don't let your feelings... get in the way of understanding what I'm actually saying.

it's challenger

To be fair, Google has been doing a great job tarnishing their own name with YouTube in the same timeframe as this.

He acted unprofessionally, insulted his coworkers, and tarnished Google's name. What the fuck did you think was gonna happen?

Quote from: Aether on August 26, 2017, 05:02:22 PM

When did I ever say I thought they weren't going to fire him? I haven't even implied that I thought they weren't going to fire him. I explicitly only said that I don't respect their decision. I think you should reread what I've posted because your perception of it seems to be awfully skewed. You seem to feel pretty strongly about the guy and google's decision. It's fine if you don't agree with me, but don't let your feelings on the matter get in the way of understanding what I'm actually saying.

I feel strongly about how pigheaded and dumb you are tbh

Quote

As for his points being pseudoscience, I have seen comments from legitimate psychologists saying that his points were based on actual research and that, essentially, even though there is no consensus within the field of psychology as to whether or not that research is correct and that more research needs to be done on the subject, the man at least based his ideas on something tangible and real (that being the studies conducted in that research) and didn't just conjure these points out of thin air.

Debunked research. Flee made a post earlier in this thread or somewhere else, quote him or some shit if you're honestly going to be this coy about it.

Quote

If the guy is wrong, then he's wrong, and people should refute his ideas with research that shows the contrary to that which he's basing his points on. Educate him on why he's wrong.

A grown man undermining his superiors and insulting his colleagues in the work place deserves to get fired if not suspended at the least. Especially when he's wrong. You don't "educate" someone like this, you get them the hell away from your company as fast as possible. He shouldn't need to be educated on this, he should know it already. If we can google this shit and know it, how does a google employee not know this?

Quote

Acting like he's some kind of bigot, making false claims about his memo being some kind of 'anti-diversity' memo even though it is specifically talking about ways in which he thinks google can still try to diversify their workforce without discriminating against certain people,

And "American" Nazis talk about how they're just "race realists" and want what's best for all races, but really they're just racist dumbasses.

Quote

It's entirely disingenuous of people to portray him in that way.

It's entirely disingenuous of you to paint him as this martyr fighting for workers rights, but here we are.

Quote

Even if what he said was wrong, he was civil and reasonable in his arguments,

You really consider what he did to be civil and reasonable? Sure, he wasn't ranting like a raving lunatic and knocking over tables, but come on. Let's be real about this.

Quote

he based those arguments on actual research,

Faulty, debunked research.

Quote

and constructively expressed methods that he thought could help google continue to diversify its workforce without discriminating against certain people. And despite that, he was still fired, which google has the right to do, ergo I cannot respect their decision even though I understand the logic behind it perfectly well.

It's not constructive to send out a company wide "manifesto" based on bullshit research that confirms his own biases.

Quote

If my opinion makes you angry or you think that I'm an idiot then so be it, I don't care whether or not you're pleased with me or what I think. Just at least understand my opinion before you decide that I am one.

I just dislike you, the way you talk/write, and your general demeanor and attitude. You seem to just be playing devils advocate here.

Quote

And why do you keep trying to use 'buddha' as a pejorative? smh

Because it is. It's the religion of lazy bums in the east, and vapid airheads who are "spiritual but don't believe in god" in the west.

I don't think anything he said was an insult. It certainly wasn't intended as an insult. Anyone who can look at the situation as objectively as possible can see that the guy didn't have ill intentions when he wrote the memo.

I'm not claiming him to be a martyr, I'm simply stating that I have no respect for google for choosing to fire him and not allowing constructive criticism from their employees in an open forum.

I fail to see what exactly is 'pig headed' about that position. Because I refuse to change my mind? I can see the argument you're making in defense of google perfectly well, that doesn't mean my opinion of google's actions has to change. Nothing you or anyone else has said has given me any reason to believe that there is something objectively wrong about how I see this situation, and I'm in no way the type of person that isn't open to changing their mind.

I didn't expect google not to fire him, I don't think they didn't have the right to fire him, and I can see clearly why they did fire him. Regardless, they did not stand by his right to freedom of expression, and yes I know that they don't have to stand by it. He was punished for speaking his mind openly against his employer even though he did it reasonably and constructively. That is what happened, and you trying to explain all the reasoning behind their decision to me (even though I've stated multiple times already that I understand the reasoning) does not negate the fact that it happened, and so my opinion hasn't changed.

If google had simply let him speak his mind, publicly disagreed with and refuted him, and let him continue to work for them, then I would have respect for them because then they would be standing by the principle of freedom of expression.

It's sad that this view somehow makes me an idiot in your eyes, but whatever, if you don't care to see google stand by that principle then there's fuck all I can do about that. I'm not going to attempt to convince you why I think it would be a good thing if they did. It's clear that you have little respect for me or my perspective anyways so my influence on you is negligible. What about my demeanor is so irritating to you anyways? Is it that I disagree with people but am not outright insulting them? Would you like me more if I was more aggressive?

Also, I don't know if you think that I agree with the points he made about gender differences or not, but I'm not arguing at all for whether or not he was right. The only thing I'm arguing about his points is that they seemed to be based on actual research so they aren't just nonsense he pulled out of his ass. If some psychologists agree with his points then why exactly should he already know which side of the argument is right? From what I understand, there is no consensus among psychologists as to whether or not his points are right or wrong. So you're telling me he should have chosen the 'right' side, but which side is right? Which psychologists should he agree with? I've been searching online for a little while now and have found multiple psychologists that say the data he referenced was empirically sound, as well as multiple that say it does not apply to the workplace at google. If he is wrong then people need to challenge that with studies that show the contrary, or show him why the data he referenced does not apply to google. The man is not some evil sexist, that much is obvious to anyone who just takes the time to watch a single interview with him. It's pretty apparent that he at least had good intentions when he wrote the memo, so I think it's unfair that people want to ostracize him and defame him instead of just trying to educate him.

It's also really baffling to me how offended some people are by the points he made. I mean he made some generalizations about men being less empathetic and higher in conscientiousness yet I'm a male is who has higher levels of empathy and lower levels of conscientiousness. I'm also less assertive which goes against another generalization he made. None of his points are offensive to me even though they imply that I'm likely to have personality traits that I don't have. I guess I'm just not that sensitive.

And you really have no understanding of Buddhism at all, do you? I'm not even specifically Buddhist anyways. I just have an interest in Zen. If I would give any label to my beliefs about spirituality and philosophy it would be non-dualism or advaita.