Autism Isn’t To Blame For Bad Behavior.

Post Reply New Topic

I have seen people play the "disability" or "illness" card with things besides autism, too. They say, "Well, I'm sick. I'm an invalid. I should be given a pass." No, you shouldn't. My Asperger syndrome, if I do have it, makes me try harder to do better.

Sure but at least the guy at Google didn't do anything wrong but stating that the best people should be elected instead of more incompetent representatives of minorities if those are a much worse choice.
But you can't fight idiots who are blind of hate to everyone who blames their sh***y and useless political correctness if those are stating that incompetent representative of minorities are always the right choice over more competent but just normal people. His whole fault was just to work for a company like Google where honesty just counts as a bad behaviour.

Yes, there is a huge difference between people making honest mistakes or people who are legitimately impaired in a way that makes their behavior look strange and brats or bullies who either have never been taught to consider others or who take pleasure in hurting others.

Google asked its employees for their opinions on diversity in the workplace and at Google. Damore did just that writing a “manifesto” saying that in general men are better at tech than women and called the culture at google an “echo chamber”, and that Google should end their diversity program. It is a view widely regarded as sexist especially at Google a company with a progressive company culture. Claiming other employees felt threatened Google fired Damore. It is obvious that Google did not want certain opinions. The probability that Google did not want Damore to say what he said was a hidden or unstated meaning in their request for feedback. Autistics are noted for getting in trouble for not understanding these hidden meanings.

I do believe in general Autism is used as an excuse for bad behavior too often.

IMHO Damore engaged in naive, not bad behavior and that it is plausible that his autism was a factor in his actions that led to his firing.

That article the google man wrote came off as misogyny and that he thinks lesser than women. So just because men tend to be more tech than woman, women shouldn't be working for Google. I remember feeling offended while reading it I had to stop because I was getting too angry. f*****g stereotypes.What if I wrote about men being incompetent and don't know how to do housework like cooking and cleaning and basic chores around the house and women do better at it in general. I am betting men would be angry too. There comes a time when you gotta say someone is just an a**hole and it's not their autism. Their autism did not make them believe this. I also felt he was using his autism as an excuse. No honey, you autism didn't make you feel that way about women. It's no different if I were to say men shouldn't work in the housekeeping business because more women are better at it than men in general. I am sure that would get me fired too for my misandry or sexism.

Did you read the paper? Just searched it again. It's only against discrimination of white males at Google.
I can't figure out why the discrimination of white males at Google should be a 'progressive company culture'.
Here is the paper of James Damore:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... hamber.pdf

Last edited by quite an extreme on 27 Jul 2019, 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What is Shuenke's purpose behind the article?

Autistic people get bullied and ostracised and they can do great things but also capable of terrible things?? WTF!

I think even psychologists struggle to differentiate between their predictive models and construct validity for autism (which is based on diagnostic criteria) and individual differences where genes coding for things as varied as executive control, compulsive behavior etc are switch on or switched either at birth or triggered by environment.

The question of whether autism is to blame for behavior is irrelevant, for the general public (and most mental health professionals) comorbid genes + autism = autism

There is nothing in the paper that women shouldn't be working for Google but the opposite. He stated that Google should provide more part time jobs for becoming more attractive for women.

He stated the differences of men and women. But this was not judging and also not the point of the paper.

He stated his opinions on the differences of women. These opinions are misogynistic, in that he uses these alleged "differences" in his convoluted "reasoning" that they constitute "evidence" that men are being discriminated against at Google. This was perceived by the management at Google as sexist bigotry, and the management at Google was well within its rights to dismiss the man.

All else being equal, I would hire the person who can demonstrate greater skill. If that person happens to be a woman, then she's hired. As long as hiring is based only on ability and willingness to work, then there is no discrimination.

I just read Damore's 'manifesto' and I think it's been misrepresented.

All he's really saying is that programs to increase diversity should not be considered sacred, such that they can not be open to debate over whether they are best serving the needs of the company.

Obviously, he is not too keen on practices that are discriminately targeted to assist women/minority groups (and I would disagree with him on that point because I personally see these as assisting to overcome historical prejudices), but all he's asking for is a culture of psychological safety in which he can be free to express his opinion on such practices.

From speaking to male colleagues in my own workplace, I think he is only voicing the frustration that many are feeling, that they are no longer allowed a voice for fear of being branded anti-feminist, discriminatory or misogynist. (i.e. exactly what happened to Mr Damore).

In a way, I agree with him to some extent, about the need for open discussion on the reasons for and benefits attained by a diversity agenda, if only to avoid misrepresentation of such programs as forming active discrimination against those who might previously have been in the majority, leading them to feel unappreciated and disenfranchised.

So what is Damore's manifesto? (Sorry all I saw was a childish cartoon on the link posted)...

One of the above respondees posted a link

Damore's claim that;
the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ8 and sex differences).

is crap...

He isn't a psychologist and if he was (which he isn't) he would know there is no "scholarly" evidence that that race or gender predict differences in IQ.

The reason there is affirmative action in google is because the entire silicon valley is skewed toward white and east Asian males.
https://money.cnn.com/interactive/techn ... sity-data/

There are only 4 managers of African American origin in the entire silicon valley!! ! that's crazy

women make up 25% of all workers in Silicon valley....predominantly admin/low end

I just feel a little uncomfortable with him being fired for expressing his views (however biased and unsound), when:
(a) Google had stated their policy of enabling open discourse;
(b) Damore was not in a position to change Google policy himself, he was only stating his opinion;
(c) The action of firing him in a way confirms his stated argument that the company did not provide a culture of psychological safety in which everyone is truly free to air their views.

If he had been in charge of diversity policy in Google or if hiring practices came within his job duties, then it would have been obvious that he had to go. Otherwise, it's not so clear-cut. In my view, it would have been better dealt with by Google refuting his argument and re-stating their diversity program aims and achievements, rather than by firing him for his beliefs.

But I may be missing part of the story. I'm not sure if Damore made his manifesto public at the time - if so, that would definitely have been problematic and would likely have been a factor in his dismissal.

I have seen a lot of debate on whether his opinion was bad. The subject of this thread is about bad behavior. Answering a request for feedback is not bad behavior.

The thread went off on a tangent almost immediately?