Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

Syncoped · 2017-08-08T01:52:23+00:00

Is there a copy of the email floating around? I'm curious to read it.

Sidion · 2017-08-08T06:51:41+00:00

Anyone else feel like American politics has devolved into a sort of psuedo religion?

You're either red or blue. There is no other acceptable answer. If you tell anyone believing in one side or the other something they don't agree with, you're the enemy.

It's kind of amusing how we have moved away from organized religion slightly, only to pivot into making politics fill the void. I wonder when the ~~holy~~ party wars will start?

EDIT: The amount of angry comments I've received are just confirming it. Funnily enough I'm getting hated on by both 'sides'.

kdeff · 2017-08-08T03:36:51+00:00

RE: The issue that women are so underrepresented in tech.

I work for a small, established Silicon Valley company of about 25 people. There were about 22 men and 3 women. But I felt the company is ~~unbiased~~ fair in its hiring processes. And of those 3 women, one was the VP of the company; a role no one ever doubted she deserved because she was exceptional at her job.

The reality at my company and at many companies across the tech industry is that there are more qualified men than there are women. Here me out before you downvote. Im not saying women aren't smart and aren't capable of being just as qualified for these jobs.

But, the thing is, this cultural push to get more women involved in engineering and the sciences only started in the 2000s. To score a high level position at a company like mine, you need to know your shit. ie, you need education and experience. All the people available in the workforce with the required experience have been working 10-30 years in the industry; meaning they went to college in the 1970s and 1980s.

So where are all the women with this experience and education? Well just arent many. And thats just a fact. In 1971-72, it was estimated that only 17% of engineering students were women. That trend didnt change much in the following years. In 2003, it was estimated that 80% of new engineers were men, and 20% women.

This isnt an attack on women, and its not an endorsement saying that there isnt sexism in the workplace - sexism can and does affect a womans career. But the idea that 50% of the tech workforce should be women is just not based in reason. Now - in the 2010s - there is a concerted effort to get girls (yes - this starts at a young age) and women interested in STEM at school and college. But these efforts wont pay off now. Theyll pay off 20-30 years from now.

There should be laws protecting women in tech; equal pay laws should apply everywhere. And claims that women are held back because of sexism shouldnt be dismissed lightly - it is a problem. But to cry wolf just because there is a disproportionate number of men in the industry right now is not a logically sound argument.

Edit: Source on figures: Link

Edit2: Yes, I should have said 90s/00's, not 70s and 80s, but the same thing still applies. The people from the 70s/80s tend to have leadership roles at my company and competitors because they were around (or took part un) the industry's foubding. They are retiring now, though. Slowly.

mangomafia · 2017-08-08T05:19:57+00:00

This is a general statement on Google's confusing culture. It is no surprise to me that such a document got written. Google profits from the plus side of an open culture, where employees don't feel they are working only for a salary, and they genuinely invest themselves in the job. On the other hand, when the chips are down Google says you are on your own.

Free food, snacks, laundry, free t-shirts (my memories are from back when they sat in cupboards open to all), massages, gym, places to nap, 24x7 work culture, haircuts, foreign off-sites (paid vacations) with colleagues, TGIF parties with booze, team bar in the cubicles, nerf gun battles in flip flops and shorts - the list of blurred lines is endless. Many can and do get confused about the exact line between personal and public life.

It's no secret Google hires from the cradle, for most this is their first real job, and they are greeted by corporate speak (implicit and explicit) that says, "treat this like your home, have an opinion, be yourself, be open, share ideas - there's no bad idea". A few (including lonely geeks who have never felt so welcomed and at home in all their lives) get comfortable and start truly being themselves, and that's when they walk into a concrete wall of "we are a big company, and we play by big company rules".

I have seen a lot of people pay the price for being too free with their opinions, but it doesn't always end in losing one's job - usually it's just a series of dings on the bonus or promotion or stern talking tos, and the employee burns out and quits on his/her own eventually.

This is not an opinion on the document which I haven't yet read, only skimmed, but I've heard plenty of such opinions, so it is not altogether new to me.

A lot of industries including tech do need more women, but tech is hardly the coalface of gender discrimination. It is one industry, unlike wall street that has been extremely accommodative of gender diversity, and that's a good thing.

That said, it is my experience that if you rise to be a senior woman engineer in tech a lot of otherwise shut doors open. For example, startups are always on the lookout for a senior woman engineer to be on their founding team - it makes getting funding a lot easier. However you also have to put up with unwanted dick pics and every other guy asking you out and feeling pissed off when you don't agree.

8DDD · 2017-08-08T08:16:08+00:00

So I initially just browsed through the entire "manifesto" on Gizmodo and then decided I didn't care enough what 1 among 57,100 employees thinks about the culture of a company I don't work with.

Then I saw the controversy and headlines build up and decided to give the text a closer read: Honestly – unless I missed something, it didn't strike me as a hateful or discriminatory text. On the contrary, the guy even made suggestions for creating a workplace that is more inclusive for everyone. His idea of creating a culture of "psychological safety" is interesting. Some of his other points were seriously misconstrued, like "De-emphasizing Empathy" (he never called for an end of empathy in his text, only that empathy is not the end-all of inclusion). Other points I don't agree with at all, but I understand his text as ideas how individuals and their talents can be strengthened, and that includes women – but coming from a "conservative" viewpoint (most of his ideas would have been considered pretty progressive in the 1990s).

Takeaway 1: Google is absolutely in the right to fire him, they are a private entity and don't have to accept opinions that they think are going against company culture. Free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

Takeaway 2: For a company that lives off the exchange of information and ideas, though, it's pretty pathetic to fire someone for expressing theirs. Heavy-handed, too. Firing someone is pretty much the last resort.

Takeaway 3: I am convinced the vast majority of people that debated the text didn't read it.

Takeaway 4: Tech journalism is ridiculous and pathetic. They are becoming an industry that creates and fosters outrage because they desperately need people to click their ad-financed articles.

SleepyMonkey7 · 2017-08-08T05:34:45+00:00

The most egregious thing I've seen so far is how certain media outlets are mischaracterizing the memo with sensationalist headlines.
1) the memo had little to nothing to do with race, it's about gender. 2) it was not anti-diversity, it was questioning Google's diversity programs (do most people even know what those are?), 3) it was not claiming women are not capable, but was rather outlining reasons why some (not all, not even most, just more comparable to men) women might not WANT to enter tech.
4) it contained many citations, many of which are being dropped in republications.

Disagree if you disagree, but at least get right what you're disagreeing about.

NoMyOwnFlashBang · 2017-08-08T09:49:21+00:00

It's important to note that the Department of Labour is currently investigating Google for wage discrimination.

I'd say that had a fair amount of influence in the decision.

yokillz · 2017-08-08T08:04:49+00:00

I've been trying for two days now to wrap my head around these responses alleging he called women "biologically inferior" at tech and I just don't get it. I've probably read the thing four times now and I have no idea where the hell that is coming from.

The entire document is talking about women who DID NOT choose to go into tech and how to make it more appealing for them (thus resulting in... more women in tech). It actually has nothing to do with the ones who currently are in tech!

And fundamentally, the reaction doesn't make much sense to me. If this guy thinks women suck at coding, why is he suggesting ways to get more women in?

iMeanWh4t · 2017-08-08T11:10:52+00:00

It's incredible how intentionally misleading some news outlets were in covering this. http://imgur.com/gRfe275 Here is CNN's headline on Snapchat.

breezehair · 2017-08-08T11:25:10+00:00

How will Google employees feel about posting on internal message boards in future?

Will anybody post any discussion at all of company diversity policy, or of any possibly politically or socially controversial issue?

It will be interesting to see. I suspect that Google just killed their internal discussion system. It's their decision, but will it perhaps be their loss?

Summitjunky · 2017-08-08T11:26:25+00:00

Someone posted the memo in the comments...This was a statement towards the end that is not a complete summary, but I think is a good point, "I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)." I get from this that the best person should be employed regardless off gender or race.

Lingenfelter · 2017-08-08T06:54:15+00:00

TL:DR

"Google respects diverse opinions"

"I disagree"

"You’re fired."

Drmadanthonywayne · 2017-08-08T06:01:49+00:00

The subject of Google’s ideological bent came up at the most recent shareholder meeting, in June. A shareholder asked executives whether conservatives would feel welcome at the company. Executives disagreed with the idea that anyone wouldn’t.

“The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking,” Alphabet Chairman Eric Schmidt said at the time. “You’ll also find that all of the other companies in our industry agree with us.”

So long as you keep your mouth shut.

17p10 · 2017-08-08T02:18:55+00:00

Every major tech news site intentionally misinterpreted what he wrote even after it became public and they could verify it. According to 4 behavioral scientists/psychologists he is right:http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/

The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right.

Within hours, this memo unleashed a firestorm of negative commentary, most of which ignored the memo’s evidence-based arguments. Among commentators who claim the memo’s empirical facts are wrong, I haven’t read a single one who understand sexual selection theory, animal behavior, and sex differences research.

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.

seekthetruthnotlies · 2017-08-08T06:36:12+00:00

"Unpopular speech, unpopular ideas, unpopular art needs protection the most"

Tim Cook

Boorgar · 2017-08-08T09:31:20+00:00

Don't understand how firing the guy makes it any better.

Yuo_cna_Raed_Tihs · 2017-08-08T10:03:34+00:00

People with dissenting opinions often are afraid to voice them.

Youre fired.

FoxxMcLeod · 2017-08-08T10:03:32+00:00

Google just confirming what his memo said...

DrockByte · 2017-08-08T09:40:43+00:00

"We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical..."

Did they really just use inclusion and acceptance as justification for firing someone with a different opinion?

luisito_75 · 2017-08-08T12:19:46+00:00

In a way, they kind of proved his point

JimesT00PER · 2017-08-08T05:36:53+00:00

This seems somewhat relevant. https://www.edge.org/conversation/helena_cronin-getting-human-nature-right

"...lots of strands of feminism have somehow got themselves committed to the view that if men and women are in any ways fundamentally different it will undermine the quest for a fair and egalitarian society."

TomboyEXE · 2017-08-08T09:42:47+00:00

I'm a girl who's a college student studying for a computer science degree. I read the comments here and have to agree with one thing: give the job to the person who is more qualified and competent in the workplace. Suppose you're a app developer, you need workers who can code not workers who are male and female. Ethnicity, age(this may be controversial), sex, gender do not matter if you cannot do your job properly.

INeedHelpJim · 2017-08-08T11:44:48+00:00

Did they seriously bring up the Pao case that she lost horribly on every front? Not really going to make your argument by using examples that fly in the face of everything you are attempting to bring attention to.

kinbladez · 2017-08-08T10:23:29+00:00

He writes a memo essentially asking for Google to have an open discussion about the issues of gender gap in the tech field, with researched footnotes, and rather than having such a discussion, is fired for it. I read the entire memo, it's boring but otherwise respectful and detailed. He is being railed against as a hateful and misogynist, which is shameful.

Essentially the entire point of the memo was that he felt Google needed to achieve diversity honestly, rather than by forcing hires based on gender or race for gender or race's sake.

KidBeene · 2017-08-08T06:20:45+00:00

I have heard the closed door conversations "We need to add a few more females to the ORG chart." in the financial technology world. It is idiotic that a person is hired based purely on their gender in any field that personality/skill/work ethic should be the determining factors.

crazystrawman · 2017-08-08T12:17:53+00:00

Google: We need diversity because women are different than men and thus bring a different point of view to the job.

Employee: Because men and women are different women may be less likely to pursue a career in tech.

Google: You're fired you fucking bigot.

aerostotle · 2017-08-08T05:48:39+00:00

This is an environment of welcoming, so you can just get the hell out

mixxituk · 2017-08-08T07:09:21+00:00

This was related to /r/JordanPeterson

cpoakes · 2017-08-08T01:39:52+00:00

Effectively demonstrating one of his main points.

xydroh · 2017-08-08T06:24:55+00:00

I get why people are outraged and rightfully so, the person that leaked the "internal memo" (hence internal) gets to stay even after making the company look bad. The guy that wrote a memo meant to stay internal gets fired because well why expressing an opinion and adding some facts to it? Google makes a statement saying they respect freedom of speech followed by firing the guy. This makes no sense, they've proven his point for him and I see grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit.

Syncoped · 2017-08-08T01:52:23+00:00

Is there a copy of the email floating around? I'm curious to read it.

Sidion · 2017-08-08T06:51:41+00:00

Anyone else feel like American politics has devolved into a sort of psuedo religion?

You're either red or blue. There is no other acceptable answer. If you tell anyone believing in one side or the other something they don't agree with, you're the enemy.

It's kind of amusing how we have moved away from organized religion slightly, only to pivot into making politics fill the void. I wonder when the ~~holy~~ party wars will start?

EDIT: The amount of angry comments I've received are just confirming it. Funnily enough I'm getting hated on by both 'sides'.

kdeff · 2017-08-08T03:36:51+00:00

RE: The issue that women are so underrepresented in tech.

I work for a small, established Silicon Valley company of about 25 people. There were about 22 men and 3 women. But I felt the company is ~~unbiased~~ fair in its hiring processes. And of those 3 women, one was the VP of the company; a role no one ever doubted she deserved because she was exceptional at her job.

The reality at my company and at many companies across the tech industry is that there are more qualified men than there are women. Here me out before you downvote. Im not saying women aren't smart and aren't capable of being just as qualified for these jobs.

But, the thing is, this cultural push to get more women involved in engineering and the sciences only started in the 2000s. To score a high level position at a company like mine, you need to know your shit. ie, you need education and experience. All the people available in the workforce with the required experience have been working 10-30 years in the industry; meaning they went to college in the 1970s and 1980s.

So where are all the women with this experience and education? Well just arent many. And thats just a fact. In 1971-72, it was estimated that only 17% of engineering students were women. That trend didnt change much in the following years. In 2003, it was estimated that 80% of new engineers were men, and 20% women.

This isnt an attack on women, and its not an endorsement saying that there isnt sexism in the workplace - sexism can and does affect a womans career. But the idea that 50% of the tech workforce should be women is just not based in reason. Now - in the 2010s - there is a concerted effort to get girls (yes - this starts at a young age) and women interested in STEM at school and college. But these efforts wont pay off now. Theyll pay off 20-30 years from now.

There should be laws protecting women in tech; equal pay laws should apply everywhere. And claims that women are held back because of sexism shouldnt be dismissed lightly - it is a problem. But to cry wolf just because there is a disproportionate number of men in the industry right now is not a logically sound argument.

Edit: Source on figures: Link

Edit2: Yes, I should have said 90s/00's, not 70s and 80s, but the same thing still applies. The people from the 70s/80s tend to have leadership roles at my company and competitors because they were around (or took part un) the industry's foubding. They are retiring now, though. Slowly.

mangomafia · 2017-08-08T05:19:57+00:00

This is a general statement on Google's confusing culture. It is no surprise to me that such a document got written. Google profits from the plus side of an open culture, where employees don't feel they are working only for a salary, and they genuinely invest themselves in the job. On the other hand, when the chips are down Google says you are on your own.

Free food, snacks, laundry, free t-shirts (my memories are from back when they sat in cupboards open to all), massages, gym, places to nap, 24x7 work culture, haircuts, foreign off-sites (paid vacations) with colleagues, TGIF parties with booze, team bar in the cubicles, nerf gun battles in flip flops and shorts - the list of blurred lines is endless. Many can and do get confused about the exact line between personal and public life.

It's no secret Google hires from the cradle, for most this is their first real job, and they are greeted by corporate speak (implicit and explicit) that says, "treat this like your home, have an opinion, be yourself, be open, share ideas - there's no bad idea". A few (including lonely geeks who have never felt so welcomed and at home in all their lives) get comfortable and start truly being themselves, and that's when they walk into a concrete wall of "we are a big company, and we play by big company rules".

I have seen a lot of people pay the price for being too free with their opinions, but it doesn't always end in losing one's job - usually it's just a series of dings on the bonus or promotion or stern talking tos, and the employee burns out and quits on his/her own eventually.

This is not an opinion on the document which I haven't yet read, only skimmed, but I've heard plenty of such opinions, so it is not altogether new to me.

A lot of industries including tech do need more women, but tech is hardly the coalface of gender discrimination. It is one industry, unlike wall street that has been extremely accommodative of gender diversity, and that's a good thing.

That said, it is my experience that if you rise to be a senior woman engineer in tech a lot of otherwise shut doors open. For example, startups are always on the lookout for a senior woman engineer to be on their founding team - it makes getting funding a lot easier. However you also have to put up with unwanted dick pics and every other guy asking you out and feeling pissed off when you don't agree.

8DDD · 2017-08-08T08:16:08+00:00

So I initially just browsed through the entire "manifesto" on Gizmodo and then decided I didn't care enough what 1 among 57,100 employees thinks about the culture of a company I don't work with.

Then I saw the controversy and headlines build up and decided to give the text a closer read: Honestly – unless I missed something, it didn't strike me as a hateful or discriminatory text. On the contrary, the guy even made suggestions for creating a workplace that is more inclusive for everyone. His idea of creating a culture of "psychological safety" is interesting. Some of his other points were seriously misconstrued, like "De-emphasizing Empathy" (he never called for an end of empathy in his text, only that empathy is not the end-all of inclusion). Other points I don't agree with at all, but I understand his text as ideas how individuals and their talents can be strengthened, and that includes women – but coming from a "conservative" viewpoint (most of his ideas would have been considered pretty progressive in the 1990s).

Takeaway 1: Google is absolutely in the right to fire him, they are a private entity and don't have to accept opinions that they think are going against company culture. Free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

Takeaway 2: For a company that lives off the exchange of information and ideas, though, it's pretty pathetic to fire someone for expressing theirs. Heavy-handed, too. Firing someone is pretty much the last resort.

Takeaway 3: I am convinced the vast majority of people that debated the text didn't read it.

Takeaway 4: Tech journalism is ridiculous and pathetic. They are becoming an industry that creates and fosters outrage because they desperately need people to click their ad-financed articles.

SleepyMonkey7 · 2017-08-08T05:34:45+00:00

The most egregious thing I've seen so far is how certain media outlets are mischaracterizing the memo with sensationalist headlines.
1) the memo had little to nothing to do with race, it's about gender. 2) it was not anti-diversity, it was questioning Google's diversity programs (do most people even know what those are?), 3) it was not claiming women are not capable, but was rather outlining reasons why some (not all, not even most, just more comparable to men) women might not WANT to enter tech.
4) it contained many citations, many of which are being dropped in republications.

Disagree if you disagree, but at least get right what you're disagreeing about.

NoMyOwnFlashBang · 2017-08-08T09:49:21+00:00

It's important to note that the Department of Labour is currently investigating Google for wage discrimination.

I'd say that had a fair amount of influence in the decision.

yokillz · 2017-08-08T08:04:49+00:00

I've been trying for two days now to wrap my head around these responses alleging he called women "biologically inferior" at tech and I just don't get it. I've probably read the thing four times now and I have no idea where the hell that is coming from.

The entire document is talking about women who DID NOT choose to go into tech and how to make it more appealing for them (thus resulting in... more women in tech). It actually has nothing to do with the ones who currently are in tech!

And fundamentally, the reaction doesn't make much sense to me. If this guy thinks women suck at coding, why is he suggesting ways to get more women in?

iMeanWh4t · 2017-08-08T11:10:52+00:00

It's incredible how intentionally misleading some news outlets were in covering this. http://imgur.com/gRfe275 Here is CNN's headline on Snapchat.

breezehair · 2017-08-08T11:25:10+00:00

How will Google employees feel about posting on internal message boards in future?

Will anybody post any discussion at all of company diversity policy, or of any possibly politically or socially controversial issue?

It will be interesting to see. I suspect that Google just killed their internal discussion system. It's their decision, but will it perhaps be their loss?

Summitjunky · 2017-08-08T11:26:25+00:00

Someone posted the memo in the comments...This was a statement towards the end that is not a complete summary, but I think is a good point, "I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)." I get from this that the best person should be employed regardless off gender or race.

Lingenfelter · 2017-08-08T06:54:15+00:00

TL:DR

"Google respects diverse opinions"

"I disagree"

"You’re fired."

Drmadanthonywayne · 2017-08-08T06:01:49+00:00

The subject of Google’s ideological bent came up at the most recent shareholder meeting, in June. A shareholder asked executives whether conservatives would feel welcome at the company. Executives disagreed with the idea that anyone wouldn’t.

“The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking,” Alphabet Chairman Eric Schmidt said at the time. “You’ll also find that all of the other companies in our industry agree with us.”

So long as you keep your mouth shut.

17p10 · 2017-08-08T02:18:55+00:00

Every major tech news site intentionally misinterpreted what he wrote even after it became public and they could verify it. According to 4 behavioral scientists/psychologists he is right:http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/

The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right.

Within hours, this memo unleashed a firestorm of negative commentary, most of which ignored the memo’s evidence-based arguments. Among commentators who claim the memo’s empirical facts are wrong, I haven’t read a single one who understand sexual selection theory, animal behavior, and sex differences research.

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.

seekthetruthnotlies · 2017-08-08T06:36:12+00:00

"Unpopular speech, unpopular ideas, unpopular art needs protection the most"

Tim Cook

Boorgar · 2017-08-08T09:31:20+00:00

Don't understand how firing the guy makes it any better.

Yuo_cna_Raed_Tihs · 2017-08-08T10:03:34+00:00

People with dissenting opinions often are afraid to voice them.

Youre fired.

FoxxMcLeod · 2017-08-08T10:03:32+00:00

Google just confirming what his memo said...

DrockByte · 2017-08-08T09:40:43+00:00

"We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical..."

Did they really just use inclusion and acceptance as justification for firing someone with a different opinion?

luisito_75 · 2017-08-08T12:19:46+00:00

In a way, they kind of proved his point

JimesT00PER · 2017-08-08T05:36:53+00:00

This seems somewhat relevant. https://www.edge.org/conversation/helena_cronin-getting-human-nature-right

"...lots of strands of feminism have somehow got themselves committed to the view that if men and women are in any ways fundamentally different it will undermine the quest for a fair and egalitarian society."

TomboyEXE · 2017-08-08T09:42:47+00:00

I'm a girl who's a college student studying for a computer science degree. I read the comments here and have to agree with one thing: give the job to the person who is more qualified and competent in the workplace. Suppose you're a app developer, you need workers who can code not workers who are male and female. Ethnicity, age(this may be controversial), sex, gender do not matter if you cannot do your job properly.

INeedHelpJim · 2017-08-08T11:44:48+00:00

Did they seriously bring up the Pao case that she lost horribly on every front? Not really going to make your argument by using examples that fly in the face of everything you are attempting to bring attention to.

kinbladez · 2017-08-08T10:23:29+00:00

He writes a memo essentially asking for Google to have an open discussion about the issues of gender gap in the tech field, with researched footnotes, and rather than having such a discussion, is fired for it. I read the entire memo, it's boring but otherwise respectful and detailed. He is being railed against as a hateful and misogynist, which is shameful.

Essentially the entire point of the memo was that he felt Google needed to achieve diversity honestly, rather than by forcing hires based on gender or race for gender or race's sake.

KidBeene · 2017-08-08T06:20:45+00:00

I have heard the closed door conversations "We need to add a few more females to the ORG chart." in the financial technology world. It is idiotic that a person is hired based purely on their gender in any field that personality/skill/work ethic should be the determining factors.

crazystrawman · 2017-08-08T12:17:53+00:00

Google: We need diversity because women are different than men and thus bring a different point of view to the job.

Employee: Because men and women are different women may be less likely to pursue a career in tech.

Google: You're fired you fucking bigot.

aerostotle · 2017-08-08T05:48:39+00:00

This is an environment of welcoming, so you can just get the hell out

mixxituk · 2017-08-08T07:09:21+00:00

This was related to /r/JordanPeterson

cpoakes · 2017-08-08T01:39:52+00:00

Effectively demonstrating one of his main points.

xydroh · 2017-08-08T06:24:55+00:00

I get why people are outraged and rightfully so, the person that leaked the "internal memo" (hence internal) gets to stay even after making the company look bad. The guy that wrote a memo meant to stay internal gets fired because well why expressing an opinion and adding some facts to it? Google makes a statement saying they respect freedom of speech followed by firing the guy. This makes no sense, they've proven his point for him and I see grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit.

news

MODERATORS

news

MODERATORS