conservative?

Good times. 2 Jews make a company and get all self-righteous about race and wages.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Because when you go to work for a corporation, you sign a bunch of agreements and forms agreeing to the company's equal employment policy. Part of that is agreeing to retraining if you cause any problems.

Nobody is disputing that. The problem is , was that retaliation or punishment as you stated warranted? His attorney don't appear to think so.

Companies, unless they deal with traumatic things, tend to not give their employees regular psyche evails.

Right , but you have the ability to psyche him as a tin foil wearing kook.

What if I say that the only reason you trust this guy is because he is conservative?

Then you would be wrong as I'm not a conservative and have a history of bashing both the right and the left. I don't restrict or constraint myself to a political team on things.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Nobody is disputing that. The problem is , was that retaliation or punishment as you stated warranted? His attorney don't appear to think so.

Yeah well forgive me for taking that attorney's word with a huge grain of salt. It's not like its unheard of to pay an attorney enough money to lie for you.

Right , but you have the ability to psyche him as a tin foil wearing kook.

Where did I ever claim that my opinion was an official diagnosis? Even in my first post I clearly said that I THINK he strapped the tin foil on too tightly. It's just my opinion of the guy. It's not like my opinion is required testimony in the trial or anything.

Then you would be wrong as I'm not a conservative and have a history of bashing both the right and the left. I don't restrict or constraint myself to a political team on things.

Yea? Well so do I, so stay in your own lane!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where did I ever claim that my opinion was an official diagnosis? Even in my first post I clearly said that I THINK he strapped the tin foil on too tightly. It's just my opinion of the guy. It's not like my opinion is required testimony in the trial or anything.

Cool , So then we can agree on why your kook and tin foil comment was baseless and irrelevant.

More proof that progressivism is one giant virtue-signalling public relations stint designed to disguise their own deep-seeded, unsavoury behavior.

a reply to: interupt42

No. We aren't in agreement. I still feel like he's a kook who is turning his persecution complex into a conspiracy theory. You have not offered a single rebuttal to change my thinking. All I've gotten from you is you trying to speak for me or discredit my opinion because I admitted that my opinion isn't an official one. Hell, this recent post is you YET AGAIN putting words in my mouth. So I tell you what, since you aren't interested in talking to me and only want to talk at me I'll just disengage here.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: interupt42

I highlighted why I think what I think. He's complaining because he was forced to attend diversity training classes. That # comes standard in a corporate environment. Then if you have diversity issues yourself you may end up having to take additional training classes for punishment. There is nothing discriminatory about it.

This guy released a manifesto to the company about his beliefs and was fired for it. Buzzfeed, for their effort, seems to be trying to paint this guy as level headed but he just comes off as a kook who believes too much # he reads on the internet.

I can easily see him being intimidated and threatened by his coworkers for going against the grain.

That really isn't Google's problem though. If he didn't report the intimidation to the chain-of-command then it is on him to deal with it.

It seems as if his claim is that the chain of command threatened him. I don't know how you're getting the outlook you are, because nothing is highlighting that you're assumptions have any merit.

a reply to: SRPrime

Nothing is highlighting that this guy's claims have merit either. The existence of a buzzfeed article and a lawsuit don't automatically mean that this guy's complaints have merit, yet many on this thread are just accepting it as fact without questioning the narrative. I feel like if this guy was being 100% honest then there would be more ex-employees coming forward validating his story, but it is just him. Then there is the fact that many of his complaints have ties to persecution complexes fostered by propaganda outlets (like the idea that white males are being discriminated against in this country).

So explain to me, using the buzzfeed article, why I should believe his words.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I still feel like he's a kook who is turning his persecution complex into a conspiracy theory. You have not offered a single rebuttal to change my thinking.

The burden of proof is on you as you were the one that made the initial accusation.

You made a baseless accusation and unless we are living in bizzaro world Its not a giant leap to suggest from your posting history, that your thinking was constraint the minute you saw conservative.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I still feel like he's a kook who is turning his persecution complex into a conspiracy theory. You have not offered a single rebuttal to change my thinking.

The burden of proof is on you as you were the one that made the initial accusation.

Um... No. The burden of proof is on the defendant putting forward the lawsuit to prove his case.

You made a baseless accusation and unless we are living in bizzaro world Its not a giant leap to suggest from your posting history, that your thinking was constraint the minute you saw conservative.

Ok. That's it we are done and I'm going to go ahead and assume you are blindly defending this guy because he is conservative. I'll give you the last word, but know this that I am not changing my opinion of you since you cannot show me any respect in your conversation with me. I will leave you with disrespect.