4 ms·

That was simply a list of topics that PC culture has deemed indisputable and heresy to even question. The topic of whether or not they're appropriate in a work

That was simply a list of topics that PC culture has deemed indisputable and heresy to even question. The topic of whether or not they're appropriate in a work environment is a whole different discussion. The Google memo was pertaining to their own company's diversity policy, and hence should be fair game for discussion. If that makes you feel uncomfortable, then the Obama quote at the bottom of the article summarizes my thoughts.

taysic 9y ago
They appear completely related to what is heresy to discuss at Google. The section starts off with "Some takeaways from this whole fiasco" "Here are some of those politically correct assertions that take on almost religious-like qualities..." And thus appear to be completely linked to the topic of the Google "fiasco". Very confusing way to present the article if they are not relevant. College is a very different place than a workplace. I am not required to interact with anyone on my college campus. Additionally, a workplace works best without the friction of being a place for the discussion of politics or controversial topics. Let alone "innocuous" jokes. The author is upset that he is not greeted with hugs and applause for his memo. So what? I only read the first part - and I'm no expert on these topics but I haven't experienced any exceptionalism within this profession as a woman. To the contrary, my code is out there in the open ready for scrutiny all the time. I truly believe this is a meritocratic profession. My understanding is that companies aim to hire equally qualified workers from more backgrounds of diversity. Even better, they have an economic incentive to do so. Many of the time the people writing these things are looking for something to complain about. I haven't worked at Google but I haven't experienced this to be imbalanced in the way it's being portrayed. I guess you can say the memo was put out there, and a discussion was had.
- RealityNow 9y ago
  Apologies if the presentation was unclear, will see if I can make that clearer. > Additionally, a workplace works best without the friction of being a place for the discussion of politics or controversial topics. Let alone "innocuous" jokes. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. I prefer workplaces, or any environment for that matter, where we all respect each other enough to be open to the discussion of any topic and not easily offended over stupid meaningless jokes. That does not mean that one has to share their political beliefs or be pestered to engage in controversial debate - but a culture where everyone has to watch out for every little thing they say because any non-PC mark could be misconstrued and used as grounds for firing simply because someone deemed it offensive is intellectually hostile, unhealthy, and not the type of environment I want to be in. > The author is upset that he is not greeted with hugs and applause for his memo. So what? That's not why the author is upset. The author got fired.
  - taysic 9y ago
    The author was fired but I certainly wouldn't describe the reason as due to "any little thing they say". Most of the time people are fired for harassment, which can be nuanced but a normal company compliance training can get one up to speed. The author was probably fired for going through the wrong channel to voice this. Now not only has he attacked his company but he also alienated his female coworkers who may feel he finds them potentially undeserving of their jobs or in excess supply, as implied by the article. Sounds wonderful for the work environment, no? At the end of the day, Google is a company out to make money and build good culture in their company. I respect your desire to surround yourself by those who aren't easily offended or too PC and I trust you will find many friends like that. However, that isn't really appropriate for the workplace where it's not your right to be treated well for any behavior. Its an interesting topic to discuss but personally I think progress is with diversity. Not just for society but it benefits companies as well. I think they are seeing that and ultimately they are allowed to do what they wish.
    - RealityNow 9y ago
      The channel he voiced the memo was apparently opt-in, thus I don't see that as inappropriate. If an opposing viewpoint backed by facts and evidence make you feel alienated, then the problem is not with the person who presented the facts. Affirmative action by definition discriminates in favor of women and underrepresented racial minorities, and this is simply a fact - the very definition of affirmative action itself. I'm a huge proponent of diversity in the sense of embracing people with different perspectives and ideas. Deciding that you need X% of females and Y% of colored people does not make you a proponent of diversity, except in the shallow sense of wanting some set of racial representation. The strongest advocates of this form of racial diversity in my experience tend to actually be the most hostile towards diversity of opinions - like all the people deeming this memo sexist who fail to bring up any coherent argument backing up their claims (since most of them never read the document). And one of the points of the memo was that we need to de-moralize diversity and allow people to have an honest discussion over it (which he ironically got fired over). Diversity of thought > Diversity of appearance
UncleMeat 9y ago
There is considerable controversy among social justice groups about how best to approach sex work. It is absolutely not verboten to suggest that sex work can be empowering rather than oppressive. Controversial, but certainly not forbidden.
- RealityNow 9y ago
  Fair point. I do think that as a male you're not really allowed to say that "prostitution empowers females", it seems that only females are allowed to say that. One time a woman working at a prominent NGO in human trafficking told me that prostitution was oppressive to the woman. I told her that although that may be the case some of the time, there are women out there doing it by choice. She got really angry at me and went on an emotional tirade. It's definitely one of those "touchy" PC subjects where honest debate is difficult without being shamed and called "sexist".
funnyguys 9y ago
This is not just PC assertions. Generalizing characteristics of people based on their gender is harmful and exactly the reason racism is frowned upon. If biological reasons can determine if a person is fit for a particular job, let us start deciding the traits of people based on the gender, race and blood samples and assign jobs based on that. If you haven't, please watch the movie Gattaca.
- RealityNow 9y ago
  > Generalizing characteristics of people based on their gender is harmful So we should completely deny that there are differences between genders? I strongly disagree that we should be denying reality.
  - funnyguys 9y ago
    In the memo, he mentions that the gender differences "may" be the reason for the lesser number of women in technology. There are no studies which link the differences with ability to work as a computer programmer. I would prefer we do not impose labels or assume certain characteristics on people just because they belong to specific gender, race or come from specific background - especially when it is not something they control and when the link is tenuous. My view was like yours before and the movie Gattaca was among the most important things that changed it. In short humans are far more complex and trying to say that a person may not be interested in software engineering just because the person is of specific gender is disservice to half the population and not helpful.

taysic 9y ago

They appear completely related to what is heresy to discuss at Google. The section starts off with "Some takeaways from this whole fiasco" "Here are some of those politically correct assertions that take on almost religious-like qualities..." And thus appear to be completely linked to the topic of the Google "fiasco". Very confusing way to present the article if they are not relevant. College is a very different place than a workplace. I am not required to interact with anyone on my college campus. Additionally, a workplace works best without the friction of being a place for the discussion of politics or controversial topics. Let alone "innocuous" jokes. The author is upset that he is not greeted with hugs and applause for his memo. So what? I only read the first part - and I'm no expert on these topics but I haven't experienced any exceptionalism within this profession as a woman. To the contrary, my code is out there in the open ready for scrutiny all the time. I truly believe this is a meritocratic profession. My understanding is that companies aim to hire equally qualified workers from more backgrounds of diversity. Even better, they have an economic incentive to do so. Many of the time the people writing these things are looking for something to complain about. I haven't worked at Google but I haven't experienced this to be imbalanced in the way it's being portrayed. I guess you can say the memo was put out there, and a discussion was had.

RealityNow 9y ago
Apologies if the presentation was unclear, will see if I can make that clearer. > Additionally, a workplace works best without the friction of being a place for the discussion of politics or controversial topics. Let alone "innocuous" jokes. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. I prefer workplaces, or any environment for that matter, where we all respect each other enough to be open to the discussion of any topic and not easily offended over stupid meaningless jokes. That does not mean that one has to share their political beliefs or be pestered to engage in controversial debate - but a culture where everyone has to watch out for every little thing they say because any non-PC mark could be misconstrued and used as grounds for firing simply because someone deemed it offensive is intellectually hostile, unhealthy, and not the type of environment I want to be in. > The author is upset that he is not greeted with hugs and applause for his memo. So what? That's not why the author is upset. The author got fired.
- taysic 9y ago
  The author was fired but I certainly wouldn't describe the reason as due to "any little thing they say". Most of the time people are fired for harassment, which can be nuanced but a normal company compliance training can get one up to speed. The author was probably fired for going through the wrong channel to voice this. Now not only has he attacked his company but he also alienated his female coworkers who may feel he finds them potentially undeserving of their jobs or in excess supply, as implied by the article. Sounds wonderful for the work environment, no? At the end of the day, Google is a company out to make money and build good culture in their company. I respect your desire to surround yourself by those who aren't easily offended or too PC and I trust you will find many friends like that. However, that isn't really appropriate for the workplace where it's not your right to be treated well for any behavior. Its an interesting topic to discuss but personally I think progress is with diversity. Not just for society but it benefits companies as well. I think they are seeing that and ultimately they are allowed to do what they wish.
  - RealityNow 9y ago
    The channel he voiced the memo was apparently opt-in, thus I don't see that as inappropriate. If an opposing viewpoint backed by facts and evidence make you feel alienated, then the problem is not with the person who presented the facts. Affirmative action by definition discriminates in favor of women and underrepresented racial minorities, and this is simply a fact - the very definition of affirmative action itself. I'm a huge proponent of diversity in the sense of embracing people with different perspectives and ideas. Deciding that you need X% of females and Y% of colored people does not make you a proponent of diversity, except in the shallow sense of wanting some set of racial representation. The strongest advocates of this form of racial diversity in my experience tend to actually be the most hostile towards diversity of opinions - like all the people deeming this memo sexist who fail to bring up any coherent argument backing up their claims (since most of them never read the document). And one of the points of the memo was that we need to de-moralize diversity and allow people to have an honest discussion over it (which he ironically got fired over). Diversity of thought > Diversity of appearance

UncleMeat 9y ago

There is considerable controversy among social justice groups about how best to approach sex work. It is absolutely not verboten to suggest that sex work can be empowering rather than oppressive. Controversial, but certainly not forbidden.

RealityNow 9y ago
Fair point. I do think that as a male you're not really allowed to say that "prostitution empowers females", it seems that only females are allowed to say that. One time a woman working at a prominent NGO in human trafficking told me that prostitution was oppressive to the woman. I told her that although that may be the case some of the time, there are women out there doing it by choice. She got really angry at me and went on an emotional tirade. It's definitely one of those "touchy" PC subjects where honest debate is difficult without being shamed and called "sexist".

funnyguys 9y ago

This is not just PC assertions. Generalizing characteristics of people based on their gender is harmful and exactly the reason racism is frowned upon. If biological reasons can determine if a person is fit for a particular job, let us start deciding the traits of people based on the gender, race and blood samples and assign jobs based on that. If you haven't, please watch the movie Gattaca.

RealityNow 9y ago
> Generalizing characteristics of people based on their gender is harmful So we should completely deny that there are differences between genders? I strongly disagree that we should be denying reality.
- funnyguys 9y ago
  In the memo, he mentions that the gender differences "may" be the reason for the lesser number of women in technology. There are no studies which link the differences with ability to work as a computer programmer. I would prefer we do not impose labels or assume certain characteristics on people just because they belong to specific gender, race or come from specific background - especially when it is not something they control and when the link is tenuous. My view was like yours before and the movie Gattaca was among the most important things that changed it. In short humans are far more complex and trying to say that a person may not be interested in software engineering just because the person is of specific gender is disservice to half the population and not helpful.