James Damore sues Google for allegedly discriminating against conservative white men

The author of the controversial memo that upended Google in August is suing the company, alleging that white, male conservatives are systematically discriminated against by Google.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
thorstein336d ago

I, a white male, sue James Damore for libel. He is making white men look like idiots.

Speed-Racer336d ago (Edited 336d ago )

Basically he screwed any potential job opportunities he has in the future. Unless he plans to work for another supremacist company.

bluefox755334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

How so? He provides proof in his law suit. It's against the law to discriminate on the basis of race or gender, and he has actual proof of it happening. Unless you think it's okay to discriminate against some races or gender, but not others? In case you're actually interested in hearing the real story, have a watch:
There's a link to the suit in the description.

thorstein334d ago

"Proof" Lol

The moron said that women have inferior brains for engineering. Please, explain to me where the proof is in that statement. He should have been fired a long time ago, not for sexism, racism, or anything else. Just for plain incompetence.

thorstein334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

Why don't we stop speculating and relying on what others said. Here is what he said, in his own words:

"Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business."

"On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:

They’re universal across human cultures
They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
The underlying traits are highly heritable
They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective"

" I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions."

OMG, and he doesn't stop there. He goes on and on and on and on...

thorstein334d ago

He continues by saying on average women are more NEUROTIC.

But according to you, "There is no proof?" Just HIS manifesto that took google 0.60 seconds to find.

Highlife333d ago

Liberals are destroying the world

starchild333d ago


The only thing shocking here is that you think there is anything wrong with what you quoted. There IS a biological basis for the differences between men and women.

People should be judged on their own merits as individuals. Quotas that attempt to reach an arbitrary balance of gender representation do constitute a form of discrimination.

thorstein333d ago

So... lot's of ad hominems? That's it? Nothing to refute that he should have been fired.

Oh well, at least Starchild can say, "wait a second.. what about this?"

@Starchild, would you state, in a company forum, a company that you work for, that "On average women are more neurotic?" And if you did, would you be surprised at any action taken against you?

I know there are biological differences between the sexes. But, his claims are completely BS. There is no peer reviewed scientific evidence that women don't make good engineers or leaders. It is up to the individual.

Do you realize that I only scratched the surface of his manifesto? Do you know all the other crap he put forth?

Do you realize that his argument is completely counterintuitive? Is PC completely out of control? Yes. But that doesn't give anyone the right to call their colleague incapable of leadership "due to biology."

The most ironic part is that he "claims" that individuals should be judged on their own merits then generalizes about the "left."

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 333d ago
bluefox755334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

@thorstein Can you provide proof that he said "women have inferior brains"? Spoiler: You can't, because he didn't say that, he didn't say anything even close to that. He's not a conservative either. You're just saying random things and you have zero proof of any of them. I provided plenty of proof as to why you're wrong, I'd be happy to change my opinion if you can provide a single shred of evidence to back up anything you said. But lets me honest, you won't, because you don't have any, and you won't read any of the blatant evidence that I linked either. Here, I'll link you a quote from the woman STEM Doctor:

"As a woman who’s worked in academia and within STEM, I didn’t find the memo offensive or sexist in the least. I found it to be a well thought out document, asking for greater tolerance for differences in opinion, and treating people as individuals instead of based on group membership."

But by all means, tell HER why SHE should be offended.

thorstein334d ago

Proof is provided above and below. She should be offended. He called her neurotic. She clearly didn't read his manifesto. I'm not sure you did either.

Inzo333d ago

Nope, thats what you are doing

coolbeans333d ago

Judging by your comments here, you're not doing white men (if that's your ethnicity) any favors either.

Averyashimself333d ago

To be honest, you make humans in general look like idiots due to your own behavior. Just in case you all don't know, ^^this is the same guy who claims that every source of negative opinion about the Last Jedi is just pure "hate". OH and also claimed that Rey is not a Mary Sue. He's proved through countless comments that he pretends to be intelligent with dissertations and overuse of unnecessary vocab. I don't know if there's any sense in even paying attention to his try hard condescension anymore.

thorstein333d ago

ad hominem.

Rey is not a Mary Sue. There are plenty of articles about it. But her flaws are simply this:

She is too trusting. She immediately trusts Finn. She doesn't push when she knows she's being ripped off when turning in scraps. She even believes the man who killed Han Solo is telling her the truth about her parents.
She can't shoot a blaster to saver her life.
She is too needy. As soon as one paternal figure comes along she latches onto him and immediately follows his lead.
She is too caring. For a women who will end up running the resistance, she cares way too much about the little things that aren't as important as the overall resistance which was a huge part of TLJ. One Dreadnaught is not worth the countless lives of the resistance.
She can't read people's intentions. Whether it is Luke Skywalker or Kylo Ren or Han Solo or Finn, she has a basic need to reach out to them but is incapable of reading their motives.

I know it sucks that when you ask for facts and get them, the only thing you can do is fall back on ad hominem. Thanks for stalking my comments, again. Downvotes are just a badge to me. Look at this entire thread.

Someone demands facts. I give them the guys' own words. Then all I get are ad hominem attacks except for one person. One. 20 disagrees, but only one person had the temerity to state what they mean.

Averyashimself333d ago

"ad hominem" - I don't honestly care. Besides, it only makes you a hypocrite to call out people's ad hominem when you fully know that you have done it multiple times on this very page. Don't act all high and mighty. At the very least, if you're going to pretend like your on a pedestal looking down on everyone else, don't expose what you actually are.

She may not be 100% perfect in every way imaginable. However:

Rey is almost immediately more powerful than most force users directly upon getting confirmation of her force sensitivity.
Rey seems to know more about the Millennium than Han Solo does.Or at the very least, she seems to know a lot more than she should, especially considering that she was outclassing Tie Fighter pilots (You know, people who have been doing it all of their life) the first time she sits in a cockpit.
Somehow understands Chewie with no evidence of linguistic teaching.
Is adept with her quarterstaff, to the point of taking out multiple people at the same time with it.
Almost any inescapable problem that she's faced with, she solves with the force, despite having absolutely NO TRAINING.
She somehow has knowledge and proficiency with probing minds, jedi mind tricks, and telekinesis for God's sake.
She quite literally says, "The Force..." Closes her eyes, and then wrecks Kylo Ren with no prior lightsaber training.
Anyone important that does anything negative to her ends up getting punished by the narrative.
There's this thing in the Star Wars universe you need to be able to use the force and lightsabers proficiently, it's called training. Well, she apparently requires none.
There are many other countless examples as to why she is annoyingly good at almost everything where it counts for the story.

Just because a female character isn't 100% perfect in every way does not mean that she is not a Mary Sue. If that were the case, there would be no such thing as a Mary Sue. You can nitpick characters all day long to find flaws, especially minor flaws.

You would know what it feels like for it to suck when you ask for facts and get them. I'd be willing to bet you've had a lot of practice. You haven't given me much practice with this at all.

Stalking your comments. Really? You're the first comment on this page dude, don't have your head so far up your ass. I feel like the fact that you took the time to mention that, "Downvotes are just a badge to me," that you actually see them for more than just a badge.

I'll await the downvote from you and wear it as a badge, though.

coolbeans333d ago (Edited 333d ago )


Then what does that say about the incendiary first comment just by me boomeranging that same treatment back to you? Convenient timing to become enkindled with a fiery spirit of rational discourse NOW only after several previous comments from you committing the lowest forms of argumentation; hell, one could even suggest libel--ironically enough--when you argued that Damore said "women have inferior brains for engineering." (EDIT: not to mention name-calling right before said quote)

I can only see that as a gross misinterpretation from something you glanced at from the memo or intentional disinformation from you. Judging by your attitude here I can only assume the latter.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 333d ago
franwex334d ago

Wow, really?
Any employer would fire a worker who is too much trouble like -sending out cry baby memos and spewing nonsense around. If he was fired for donating to conservatives groups or parties, that'll be different story.

bluefox755334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

Nonsense? He's an actual scientist who has studied at Harvard and MIT. Furthermore, other actual scientists have come out and verified what he said. If you're interested in hearing it from their own mouths, have a read. It even includes a female scientist:
A biology professor also echoes a similar sentiment:

thorstein334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

And Donald Trump is an actual person who studied at Wharton. It doesn't make him competent to lead the country. Adversely, Clinton, went to Yale and Wellesley. It didn't make her competent to run the country either.

In the USA, a "conservative scientist" is an oxymoron. Just look at what the National Academy of Sciences is going through with "conservatives."

bluefox755334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

@thorstein The scientists I listed are not "conservative" scientists. Everything I listed is from a left leaning source, because I know people like you will dismiss it outright if it's not from someone that's not aligned with you ideologically. Not that it would matter if they weren't, because science and facts don't care what your ideology is. Though that seems to be the only thing that you are concerned with. Try to stick to the facts.

thorstein334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

Not conservative? OMG, it says he is IN THE LAWSUIT

Since you won't read links, I'll quote it for you: "discriminated against (i) due to their perceived conservative political views by Google in California at any time during the time period beginning four years prior to the filing of this Complaint through the date of trial in this action (“Political Class Period”);(ii) due to their male gender by Google in California at any time during the time period beginningone year prior to the filing of this Complaint through the date of trial in thisaction (“Gender Class Period”);and/or (iii) due to their Caucasian race by Google in California at any time during the time period beginning one year prior to the filing of this Complaint through the date of trial in this action (“Race Class Period”) (Political Class Period, Gender Class Period, and Race Class Period referred to collectively, as “Class Periods”).These violations also subject Google toclaimsfor violation ofCalifornia’s Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq"

And he isn't done. This total nutjob thinks there is a giant leftwing conspiracy in Silicon Valley to hunt down conservatives.

Not conservative!?!!!???!?!!!?!!!? !!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

How's that for facts? The lawsuit continues and gets more and more egregious. I just quoted the beginning.

Science has been under fire from conservatives since before the Enlightenment. You are right about it not caring what your ideology is, but in the USA science has become political when POTUS states that the CDC cannot use the following sentences: "Based on scientific evidence, a fetus can be endangered when exposed to the Zika virus. Here is the evidence based study. Provides link."

So facts? I have provided plenty. Along with some derision. If you apologize for misrepresenting this fool and admit that you were wrong I will gladly apologize for any derision I aimed your way.

Highlife333d ago

Thorstein dims can't talk about science unless they agree there are only two genders.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 333d ago
Heavenly King334d ago

I dont know the story, but this is actually something good.

ChristopherJack334d ago (Edited 334d ago )

I definitely lean left, I'm a progressive, but something tells me if a woman wrote something like this, she wouldn't have been fired & ostracized. That said, there's a time & place for political debate & shoving it in the face of your colleagues, is not it.

I believe in affirmative action but only to the extent that it doesn't become discrimination again. If there's a poverty issue affecting a majority black neighbourhood, I believe the issue should be tackled- but I also see no reason for other ethnicities in the area to be neglected in the process.

When it comes to employment, I believe the process needs to be encouraged, rather than forced with arbitrary quotas. I can understand why reverse discrimination bothers many in the US, in fact, I believe it's the primary reason, you elected Trump.

Ultimately, I believe the solution comes from empathy- understanding each sides perspective & working around it to reach a middle ground. Like police vs Black Lives Matter sorta groups, the solution is simple: Encourage more black people to become involved in law enforcement & provide some healthy debate regarding protocol- this issue in particular is something all Americans should be involved in.

334d ago
InTheZoneAC333d ago

Blm should focus on the vast majority of crimes, not the small percentage of innocents shot by police. Blm blows up when a black person, criminal or not, gets confronted by police, but they ignore the mass terrorists acts carried out daily by criminals. That's why blm is a joke

sonicwrecks333d ago

"I'm willing to bet the comments are exactly what...."
*clicks on submission*

Show all comments (31)