Discussion
  • Read More
    artiofabKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:06pm

    I would generally say that any person who brings up IQ “differences between people” is trying to justify their racism with a misunderstanding of social science.

    the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ[8] and sex differences).

    Hooray they’re not just sexist they’re also racist! Intersectionality.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Stevieartiofab
      8/05/17 5:12pm

      Right! It’s almost like people who go to better schools and are exposed to more educated people in their immediate vicinities and interactions might have an opportunity to increase their IQs that someone less advantaged wouldn’t. Not like anyone is born with a 170

      Reply
    • Read More
      Yttriumartiofab
      8/05/17 5:16pm

      is trying to justify their racism with a misunderstanding of social science.

      They are not even trying to hide their racism. They used the word ‘race’ 8 times in the document.

      You know who thinks there are different races of people; colonialists and racists.

      Humanity is one race, one species, with multiple ethnicities. This person does not see other ethnicities as being the same species as themself.

      Reply
  • Read More
    JedinKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:26pm

    Wow, he’s wrong on a lot of things.

    1. There is an inherent bias against women’s performance. This study on try-outs for an orchestra showed that when the try-outs were blinded, the number of women who got into the orchestra increased by 50 %.

    2. Women pay a higher social price for negotiating their salary. Women who wants to get paid more are viewed as abrasive, whereas men who ask for a higher salary are viewed as ambitious.

    3. People often confuse confidence with competence, which means a lot of big talking men get put into positions of power even when it is clear they are incompetent.

    4. Companies with a high level of diversity actually perfom better financially compared to companies with low diversity.

    Reply
    • Read More
      PandasAreAFalseBearJedin
      8/05/17 5:31pm

      Preach!

      Reply
    • Read More
      Douche GossageJedin
      8/05/17 5:47pm

      These points can’t be true. It says right in his thingy that he thinks we need to value reason over feelings. And clearly *he’s* not the one being controlled by his feelings.

      Reply
  • Read More
    YttriumKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:09pm
    GIF
    • This person just hits all the Conservative checkpoints.
    • ‘Men > Women, that’s just nature and science’
    • ‘Men are men, manly men that must do men things and act in a manly way in order to be a man. That is the order of things’
    • ‘Communism must be destroyed. REAGANOMICS!!!!!’
    • ‘There are different races of people’
    • ‘How dare i not have all the power and say anymore, where is my safe space’

    Dollars to doughnuts this person was passed up for a job position recently.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Horseshit MeterYttrium
      8/05/17 5:18pm

      “I consider myself a classical liberal.”

      Reply
    • Read More
      torchbearer2Yttrium
      8/05/17 5:24pm

      Either that or they are a hiring manager that got shit for constantly hiring white dudes and never considering anyone else.

      Reply
  • Read More
    CartireKate Conger
    8/05/17 4:55pm

    Welp, this is gonna be a fun commment’s section.

    I do think he brings up some good points. One point being, we should be able to discuss this without instantly shaming/closing off the opposing viewpoint.

    Reply
    • Read More
      All Hail The Big CatCartire
      8/05/17 5:31pm

      Yes, but when you automatically state that half the population is just more neurotic than the other half, it’s hard to take anything else said seriously. Talk about biases.

      Reply
    • Read More
      truthonaSaturdayCartire
      8/05/17 5:33pm

      “...One point being, we should be able to discuss this without instantly shaming/closing off the opposing viewpoint.”

      90+% of the comments contain ad hominem attacks against the Google Guy.

      So much for reasonable discourse, huh?

      Reply
  • Read More
    Peter still hates KinjaKate Conger
    8/05/17 4:58pm

    Thus answering the question I didn’t realized I had, “if you put a sociopathic technocrat in a a room with nothing but a word processor and the sound of his own voice, what would he write?”

    Reply
    • Read More
      JeffFromAbovePeter still hates Kinja
      8/05/17 5:12pm

      Define irony. Lambasting someone for stating that it is difficult to express a dissenting opinion.

      Granted he goes on to make some pretty idiotic points but you certainly helped make the first one.

      Reply
    • Read More
      HumanAbyssPeter still hates Kinja
      8/05/17 5:17pm

      You are literally the fucking problem. You and this mindset of “Oh shit who’s going to pat my back when I say this really righteous shit about this thing that’s popular to talk about right now”

      You are the reason discourse is, and has become, nearly impossible to have in any honest sense and you’ll likely try to rationalize that and say that you can’t possibly be part of the problem.

      Congrats.

      Reply
  • Read More
    signofthenineKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:20pm

    Stop alienating conservatives.

    Oh, there it is. Poor thing. Life is so hard. “Guys, why can’t I be an asshole at work?”

    Reply
    • Read More
      Douche Gossagesignofthenine
      8/05/17 5:31pm

      Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently.

      This means: More people need to not question or challenge my (conservative) ideas. And I deserve to get my way more of the time.

      Besides that, it doesn’t even have internal logic. The real reason people champion diversity (which he views as superficial because of HIS biases) is precisely to do this thing that he claims to be a fan of: to create viewpoint diversity.

      Let’s be clear he doesn’t give a shit if anyone other them him gets their viewpoint heard.

      Reply
    • Read More
      Xagzansignofthenine
      8/05/17 5:43pm

      because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness

      I’m still trying to decipher this strange text.

      Reply
  • Read More
    KazKate Conger
    8/05/17 4:55pm

    Summarily dismissing the screed as being “anti-diversity” is exactly the problem it was outlining. Ms. Conger, it’s difficult to have discussions with people that prefer to affix labels out of some misguided sense of moral superiority. Listening to other perspectives, whether you agree with them or not, is just part of a functioning community. Can we not even do that?

    Reply
    • Read More
      h1koseijuroKaz
      8/05/17 5:07pm

      Your perspectives were accepted as facts 80 years ago and we’re done with it! Sorry :)

      Reply
    • Read More
      Douche GossageKaz
      8/05/17 5:33pm

      The entire thing was printed in its entirety. What else do you want? How the hell is that NOT listening We’ve literally heard everything he said. and we’re engaging with it. WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT?

      Let me answer that for you. You want people to accept your opinions uncritically. Sorry. That’s not how this works.

      Reply
  • Read More
    Eustache DaugerKate Conger
    8/05/17 4:51pm

    That’s a lot of big words from someone who thinks the TL;DR goes at the beginning of a wall of text.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Sardonicuss EvocatusEustache Dauger
      8/05/17 4:57pm

      TL;DR: Cocaine may induce manic episodes (including rambling manifestos) with delusions of grandeur.

      Reply
    • Read More
      chaboudEustache Dauger
      8/05/17 5:32pm

      I always use it before a wall of text... along with a one line summary of that wall of text....

      That last bit is critical.

      Reply
  • Read More
    opheeliaKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:10pm
    • I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain‚causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts.

    “It’s theoretically important to understand other people’s perspectives, but why should I have to understand other people’s perspectives? Ugh.”

    This person is also a mediocre writer.

    Reply
    • Read More
      Douche Gossageopheelia
      8/05/17 5:48pm

      Not to mention all the departures from reason and facts that his gut-driven manifesto is built on

      Reply
    • Read More
      mwittieropheelia
      8/05/17 5:49pm

      De-emphasize empathy.

      Riiiight. That’s what’s wrong today: too much empathy. I empathize with his frustration over... wait. Wut?

      Reply
  • Read More
    PandasAreAFalseBearKate Conger
    8/05/17 5:40pm

    I think there’s a difference between creating a space where it’s safe to voice potentially controversial opinions and wanting a safe place to present prejudices as legitimate forms of thinking. If you’re in a position of influence in the STEM field, where particular groups of people are infamously underrepresented, then you should be challenged if you write a manifesto and say, “Women are more prone to stress, so that’s why there aren’t many female CEOs. Also, ladies are bad at negotiating for higher salaries.” Your biases should be dissected. I wish I could see the memes generated by this.

    Reply
    • Read More
      maryannsuePandasAreAFalseBear
      8/05/17 7:48pm

      To be entirely fair, there are plenty of studies saying that women negotiate less, but there is also plenty of evidence that women are judged more harshly for negotiations and they’re more socialized to avoid any kind of conflict. One of the problems with this guy is that he seems content to throw up his hands and say “that’s the way it is” on several of his points instead of considering what fixable biases could be accounting for inequalities.

      Reply
    • Read More
      TehhhhPandasAreAFalseBear
      8/05/17 8:03pm

      This is exactly how discrimination works. Labeling beliefs as not “legitimate” so you can altogether dismiss it and be hateful towards people of those beliefs.

      If enough people think it to be true, which is the case since it’s the time of mentality of a major democratic party, then it is legitimate opinion that needs to be discussed.

      Reply