As a black male, I guess I just comprehend that I dont have the right to spout off my opinions at work, at least not if I want to keep my job. If I start rocking BLM merch around the office, I might not have a job. Feel free to finish telling me how unfair it is that he can't express his opinions, while we ignore the fact that he likely insulted a great deal of his colleagues while doing so. But they don't matter, right? Whats most important is James getting his opinions across. He is free to write what he wants, and they are free to can him.
Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
601–610 of 872 posts
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#602Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I made the grave mistake of trying to express that point on Twitter. Twitter seems to be a poor vehicle for nuanced debate at the best of time, but it's a dumpster fire right now full of raging people who don't understand what you've just said. It's worse. They don't care for what you've said, and they don't particularly care about the issues they talk about either. Some (media people, etc.) use the issues to have…
Extreme leftism is literally a religion, so much so that you can't even present scientific evidence that is contrary to their decided narrative. Born Again/Woke Transgression/Microagression Heresy/Dissent Sinner/(Racist, Misogynist, Bigot, Sexist) EDIT: Original Sin/(Privilege, Unconscious Bias) They even follow the same behavior pattern. First they declare you a Sinner. If you've done research they question the moti…
Don't forget that they recently created a concept of original sin: unconscious bias.
Thanks to the Implicit Association Test, it can now be demonstrated that everyone has racial bias. If you point out that follow up studies have shown poor test-retest reliability and that there are all sorts of other flaws in this field of research, you'll simply be dismissed as a denier.
So now, implicit bias takes the place of original sin, with white European (even the ones from Eastern Europe that had nothing to do with slavery) slaveholders standing in for Eve. You can never get rid of original sin, you can only ask for Jesus to forgive you. So who or what will be the new secular left wing Jesus?
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#603IMO the best comment from there: Giulio Prisco said... The results of this incident are easy to predict. Now everyone at Google (and everyone in large tech companies, and everyone in academy) knows that they can be fired for expressing opinions that dissent from the party line. Of course they'll shut up for fear of losing their job and the means to support their family. But they won't change their position. If anythi…
I see another problem: If you can't be openly sexist (or whatever you call it), you will still be in secret.
Nobody cares if you have sexist thoughts and opinions if you keep them to yourself and treat women with the respect and dignity they deserve. So I would say this is a step in the right direction.
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#604Really great post, and I had what I thought were some great observations about the article I wanted to share. But then in the article's comments I read this by Outer M.: "By the way, in science and technology, conservatism is a minority ideology (he says so himself in his letter). How would he feel if we start saying that conservative people aren't apt for science and technology? That if he doesn't feel welcome he sh…
Politics, favorite foods, religion, dress sense and other ideas aren't innate. Gender, age, ethnicity and sexuality are. Hence swapping gender for politics doesn't work. Additionally Damore argued for assessing individuals as individuals rather than as tribe members and assuming discrepancy is down to bias - even if you did sub someone's chosen politics for their gender, Damore's proposed fix would still require you…
> Politics, favorite foods, religion, dress sense and other ideas aren't innate. Gender, age, ethnicity and sexuality are. Hence swapping gender for politics doesn't work.
That is incorrect. The word "gender" is defined as the social and cultural differences between male and female, as opposed to the biological ones.
You also meant to say "sex" and not "sexuality". Sex is the innate biology of males & females. Sexuality refers to things like sexual preferences of partners, sexual feelings, and sexual activity, all of which are not innate.
I wasn't arguing against Damore and I don't care whether he argued for individuals. Except that he obviously didn't just argue for individuals, because he complained about the plight of the conservatives at Google, and suggested that women as a group are innately less capable technologists.
I just find it really funny that he took opposite stances on two minority groups in tech, and with a straight face argued against sensitivity toward one group and argued in favor of more sensitivity for the other. You can swap them, and I did, and what you get is more or less the exact same, equally wrong argument. It's very sad if what it takes is swapping them to see how wrong it is.
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#605Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Trust in Trump has plummeted, even amongst his core. The vote is very quickly slipping out of the grasp of the Right This is certainly the message being broadcast into every home on the planet for the last 6 moths. In reality it seems a bit optimistic when we consider the Democrats are coming from a decade-long losing streak ( http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/25/... ), a monumentally embarra…
Indeed but I think a lot of leftists would be very happy just to get rid of Trump. A right-wing government with a President who displays any kind of understanding of diplomacy, international politics and everyday reality would be an improvement.
I fear what Trump would be replaced with if the establishment GOP and Democrats actually managed to oust him.
The environment that catalyzed Trump's rise to power has not changed - if anything, it has intensified.
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#606Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do the last two bullet points of his tl;dr count?: * Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. * Discrimination to reach equal representation is [...] bad for business. Which I read as, "woman aren't as good, that's why they don't already work here, if we hire more of them, they'll not be able to do the job as…
That can be a reasonable reading, but I don't see what's so controversial about it. Would you agree that women are naturally physically weaker than men, and this makes for a convincing argument why you would expect more men doing physically demanding jobs? Is this a controversial statement to make? A difference in traits does not even have to produce a difference in ability to produce a difference in representation.…
> Would you agree that women are naturally physically weaker than men, and this makes for a convincing argument why you would expect more men doing physically demanding jobs? Is this a controversial statement to make?
There is a big difference between agreeing that some differences might exist and arguing that any token gestures for the women who DO qualify under the identical standard are unfair.
That's where this argument breaks down even if we pretend that it's not based on a leaning tower of broscience observations and dated dualist notions of "intellect".
Providing opportunities for minorities in the workplace substantially improves the lot of folks in those categories.
If we could point to the current diversity numbers and say, "Women who do qualify are rarer in the population than men, but tend to equal outcomes once we select for this population? Your argument would make more sense.
But wages are imbalanced, harassment is more prevalent, and turnover is higher. So I'm not as inclined to shrug and walk away just yet.
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#607Outraged about the leaked manager reactions. Will be hard to attract any talent with such middle management.
Any link to those reactions?
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#608Earlier quoted context omitted.
Extreme leftism is literally a religion, so much so that you can't even present scientific evidence that is contrary to their decided narrative. Born Again/Woke Transgression/Microagression Heresy/Dissent Sinner/(Racist, Misogynist, Bigot, Sexist) EDIT: Original Sin/(Privilege, Unconscious Bias) They even follow the same behavior pattern. First they declare you a Sinner. If you've done research they question the moti…
Don't forget that they recently created a concept of original sin: unconscious bias. Thanks to the Implicit Association Test, it can now be demonstrated that everyone has racial bias. If you point out that follow up studies have shown poor test-retest reliability and that there are all sorts of other flaws in this field of research, you'll simply be dismissed as a denier. So now, implicit bias takes the place of orig…
The mob.
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#609[deleted]
Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
#610> And let us be clear that, yes, such policies mean every once in a while you will not hire the most skilled person for a job. Therefore, a value judgement must be made here, not a logical deduction from data. Is diversity important enough for you to temporarily tolerate an increased risk of not hiring the most qualified person? That’s the trade-off nobody seems willing to spell out. Perhaps because it's not a necess…
In no company in the world is this a "diversity policy." Diversity policies are the exact opposite of this. If they were as you describe, I'm sure the the author of the memo, and everyone who agrees with it, would be completely in support of them.
I have no idea if that's true of tech companies. Regardless, you are confusing the part-- tech companies-- with the whole-- the set of all companies (of which orchestras are included).
I was responding to a non-expert's cost-benefit analysis that confused the part-- a specific type of diversity policy-- with the whole-- the set of possible diversity policies. She generalized a set of trade-offs and claimed unasked/unanswered questions around the field based off that part. I referred to a well-known historical diversity policy for which her proposed trade-off does not exist.
That ought to arouse skepticism that a non-expert who isn't genre-literate in the field is able to find the best solution to the problem.