4 ms·
Again, you are not stating a fact the left is offended by. You are posting a wikipedia article to a topic, just in case you forgot. In addition to that, after
by bontaq 7y ago
Again, you are not stating a fact the left is offended by. You are posting a wikipedia article to a topic, just in case you forgot.
In addition to that, after reading this guy's ideas, do you not see how it's absolutely against google's goal of higher diversity? It's honestly terribly written. They go from "google's biases," to "stop alienating conservatives."
Then they go on about how it's bad we let less experienced women in tech, comparing it to mandated increases in home-less women. What the fuck?
- koonsolo 7y agoHere's a fun controversial fact related to the "gender pay gap": There is no gender discrimination related to pay in the younger portion of the US workforce.
- bontaq 7y agoHey that's great! Here's the comment you should be responding to: "That's nice, would you mind stating a fact the left is offended by?"
- Excel_Wizard 7y agoYou disavowed the wikipedia article for being strictly fact-based, having no interpretation. I can vouch for the fact that there are many left-leaning people offended by the contents of that article. You disavowed Damore's stance because it has been interpreted in a way you think is wrong and offensive. You can't disavow both of these at the same time without contradicting your claimed intent (of wanting to hear facts that the left is offended by). It's obvious, based on your reaction to Damore's stance, that you are offended by, if not the Gender Equality Paradox, something extremely adjacent to the Gender Equality Paradox.