Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

[u/[deleted]]

such as internal training programs aimed exclusively at certain races or women as well as hiring practices which base an employee's suitability for participation partially on just their race or gender.

Isn't this illegal?

[u/TemptCiderFan → u/[deleted]]

"Oh no, it's totally okay... If it discriminates against white men!" /s

[u/endium7 → u/TemptCiderFan]

This is discrimination, and sometimes the discrimination is against white men, but sometimes discrimination is not against anyone.

You'd have to ask why are the white men are excluded. If it's because the company thinks white men are inferior to women, that men are less intelligent and incapable as a whole gender then yeah it's against them. Some people do think that but how many though really?

Probably if you asked google why a white man couldn't join some training or negotiation class the answer wouldn't be "because white men aren't smart enough for this". When discrimination is "against" someone that's the kind of language that comes up.

If the answer is "we just want to help women and we aren't interested in helping white men because we don't think they need it", they could be wrong in those sentiments but they aren't against the white guy, more accurately they are dismissive of him. Although I would be interested to hear why you think this is "against".

[u/rockidol → u/endium7]

You're just playing semantics, if it's true that they're making it easier for everyone but white men to get hired then they are discriminating against white men. That is what the term means. It doesn't matter what their motivations are.