"No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science." | GTAMotorcycle.com

"No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Males and females have been differently-suited for roles in society since we were hunter/gatherers. Males chased down prey and fought off invaders and females gathered, nurtured and did pretty much everything else to hold societies together. We are different.
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Blackfin said:
Males and females have been differently-suited for roles in society since we were hunter/gatherers. Males chased down prey and fought off invaders and females gathered, nurtured and did pretty much everything else to hold societies together. We are different.
Click to expand...


But that goes against everything that mainstream media tells us and against the push for "equality". How dare you point out that men and women are different! /s

I couldn't help but laugh at how this is being spun into something sexist. Feel bad for the engineer who was fired for bringing up science.
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

esphoto said:
But that goes against everything that mainstream media tells us and against the push for "equality". How dare you point out that men and women are different! /s

I couldn't help but laugh at how this is being spun into something sexist. Feel bad for the engineer who was fired for bringing up science.
Click to expand...

The moment you realize there are more "female only" than "male only" establishments.

It's just not fair.
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

You should hear what the ceo of YouTube has to say. You read an essay & still doesn't make sense. Gotta love feminism
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Shocking that we have to take time to have this discussion.

I mean...isn't common sense suppose to cover topics such as this?

Surprisingly (or not surprisingly), "modern/millennial educated campus individuals" seem to be the most susceptible to forces like institutionalization, political agendas/elements, internal conflict and acute loss of common sense.

It seems that nowadays, obtaining that impressive degree costs alot more than money.

Sent from my Z957 using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Genesis said:
Shocking that we have to take time to have this discussion.

I mean...isn't common sense suppose to cover topics such as this?

Surprisingly (or not surprisingly), "modern/millennial educated campus individuals" seem to be the most susceptible to forces like institutionalization, political agendas/elements, internal conflict and acute loss of common sense.

It seems that nowadays, obtaining that impressive degree costs alot more than money.

Sent from my Z957 using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
Click to expand...
Because.... laziness.
When you're lazy it is easy to fall victim to propaganda, especially when it helps you only in the short term
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

On a related note, this is perfectly acceptable: smh

"Charging 'Man Tax' Is Nothing Personal, It's Just Good Business"
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ryan-khurana/charging-man-tax-is-nothing-personal-its-just-good-business_a_23070050/
The shop gives priority seating to women and charges an optional 18 per cent "man tax" to reflect the earnings gap between men and women in Australia. The funds raised from the tax are donated to women's charities.
Click to expand...
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Aussie rules were harsh in the school yard
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

i would like to take the time to declare that i'm a xennial. I don't associate to millenials, so please refer to me as such *suchamillenialthingtosay*
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

Blackfin said:
Males and females have been differently-suited for roles in society since we were hunter/gatherers. Males chased down prey and fought off invaders and females gathered, nurtured and did pretty much everything else to hold societies together. We are different.
Click to expand...

[video=youtube;aL0MuT0v6ds]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL0MuT0v6ds[/video]
 
Last edited:
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

spitRR said:
On a related note, this is perfectly acceptable: smh

"Charging 'Man Tax' Is Nothing Personal, It's Just Good Business"
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ryan-khurana/charging-man-tax-is-nothing-personal-its-just-good-business_a_23070050/
Click to expand...

optional .....imagine the uproar if it was the other way around?

Men and women ARE different. Equality should not be about a completely lever playing field regardless of differences, it should be equality of intent.
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

CruisnGrrl said:
Funny thing is programming computers was women's work at first.
Click to expand...

Women were the computers in some cases (e.g. Harvard Computers).

I don't know if this "manifesto" is scientifically correct; I don't know if women have been scientifically proven to be "more prone to anxiety" or suffer from "neuroticism" (although we know the etymology of the term "hysterics"... :) ) to a greater degree than males, I don't know if males prefer to "systemize" things while women prefer working with "people and aesthetics" etc etc. Maybe a sweep of peer reviewed research will show him to be full of ****. Or maybe such a review would suggest he's basically correct.

I just believe that there are instances where the "Anything you can do I can do..." (if not better) narrative does not apply due to physical reasons: For example, I don't know if I like the idea that physically smaller, weaker females become firefighters because the testing bar is lowered (criteria are "weakened") simply to allow more females to pass simply in the name of increasing diversity. Any female that can pass the test male candidates are required to pass has my vote; those that are there because of SJW meddling would not be my first choice to carry my grandmother out of a burning building; their guts, dedication and honour are admirable but being there more by virtue of gender than capability...well, no.

So there are clearly cases where "typical" physical traits simply don't align with true job requirements (although there will always be individual exceptions, of course): I see no reason to believe that all jobs -- tech or otherwise -- align equally well between the genders' "typical", let's say "mental/psychological" traits (individual exceptions noted, of course...)
 
Re: "No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science."

The firefighter example is the one I keep thinking of. There are many roles that are similar, but not as many with adjusted criteria to make up for diversity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom