The original memo runs against current mores, and the science is wobbly, but it's not outrageous. Perhaps it's wrong, but it's not outrageous to be wrong! On the other hand, once he was kicked out of Google, he quickly fell in with some nasty characters, like Molyneux.
If you only heard about the memo, and missed or skimmed over the subsequent stuff, it's easy to see Damore as a victim of the dreaded cancel culture. Whereas if you didn't read the memo but saw what he was up to afterwards, it's easy to see him as a straightforward villain.
Your characterization of Damore is equally low effort. The memo is not simply a "relatively straightfoward review of standard Biology and Psychology research". Even if I were to agree that those parts of it were non-controversial, those parts of it are not the point or intention of the memo.
You are completely ignoring the arguments Damore actually makes, that were built on faulty premises and selected studies that validate his worldview. Some of his statements might be non-controversial in isolation, but have been constructed to build a specific narrative about diversity and inclusion. You are also completely ignoring the context in which this memo was distributed, surfaced, and the channels through which it was ultimately publicized.
Damore clearly had an agenda and his own bias against what he perceived as PC-culture at Google. Trying to frame him as some neutral observer of the behavioral psychology of Googlers is ignorant, if not disingenuous.
Just for reference, the first line in the memo is literally: "I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes"
But you kapnobatairza, you actually know what was in Damore's heart better than he himself. You are an oracle and a prophet and the bringer of truth. 2+2=5 amirite.
Which ones?
Your edit is even more misleading and incoherent than your original comment.
Memo line: "Women, on average, have more Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men"
Research summary: "I summarize data from two meta‐analyses and three cross‐cultural studies on gender differences in personality and interests. Results show that gender differences in Big Five personality traits are ‘small’ to ‘moderate,’ with the largest differences occurring for agreeableness and neuroticism (respective d s = 0.40 and 0.34; women higher than men). In contrast, gender differences on the people–things dimension of interests are ‘very large’ (d = 1.18), with women more people‐oriented and less thing‐oriented than men." https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-9004...
Wow.. totally misrepresented the research there...
Memo: "Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average"
Research: "There are no sex differences in cognitive ability but enduring sex differences in competitiveness, life goals, the relative emphasis on agency versus "connection." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0306988060076911...
Omg how misogynistic...
Memo: "Women, on average, have more Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance)."
Research: "Secondary analyses of Revised NEO Personality inventory data from 26 cultures (N =23,031) suggest that gender differences are small relative to individual variation within genders; differences are replicated across cultures for both college-age and adult samples, and differences are broadly consistent with gender stereotypes: Women reported themselves to be higher in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Warmth, and Openness to Feelings, whereas men were higher in Assertiveness and Openness to Ideas" https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.81.2....
Omg he totally misrepresented the research there...
Dogmatic statements like these just weaken your case; the idea that some memo was the Golden Standard™ of Science and those who question it are questioning Science itself is clearly ridiculous. It's Trump-level hyporbole. The perfect memo.
“I don’t view humanity as a single species...” —Podcast FDR2768, “Collective Guilt for Fun and Profit”, Saturday call-in show, August 9, 2014
“The whole breeding arena of the species needs to be cleaned the f--- up!” —Podcast FDR2740, “Conformity and the Cult of ‘Friendship’,” Wednesday call-in show July 2, 2014
"Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane." —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015
“You cannot run a high IQ [white] society with low IQ [non-white] people…these [non-white] immigrants are going to fail...and they're not just going to fail a little, they are going to fail hard…they're not staying on welfare because they’re lazy...they’re doing what is economically the best option for them...you are importing a gene set that is incompatible with success in a free-market economy.” —YouTube video, The Death of Europe | European Migrant Crisis, October 4, 2015
“...white people will bend over backwards to accommodate you, but when they finally get that they’re just being taken advantage of...you will see a backlash, and that backlash will be quick, decisive, and brutal.” —YouTube video, The Death of Germany | European Migrant Crisis, September 16, 2015
It's a terrible comment that belongs on Reddit, not HN.
As to what shows Damore appeared on, note that this was after he was fired by Google and pilloried by a large portion of the pitchfork "simplify everything to an easy villain" mob. It isn't surprising that he leveraged the small group that didn't ostracize him.
Damore's essay was horrendously poorly considered. People like Molyneux are effectively clowns playing to an audience that they can monetize. This doesn't change the fact that Damore's core argument was actually fairly reasonable.
The simple reality that every fist-pounding critic needs to grossly misrepresent what Damore said, turning it into some grotesque caricature far detached from truth, is revealing.
It's funny because the same people who support James Damore are also anti unionizing which would give them a stronger voice....
Is there actual literature on unionizing in software engineering, or is it mostly impassioned blog posts?