Google fires diversity critic

[Mormolyce]

Yeah it leaves it up to the imagination, even better.

What are you even saying?

[Afrospinach]

What are you even saying?

I think he is saying he views co workers and possible co workers as sex objects.

[matt4pack]

How is danger more suited to men than women? There's nothing in DNA that makes people inherently more susceptible to danger.

It's not the danger just the physical demands of those jobs which tend to make them more dangerous.

[Venant]

I'm probably one of the most conservative people to post on this forum. That being said, if you mouth off to your employer, you really have only yourself to blame if you get fired. Working for Google, or anyone else for that matter, is not a constitutional right. My father once told me, "If you take a man's money, the least you owe him in return is silence."

If your supervisor is embezzling money from the company, do you have a duty to say something or do you have a duty of loyalty to your supervisor?

[rogueMatthias]

Fun world to live in where saying the truth is agaisnt "popular" progressive culture.

The funny part is that most people, (conservative, liberal or whatever) who've ACTUALLY READ it and not just the overly emotional "summaries", kinda know he's making a lot of valid points.

It's like everyone's pretending to be outraged together Is society really that scared of offending the whole "Control Left" now that we're all going to just accept a false reality together?

[satimy]

The human sexes and races have exactly the same minds, with precisely identical distributions of traits, aptitudes, interests, and motivations; therefore, any inequalities of outcome in hiring and promotion must be due to systemic sexism and racism;
The human sexes and races have such radically different minds, backgrounds, perspectives, and insights, that companies must increase their demographic diversity in order to be competitive; any lack of demographic diversity must be due to short-sighted management that favors groupthink.
The obvious problem is that these two core assumptions are diametrically opposed.
Let me explain. If different groups have minds that are precisely equivalent in every respect, then those minds are functionally interchangeable, and diversity would be irrelevant to corporate competitiveness. For example, take sex differences. The usual rationale for gender diversity in corporate teams is that a balanced, 50/50 sex ratio will keep a team from being dominated by either masculine or feminine styles of thinking, feeling, and communicating. Each sex will counter-balance the other’s quirks. (That makes sense to me, by the way, and is one reason why evolutionary psychologists often value gender diversity in research teams.) But if there are no sex differences in these psychological quirks, counter-balancing would be irrelevant. A 100% female team would function exactly the same as a 50/50 team, which would function the same as a 100% male team. If men are no different from women, then the sex ratio in a team doesn’t matter at any rational business level, and there is no reason to promote gender diversity as a competitive advantage.
Likewise, if the races are no different from each other, then the racial mix of a company can’t rationally matter to the company’s bottom line. The only reasons to value diversity would be at the levels of legal compliance with government regulations, public relations virtue-signalling, and deontological morality – not practical effectiveness. Legal, PR, and moral reasons can be good reasons for companies to do things. But corporate diversity was never justified to shareholders as a way to avoid lawsuits, PR blowback, or moral shame; it was justified as a competitive business necessity.
So, if the sexes and races don’t differ at all, and if psychological interchangeability is true, then there’s no practical business case for diversity.
On the other hand, if demographic diversity gives a company any competitive advantages, it must be because there are important sex differences and race differences in how human minds work and interact. For example, psychological variety must promote better decision-making within teams, projects, and divisions. Yet if minds differ across sexes and races enough to justify diversity as an instrumental business goal, then they must differ enough in some specific skills, interests, and motivations that hiring and promotion will sometimes produce unequal outcomes in some company roles. In other words, if demographic diversity yields any competitive advantages due to psychological differences between groups, then demographic equality of outcome cannot be achieved in all jobs and all levels within a company. At least, not without discriminatory practices such as affirmative action or demographic quotas.


Good summary about fake diversity


http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/goog...tists-respond/

[ro9ue]

Totally justified. It is unacceptable to write a memo stating "women are terrible leaders cuz genetics" then play the conservative white male victim card. Grow up.

Again, I can only assume you didn't read it, but only what the media's spin on it was. I think if you read it you'd probably agree with 80% of it.

[Dextroden]

Again, I can only assume you didn't read it, but only what the media's spin on it was. I think if you read it you'd probably agree with 80% of it.

You can safely assume that anyone saying he thinks women are lesser read a tweet from someone else who didn't read the paper at this point.

[McFuu]

Did Google settle out of court yet? Can this guy retire already?

[sarahtasher]

Again, it's pretty funny that the usual suspect assume that people did not read this masterpiece of MRA thought.

For instance, I know that you are all persuaded that if a STEM white guy tell you something, it's ''scientifikal and logikal'' but this ''memo'' is just a list of bullet points without any source backing them. It's him stating his opinion, which is the thinly veiled MRA/PUA gospel ''wumin too stoopid to work, wumin brain just good enough to obey STEM owner and make him sandmiches''

- - - Updated - - -

Did Google settle out of court yet? Can this guy retire already?

Ah, now the usual suspects are going to defend workers rights, before the next agitprop instructions to call unions and workers protections laws ''kommunist'' are given of course. Once again, it's really fun to see the said usual suspects completely miss the point, that is in the cuthroat business culture they are venerating, you can fire workers for no reason at all.

[Livnthedream]

CONTRA GRANT ON EXAGGERATED DIFFERENCES

I also recommend reading the comments.

[Illana]

Again, it's pretty funny that the usual suspect assume that people did not read this masterpiece of MRA thought.

For instance, I know that you are all persuaded that if a STEM white guy tell you something, it's ''scientifikal and logikal'' but this ''memo'' is just a list of bullet points without any source backing them. It's him stating his opinion, which is the thinly veiled MRA/PUA gospel ''wumin too stoopid to work, wumin brain just good enough to obey STEM owner and make him sandmiches''

- - - Updated - - -



Ah, now the usual suspects are going to defend workers rights, before the next agitprop instructions to call unions and workers protections laws ''kommunist'' are given of course.

Without any sources backing it?

Are you sure you've read the memo?

[Livnthedream]

For instance, I know that you are all persuaded that if a STEM white guy tell you something, it's ''scientifikal and logikal'' but this ''memo'' is just a list of bullet points without any source backing them.

So says someone else who either didn't read it (most likely) or read the Gizmodo version which stripped them all out!

Truly, you have the best mind and should lord it over all of us plebs.

[Dextroden]

Wait. He's a PUA now? You're using too many buzzwords at once.

[sarahtasher]

That memo take a whopping 5 minutes to read. It's not the eight wonder of the world. I know that in certain settings, ''agitprop orders given on YouTube'' count ''as a source or reference, but MRA-boy does not cite a single study...

[Livnthedream]

Wait. He's a PUA now? You're using too many buzzwords at once.

It is almost like they don't actually know what any of them mean just that they are bad and therefore must apply. Remember, at the end of the day, he is a literal Nazi too!

- - - Updated - - -

That memo take a whopping 5 minutes to read. It's not the eight wonder of the world. I know that in certain settings, ''agitprop orders given on YouTube'' count ''as a source or reference, but MRA-boy does not cite a single study...

And yet you didn't do it. As your statements indicate.

[Illana]

That memo take a whopping 5 minutes to read. It's not the eight wonder of the world. I know that in certain settings, ''agitprop orders given on YouTube'' count ''as a source or reference, but MRA-boy does not cite a single study...

if it took you 5 minutes to read I don't think you grasped it very well.

Especially if you think he didn't cite any studies..

[Deleted]

I think he is saying he views co workers and possible co workers as sex objects.

That's the whole point of education, to gaining a few additional useful properties other than potential sex object and avoid ending-up as a prostitute, mankind's default job. Education is not about teaching me how to play dead under any provocation, want a war or something?

If you don't want people to regard you as a sex object you should stop advertising your sexual properties.

[sarahtasher]

Wait a minute, you are ACTUALLY thinking that TWO charts, unsourced ones moreover, are ''proofs'' ? (What you seems to call ''quotes'' include maybe 2-3 genuine references and, I'm not joking, a Wikipedia article, a blog post, articles from newspapers and so forth)

[McTroll]

Wait. He's a PUA now? You're using too many buzzwords at once.

Yeah, he's got mad game. His openers are off the hook, his negs are on point, his kino's perfect. Plus he F-closes every approach he makes!

#alfaasfuk