Google gave its employee James Damore the axe this week. Figuratively speaking, should it have, instead, killed him softly with its love?

Damore, whom we will be hearing more about in the coming days as the newest face of white supremacy, is reportedly considering suing the tech giant for wrongful dismissal.

An internal memo he wrote to staff, made infamous on social media as the “Google Manifesto,” said you can’t blame discrimination or hiring practices for the dismal number of women in the tech industry and leadership positions.

It’s biology, stupid.

Read more:

Google memo shows workplace free speech protections are limited

Ex-Google engineer James Damore says ‘secretive’ diversity session prompted memo

Google fires author of divisive memo on gender differences

Women’s “neuroticism” makes them less suited to be software developers.

He said, “I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes.” Then he proceeded to rationalize the exclusion of women and to stereotype them.

The internet well-nigh exploded, its embers descending onto predictable corners. At one end were those outraged that a supposedly logical-minded engineer could cherry-pick scientific studies to make sweeping, absolute denouncements about half of humanity. On the other, were those outraged that a man speaking up for the status quo was vilified and had his free speech rights violated.

Much of the debate has focused on whether the brains of men and women are biologically different. One study says they are, another says they are not not. Certainly, no credible studies have made the connection between those differences and the career choices women make.

While it’s comforting to seek the status quo and explain away discrimination as a biological necessity — not being equally considered for those “bro” jobs is in our interest, silly— why do countries such as India and those in Latin America produce proportionally more female programmers than North America?

To lean on science first and then to switch to the claim that women don’t want leadership because “these positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life,” is just ridiculous, and ignores societal expectations that women carry the physical and mental load of running the house. It’s not just about who does the dishes.

Google's new head of diversity has denounced an employee who suggested women don't get ahead in tech jobs because of biological differences. (The Associated Press)

Damore says, “Status is the primary metric that men are judged on, pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for the status that they entail.”

Aww, those poor rich corporate bosses. Given a chance, they’d much rather do a 9 to 5, rush home and take charge of the household, pick up their kids, help with homework, run their baths, cook dinners, prep for school the next day, arrange play dates, arrange the social calendar, relationships, groceries . . . just bliss. Instead they are valiantly living up to societal pressures to be powerful.

“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.”

— Unknown

Damore’s views have clearly reverberated far beyond the boundaries of the tech industry to the wider world of sexists who couch their support of male dominance by heaping scorn on political correctness, by claiming victimhood while calling those actually victimized snowflakes, and finally, by relying on their “natural” leadership.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

They see opposition to their views as hypocrisy. They think social justice advocates welcome diversity of thought only when they agree with it.

But an opinion is not “diverse” just because it differs from the norm.

True diversity of thought based on different experiences enriches places of learning, places of work and societies when those speaking are not discounted simply for who they are. A differing view is not legitimate when all it seeks is to further oppress the marginalized.

One immediate reaction that was widely cited within Google and outside was a persuasive opinion piece by a former employee, Yonatar Zunger, who said characteristics such as empathy, described as “female” in the manifesto, make you better engineers. “Engineering is not the art of building devices; it’s the art of fixing problems,” he wrote. “The large bulk of your job is about co-ordinating and co-operating with other groups.”

He also made a case for why he would fire Damore. “I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you. You have just created a textbook hostile workplace environment.”

Google fired Damore on Tuesday.

There was another option. Google could have made Damore work in an all-women’s team with only female bosses, letting him stick out like a sore thumb, torn from his clique, unable to use “female” skills of collaboration because — biology just made him that way. Would he still want to “de-moralize diversity” if it meant there could be no men on his team? Would he still want to “de-emphasize empathy” if it led to his isolation?

Google’s firing supposedly sent a message that sexist views would not be tolerated.

In reality, it was not the views, but the expression of such views that were not being tolerated. The tech giant applied a Band-Aid to a far deeper cut. Firing people like Damore pushes underground the sexism that manifests daily in subtle ways around who is considered favourably, who is assigned challenging tasks, whose errors are excused more readily than others.

The outcome of such thinking shows up in Google’s employee demographics (similar to other tech companies): predominantly male (nearly seven in 10) and predominantly white (56 per cent), with Asian males making inroads.

It shows up in the company’s secrecy over its salary information while being investigated by the U.S. government over allegations of gender wage gap.

In being tardy about changing its institutional sexism, all the Google firing did was confirm delusions of victimhood among the powerful and deliver supremacists a new martyr.

Shree Paradkar writes on discrimination and identity. You can follow her @shreeparadkar

Read more about: