4 ms·

> where is the intimidation or harassment? Many employees felt intimidated and that they now had to prove in a work setting that they are not "more neurotic on

> where is the intimidation or harassment? Many employees felt intimidated and that they now had to prove in a work setting that they are not "more neurotic on average than men". This is about human relationships. If enough people say they felt intimidated, how can anyone dispute that? Can you prove they didn't feel intimidated? Can I prove they did feel intimidated? No to both questions. It's not in the domain of science or facts. It's in the domain of human relationships and emotions. > If, as you say, it's a fact, I said it was a fact? Where? I actually don't care if it's a fact or not. It just doesn't mean a lot to me either way. > then how can it be harassment? Easy. There is zero relationship between facts and harassment. I can tell the truth and harass you. I can also lie and harass you. If I pass your workspace every day and say "You have a smaller penis than the average man and some people here are better at programming than you" does it matter whether both of those are facts? It's still clearly harassment. Unless we have an inside joke.... human relationships are far more complex than science. No wonder so many of us would like to shoehorn everything into black and white scientific facts! > You cannot have reasonable discussions, if you dismiss what you consider to be true facts because you consider them to be harassment. Of course you can. A reasonable discussion around your penis size at work wouldn't include facts about your penis size. The reasonable discussion would be "that's inappropriate and if you don't leave me alone I'll report you to HR for harassment." You are confusing "facts" with "appropriateness". One is a scientific concept, the other is a social concept. The two have almost nothing to do with each other. > the author claims that his memo had notes to supporting evidence It might be interesting, but it doesn't matter in the least in this case. The domain isn't science. Per the Google code of conduct, it expects "each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination." Do you see anything about science in the code of conduct? Or is it talking about culture and human relationships?

jshevek 9y ago
> Many employees felt intimidated and that they now had to prove in a work setting that they are not "more neurotic on average than men". Since we can't read minds, we don't know how they felt. We only know that they said they felt that way. When you believe it is for a higher cause - like fighting the patriarchy - lying about your feelings is a minor consideration. Witness how many of these identity activists lie about being pushed, lie about having their space invaded to accomplish their ends: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRlRAyulN4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRlRAyulN4o Not a single one of them says "Hey, no, lying isn't right." The collective values of that massive group of identity activists has no regard for truth, on this level. We can't deny that there is cultural overlap between the identity activists in this video, and the identity activists currently working at Google.
- tchaffee 9y ago
  You're basically saying what I'm saying: harassment isn't something that can be objectively determined. Googlers might be lying about it, they might be telling the truth. If you don't want to get fired for harassing folks, and you don't have great people skills, you should probably keep your controversial opinions at home. YMMV.

jshevek 9y ago

> Many employees felt intimidated and that they now had to prove in a work setting that they are not "more neurotic on average than men". Since we can't read minds, we don't know how they felt. We only know that they said they felt that way. When you believe it is for a higher cause - like fighting the patriarchy - lying about your feelings is a minor consideration. Witness how many of these identity activists lie about being pushed, lie about having their space invaded to accomplish their ends: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRlRAyulN4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRlRAyulN4o Not a single one of them says "Hey, no, lying isn't right." The collective values of that massive group of identity activists has no regard for truth, on this level. We can't deny that there is cultural overlap between the identity activists in this video, and the identity activists currently working at Google.

tchaffee 9y ago
You're basically saying what I'm saying: harassment isn't something that can be objectively determined. Googlers might be lying about it, they might be telling the truth. If you don't want to get fired for harassing folks, and you don't have great people skills, you should probably keep your controversial opinions at home. YMMV.