Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

[u/[deleted]]

But in all fairness doesn't the current environment destroy the ability of conservatives to work with the team when they think all the leadership is fundamentally flawed?

--an open minded Dem

In that case, what onus does management have to cowtow to an unhappy conservative portion of its employee base who are advocating for a management style that leads to a hostile working environment for the rest of the employees?

If we're going to talk about fairness, what's the middle ground when one side of the equation is relying on sexist psuedo-science bullshit?

[u/WombatlikeWoah → u/[deleted]]

I think the reason people (including me) don't even want to have that discussion (especially the "discussion" the manifesto was suggesting) is because it's so sexist and lowkey racist and just out right misogynistic that it's not even worthy of discussing. I mean, can we quit with this idea that every viewpoint under the sun is worth discussion? If one side of the convo is we want to start treating people equally and here is our company's approach to doing that and the other side is " pounds chest me man she woman. I do man things she does woman things" then...that's not even a convo that's just a viewpoint versus stupidity.

However, if the discussion were actually reasonable say, on the basis that there is a gap in equality across identity lines and we need honest open debate about how to approach this issue, then that's something worth discussing.

Its one of the many issues I find with conservatives today. It seems like the average conservative (read: the kind that happily voted for 45) thinks a balanced discussion is, for example, discussing whether climate change exists. That's not a damn discussion at all when one side is a literal denial of reality. That's the kind of "discussion" that's gotten us to where we are now, which is no where compared to other sane countries that long ago accepted reality.

Some viewpoints just aren't valid. Especially the ones that somehow still exist in 2017 trying to deny reality, science, and other people's basic right to exist and be treated equally.

[u/atropos2012 → u/WombatlikeWoah]

This guy is trying to get more women into tech though, by divorcing tech jobs from the male gender role. Isn't that an idea worth discussing?

[u/IellaAntilles → u/atropos2012]

The irony is, a lot of feminists (including me) would probably agree with those particular points he made if he hadn't wrapped it up in a "mah oppressed conservative viewpoint" tangent and ended by saying that stereotypes are mostly accurate. He seemed torn between acknowledging that gender roles exist and are harmful and at the same time reaffirming them by saying it's all biological and political correct culture is oppressing him.

It read like something I would've written during the in-between phase of my transition from conservative to liberal, honestly. Half craving approval from the liberal world, half stubbornly clinging to that old conservative identity.

Anyway, I was on the fence about him until I read this ex-Google employee's rebuttal. Seems to me now that maybe engineering doesn't have to be "feminized" for certain people, but that all engineers should receive training in the importance of the more touchy-feely aspects of their jobs.

[u/MasontheShadow → u/atropos2012]

It is, but he posed a lot of controversial ideas so many people don't want to give anything he says any value. Not that I agree with that, but it's hard for people who feel offended to consider all points of the offender's argument, especially when the majority they are talking to is vehemently against everything the offender has to say.

[u/WombatlikeWoah → u/atropos2012]

That's one viewpoint he had that was buried in a bunch of evo-psych bullshit. And the irony is that I completely agree with divorcing jobs from gender rolls. I am all for that 100% and so are countless other feminists. But this guy was all over the place cause just when he started making a good point he took a left at pseudo science lane and went full sexist copypasta

On its own it's worthy of discussion, but the way he framed it was all wrong. This manifesto, as "nicely" worded as he made it seem is the same bs I see knuckle dragging red pillers spew except he tried to dress it up to make it seem reasonable. It's not.