4 ms·

But is it okay to campaign towards the goal of firing someone for expressing an opinion they feel outraged about?

Semiapies 9y ago
Sure! Especially when it's so rare that it's a big kerfuffle every single time it happens in this industry.
snerbles 9y ago
To some, the mere expression of an outrageous opinion is a form of violence in and of itself. Following this logic, any who express such ideas to others should be sanctioned as if they committed physical violence.
- Ilurkyeahsowat 9y ago
  What makes something outrageous though? Physical violence is fairly cut and dry in definition, "outrageous" is completely subjective. For example, my grandmother, like some older people, will not talk about menstration. She believes it is completely outrageous that anyone would discuss this publically. Would it then be fair to say that discussions surrounding menstration are as bad as physical violence towards my grandmother?
- poohblahoyamo 9y ago
  Ohhhh, I see.. nobody ever showed me this linear line.. (I am a minority, immigrant.woman...) The social justice warrior reasoning were.never very clear today.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> But is it okay to campaign towards the goal of firing someone for expressing an opinion they feel outraged about? It depends what the opinion is, and what job the person holds, and the relationship between those two things. The idea that the coercive power of government should not be deployed against expression doesn't mean all ideas or equal or that there are never conditions where expression should have negative consequences. (In fact, any answer to your question implies that there are ideas that are unacceptable to express.)
s73ver 9y ago
Let's be frank, here. This is not someone merely "expressing an opinion." This is someone rallying against diversity, using pseudoscience to back up claims that women and minorities are inferior, and thus shouldn't have been hired. On top of that, they ranted about how Google had not done enough to make conservatives feel they have a safe space, when the only thing Google has done on the subject is to make others feel safe at Google.
- amazingman 9y ago
  I looked for claims in the manifesto that women and/or minorities are inferior, and I failed to find them. Would you mind providing an example of what I seem to have missed?
  - drewrv 9y ago
    Believing that diversity requires "lowing the bar" means believing "diverse" candidates are inferior.
    - amazingman 9y ago
      Again, I failed to find this claim. The one instance I found of this phrase arises explicitly within a claim about a specific hiring practice being discriminatory: >Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Is this what you're referring to?
    - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
      No, it just means that ones that meet the current requirements are not available in sufficient quantity.
- wanderingshi 9y ago
  actually, I think the author was pro-diversity but anti-diversity programs. in other words, he's rallying against diversity programs, not diversity. he also didn't outright claim women/minorities are "inferior" but that biological differences mean they are good at different things and maybe driving them into tech isn't necessarily a good thing. he also further claims we should be looking at each candidate and evaluate their skills as an individual and not because of one of their attributes (i.e. race, gender, religion) I'd urge you to reread the manifesto and not get too focused on the part with bad science. the author makes some other interesting points.

Sure! Especially when it's so rare that it's a big kerfuffle every single time it happens in this industry.

To some, the mere expression of an outrageous opinion is a form of violence in and of itself. Following this logic, any who express such ideas to others should be sanctioned as if they committed physical violence.

Ilurkyeahsowat 9y ago
What makes something outrageous though? Physical violence is fairly cut and dry in definition, "outrageous" is completely subjective. For example, my grandmother, like some older people, will not talk about menstration. She believes it is completely outrageous that anyone would discuss this publically. Would it then be fair to say that discussions surrounding menstration are as bad as physical violence towards my grandmother?
poohblahoyamo 9y ago
Ohhhh, I see.. nobody ever showed me this linear line.. (I am a minority, immigrant.woman...) The social justice warrior reasoning were.never very clear today.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> But is it okay to campaign towards the goal of firing someone for expressing an opinion they feel outraged about? It depends what the opinion is, and what job the person holds, and the relationship between those two things. The idea that the coercive power of government should not be deployed against expression doesn't mean all ideas or equal or that there are never conditions where expression should have negative consequences. (In fact, any answer to your question implies that there are ideas that are unacceptable to express.)

s73ver 9y ago

Let's be frank, here. This is not someone merely "expressing an opinion." This is someone rallying against diversity, using pseudoscience to back up claims that women and minorities are inferior, and thus shouldn't have been hired. On top of that, they ranted about how Google had not done enough to make conservatives feel they have a safe space, when the only thing Google has done on the subject is to make others feel safe at Google.

amazingman 9y ago
I looked for claims in the manifesto that women and/or minorities are inferior, and I failed to find them. Would you mind providing an example of what I seem to have missed?
- drewrv 9y ago
  Believing that diversity requires "lowing the bar" means believing "diverse" candidates are inferior.
  - amazingman 9y ago
    Again, I failed to find this claim. The one instance I found of this phrase arises explicitly within a claim about a specific hiring practice being discriminatory: >Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Is this what you're referring to?
  - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
    No, it just means that ones that meet the current requirements are not available in sufficient quantity.
wanderingshi 9y ago
actually, I think the author was pro-diversity but anti-diversity programs. in other words, he's rallying against diversity programs, not diversity. he also didn't outright claim women/minorities are "inferior" but that biological differences mean they are good at different things and maybe driving them into tech isn't necessarily a good thing. he also further claims we should be looking at each candidate and evaluate their skills as an individual and not because of one of their attributes (i.e. race, gender, religion) I'd urge you to reread the manifesto and not get too focused on the part with bad science. the author makes some other interesting points.