Well, they do discriminate by sex. They're proud of it - it's part of their "diversity" (i.e. anti-diversity) and "equality" (i.e. anti-equality) policies. So the question the case will answer isn't whether or not Google discriminate by sex (they do) but whether or not it's legal for them to do so.
The problem with the suggestion that it's a hostile work environment driving women out would mean there's qualified women sat at home or leaving the industry to do something else which just isn't born out by the stats - Google's proportion of men to women closely mirrors that of those who are graduating from universities according to the stats quoted in the article. The irony of course that Google's CEO would then have to rely on the same arguments for the lack of women at Google is of course not missed.
I wonder how Damore's sexual discrimination lawsuit is doing? I suspect that Google will just pay him off rather than have this sort of thing brought out in court.
Of course not. The situation is very different. She has a priviliged group identity, he has a target group identity. The whole point of the people who targetted Damore is the belief that a person's sex is their identity and women should be given privileged treatment over men - that's why they were so furious that he said that everyone should be treated the same regardless of their sex and that individuals of the same sex are actually different people. They have the power, so they make the rules. Pointing out that they are hypocrites is as useless as pointing out that they were lying about Damore's memo. They know that they are liars and hypocrites and they don't care.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.