4 ms·

What are these white heterosexual Christians defending their identity against?

Const-me 8y ago
Against treats to that identity. Through most of the history, the threats were imaginary, and it was conservative majority who oppressed other people. Recently however, in places like Bay Area, the conservatives are no longer a majority, and consequently the treats became quite real, see e.g. https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsuit https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsu... I don’t think the right way to solve this is oppress, stamp out, or discriminate people positively or negatively. The right way is promoting tolerance (the good one i.e. civilized behavior towards people despite different positions, not the bad one that says everyone must express the only true position), and most importantly following the laws. Democracy + judicial system worked OK for centuries. IMO it’s the only working mechanism invented so far how a society can function despite different people have different identities and beliefs.
- mike10010100 8y ago
  > Against treats to that identity. What, precisely, about other minorities existing threatens that identity? You keep repeating this claim of threats, but haven't been able to articulate any. > I don’t think the right way to solve this is oppress, stamp out, or discriminate people positively or negatively. And yet that's precisely what the Google engineer linked to was doing by circulating his memo describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers based solely on their biology. Hence, why he was fired. The only thing that cannot be tolerated in a tolerant society is intolerance itself.
  - Const-me 8y ago
    > haven't been able to articulate any. See the link in the previous comment. Being fired for expressing a political viewpoint is a classic example of discrimination. Also because the subject was about work conditions, the firing was illegal in California jurisdiction. > describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers Apparently, you have not read that memo. He never said that (I’ve just downloaded the memo and searched), nor anything similar to that. And IMO he never meant that either.
    - mike10010100 8y ago
      > See the link in the previous comment. That really doesn't describe a threat to the "white heterosexual Christian" identity. In fact, you're free to be a white heterosexual Christian at Google or anywhere else for that matter. > Being fired for expressing a political viewpoint is a classic example of discrimination. Again, the viewpoint on women and minorities was an intolerant one. Please study the Paradox of Tolerance. > He never said that (I’ve just downloaded the memo and searched), nor anything similar to that. You're right, he made a much more broad statement about the gender gap in the tech industry. Although there is this section: > Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing). >○ These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics. He's regurgitating the idea that biology, rather than society, is what is holding women back in the tech industry. This is an intolerant viewpoint, as it suggests that there is something inherent about being female that makes them inferior at participating in the tech industry.
      - Const-me 8y ago
        The quotes you’ve copy-pasted are about statistically significant gender difference in interests and preferences. The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. Huge difference between the two.
        mike10010100 8y ago
        > The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. This is the conclusion the author of the memo reaches as well. His suggestions are not to fix the culture surrounding these preferences, but instead to simply "give women what they prefer", which inherently limits their experience and makes an implicit claim on their ability without that compensation.
      - _Tev 8y ago
  - _Tev 8y ago
    > And yet that's precisely what the Google engineer linked to was doing by circulating his memo describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers based solely on their biology. Hence, why he was fired. After all discussions on the HN on the topic you still hold this view? When you paint the dissenting view in the worst possible light (and imagine a few things just to be sure), you will be seen as the oppresor. Hence the identity threat to the conservatives.
    - mike10010100 8y ago
      > Hence the identity threat to the conservatives. You are free to believe whatever you want. Just be prepared for your ideology to be called out for what it is if you choose to publicly stand for it.
- mcphage 8y ago
  > Recently however, in places like Bay Area, the conservatives are no longer a majority, and consequently the treats became quite real Spoiler Alert: the current threats to their identity are just as imaginary. White heterosexual conservatives will eventually learn how to be a minority, just like every other identity in this country has.

Against treats to that identity. Through most of the history, the threats were imaginary, and it was conservative majority who oppressed other people. Recently however, in places like Bay Area, the conservatives are no longer a majority, and consequently the treats became quite real, see e.g. https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsuit https://www.scribd.com/document/368692388/James-Damore-Lawsu... I don’t think the right way to solve this is oppress, stamp out, or discriminate people positively or negatively. The right way is promoting tolerance (the good one i.e. civilized behavior towards people despite different positions, not the bad one that says everyone must express the only true position), and most importantly following the laws. Democracy + judicial system worked OK for centuries. IMO it’s the only working mechanism invented so far how a society can function despite different people have different identities and beliefs.

mike10010100 8y ago
> Against treats to that identity. What, precisely, about other minorities existing threatens that identity? You keep repeating this claim of threats, but haven't been able to articulate any. > I don’t think the right way to solve this is oppress, stamp out, or discriminate people positively or negatively. And yet that's precisely what the Google engineer linked to was doing by circulating his memo describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers based solely on their biology. Hence, why he was fired. The only thing that cannot be tolerated in a tolerant society is intolerance itself.
- Const-me 8y ago
  > haven't been able to articulate any. See the link in the previous comment. Being fired for expressing a political viewpoint is a classic example of discrimination. Also because the subject was about work conditions, the firing was illegal in California jurisdiction. > describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers Apparently, you have not read that memo. He never said that (I’ve just downloaded the memo and searched), nor anything similar to that. And IMO he never meant that either.
  - mike10010100 8y ago
    > See the link in the previous comment. That really doesn't describe a threat to the "white heterosexual Christian" identity. In fact, you're free to be a white heterosexual Christian at Google or anywhere else for that matter. > Being fired for expressing a political viewpoint is a classic example of discrimination. Again, the viewpoint on women and minorities was an intolerant one. Please study the Paradox of Tolerance. > He never said that (I’ve just downloaded the memo and searched), nor anything similar to that. You're right, he made a much more broad statement about the gender gap in the tech industry. Although there is this section: > Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing). >○ These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics. He's regurgitating the idea that biology, rather than society, is what is holding women back in the tech industry. This is an intolerant viewpoint, as it suggests that there is something inherent about being female that makes them inferior at participating in the tech industry.
    - Const-me 8y ago
      The quotes you’ve copy-pasted are about statistically significant gender difference in interests and preferences. The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. Huge difference between the two.
      - mike10010100 8y ago
        > The conclusion you’ve made in this and previous comments is about abilities. This is the conclusion the author of the memo reaches as well. His suggestions are not to fix the culture surrounding these preferences, but instead to simply "give women what they prefer", which inherently limits their experience and makes an implicit claim on their ability without that compensation.
    - _Tev 8y ago
- _Tev 8y ago
  > And yet that's precisely what the Google engineer linked to was doing by circulating his memo describing how he and others believed women weren't as "qualified" to be programmers based solely on their biology. Hence, why he was fired. After all discussions on the HN on the topic you still hold this view? When you paint the dissenting view in the worst possible light (and imagine a few things just to be sure), you will be seen as the oppresor. Hence the identity threat to the conservatives.
  - mike10010100 8y ago
    > Hence the identity threat to the conservatives. You are free to believe whatever you want. Just be prepared for your ideology to be called out for what it is if you choose to publicly stand for it.
mcphage 8y ago
> Recently however, in places like Bay Area, the conservatives are no longer a majority, and consequently the treats became quite real Spoiler Alert: the current threats to their identity are just as imaginary. White heterosexual conservatives will eventually learn how to be a minority, just like every other identity in this country has.