Google fires diversity critic

[Vyuvarax]

you do know its possible to criticize democrats without being a republican right?

Sure, but the claim implied by the original poster is that Republicans do want to help the average person more than Democrats. Not sure you're reading enough before commenting.

[Illana]

I mean, if you have a purely nonsensical definition of strawman that, say, you liberally throw out at any hint of opposition to your argument in a way that is itself a strawman, sure.

Ironic considering that's pretty much what you did

[Aggrophobic]

What company guideline did he go against?

It's absolutely that Google is against free speech. Firing a guy who wrote a memo? Isn't that the definition?

Right, of course. How about using some other search enging or maybe make your own?
Or do you actually want more goverment control over what companies do? Sounds like socialist agenda right there, mate.

The right wing in the US today is weird as heck. Like SJWs just more obnoxious.

[Vyuvarax]

Indeed and both sides loves misinformation when it fits their agenda.

Saying both sides use misinformation equally is misinformation. Conservatives actively argue against science as a party platform. Your claim is disingenuous.

[Illana]

Sure, but the claim implied by the original poster is that Republicans do want to help the average person more than Democrats. Not sure you're reading enough before commenting.

Where was that written? I just said it was laughable that people believe democrats are out to protect the common man.

Projection is strong with this one.

[Canpinter]

Say what you will about Mike Pence, at least he would pay attention to national security briefings and wouldn't be Tweeting insults at people like a teenager.

ya he might actually accomplish something, that's my worry.

[Vyuvarax]

With all the affirmative action and political pressure coming from the media to get more women in leadership positions. Would it not logically follow that without the pressure the numbers would be lower?

Not seeing what part of your claim is actually bad.

[Dextroden]

Bringing up the issue of women in the tech industry is the verbal equivalent of throwing rocks at a hornet's nest.

I suspect it is because a lot of the bros in said industry feel threatened by the idea they might have to compete on actual, you know, quality of output rather than succeed because the environment is inherently hostile to people outside of a certain subculture.

Couldn't the same be said about women who react with hostility to the idea of being hired based on merit and not a gender quota?

[Deleted]

I... just... What?!

When you get a girlfriend you will know.

[Noomz]

Their behaviour against Laci Green and the girl behind the red pill movie comes to mind, both faced massive amounts of harrasement, doxing and threats, including death threats by progresdive or the "tolerant" ones for questioning the movemebts they used to be a part off, and turned away from.

We know that everyone on either side of the political spectrum do this to each other and it's always equally unacceptable but shouldn't get to taint the true politics going on.

[Illana]

Right, of course. How about using some other search enging or maybe make your own?
Or do you actually want more goverment control over what companies do? Sounds like socialist agenda right there, mate.

The right wing in the US today is weird as heck. Like SJWs just more obnoxious.

I didn't say I wanted government control, I just want people to say it like it is instead of building a mountain of bs to protect what amounts to an attack on dissenting opinions form a company claiming to promote "diversity"

[Elegiac]

With all the affirmative action and political pressure coming from the media to get more women in leadership positions. Would it not logically follow that without the pressure the numbers would be lower?

No, because all those serve to do at this point is mitigate some of the cultural obstacle to women entering those fields.

[Narwal]

I disagree that the only thing you can argue is sexism/bigotry. You can argue that it's societal, that our development process pushes women towards certain roles and men towards certain ones. And I would argue that's ok even if both sexes are equally capable of fulfilling any role, as long as you give everyone the opportunity. The only biological thing I'd get into is that women actually have to bear the children, and that as a result it's typically been more convenient to have them care for the children too so men tend to focus on career and women on child rearing. As long as women still have the opportunity to pursue engineering roles etc., I think that's an ok outcome. It doesn't have to be sexism.

Isn't society pushing women towards certain roles exactly the argument of "institutional sexism" that those on the side of "it's only sexism" make? So you make the argument for me... if women and men have no chemical differences (scientifically inaccurate) thus resulting in no actual trait-like differences, the only reason women are not in stem jobs is because society (the institution) tells them they can't because they're girls (sexism). We know for certain that schools are pushing hard on girls to go into stem, yet we still have a lack interest in it (generally). So this guys argument is this, we need to find new ways to make the stem fields interesting to girls.

Clearly, the initiatives we have right now are not enough. This could be because we ignore subtle things like the differences between what girls and boys tend to like, and that if we catered the stem fields/learning to do things girls may like more, we may have more success.

For instance, maybe we can make the development/programming pit be more social in some way. You know, talk to actual girls, figure out what kind of environment they would like to work in, etc.

Edit: This doesn't mean you have to push girls into new specific roles you generated for girls. It means having the option of different roles within a team. Choice/diversity of roles is not a bad thing.

[Illana]

No, because all those serve to do at this point is mitigate some of the cultural obstacle to women entering those fields.

And what obstacles are those?

[Vyuvarax]

Where was that written? I just said it was laughable that people believe democrats are out to protect the common man.

Projection is strong with this one.

You've argued conservative ideology consistently throughout this thread. The fact that you're conservative doesn't need to be openly stated when your views illustrate it. You could use some reading comprehension skills, too.

[matt4pack]

Bringing up the issue of women in the tech industry is the verbal equivalent of throwing rocks at a hornet's nest.

I suspect it is because a lot of the bros in said industry feel threatened by the idea they might have to compete on actual, you know, quality of output rather than succeed because the environment is inherently hostile to people outside of a certain subculture.

This is just so much BS it's hard to even no where to begin. First of all most males in tech wish for more woman to be around. I mean how many males really want to be surrounded by nothing but males constantly? You must really live in an odd little world to think that.

Secondly sorry to say but in my experience I haven't really witnessed females outperforming males in IT. Some do very well but at best would be on par with males. I've never seen someone just head and shoulders above. If anything many are given a much easier time then their males counterparts because they are female.

[Elegiac]

Couldn't the same be said about women who react with hostility to the idea of being hired based on merit and not a gender quota?

Sure, if one is dumb enough to be a 'woke independent' and draw false equivalencies because of it.

[Illana]

You've argued conservative ideology consistently throughout this thread. The fact that your conservative doesn't need to be openly stated when your views illustrate it. You could use some reading comprehension skills, too.

What part did I not comprehend?

Just because I have some conservative views does not mean all of my views are conservative.

Nuance really is dead in this generation.

[Ryme]

eh he may have some valid points but saying thing near / like "women are biologically unsuitable for certain technical roles." immediately invalidates the rest of his points. things like affirmative action and quota's on who to hire are bad though imo. The best person regardless of race/gender should be in the position.

Where is this line coming from? It's no where in the memo but is stated in this thread constantly.

[Aggrophobic]

When you get a girlfriend you will know.

I'm married and have been for close to 10 years now, thank you.