Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ram23

Political Correctness

Recommended Posts

If the AP Stylebook is a relic, the UPI Stylebook is even more of a relic. But as a former Unipresser myself, I still favor the UPI version -- if for no other reason than its advocacy of plain old common sense in journalism. To wit: the entry on "burro, burrow," which reads: "A burro is an a$$; a burrow is a hole in the ground. As a journalist, you are expected to know the difference."

 

Urban, what happened to UPI? Did it merge with AP or Reuters or did it just disappear? I'm too busy too look it up right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ It's inappropriate when it is in the form of an unwanted sexual advance.  Telling an elderly woman she is in great shape for her age is completely different territory. Those of us who can read social cues can make a distinction without the need for zero tolerance policies.

 

Look, if you think what Trump said is acceptable, then you probably can't "read social cues" as well as you think you can.

 

Trump's comments show a larger lack of imagination on his part. You meet someone for the first time, and that's how you start the conversation? I don't think that this is about political correctness, this is about a man who has absolutely no idea how to behave like a gentleman because he's gotten away with being a sleaze for his entire life. How about starting the conversation off with something else? I mean, literally anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look.... we are dealing with The Donald here.  He didn't 'grab' her.  Crisis averted.  You all need to lower your expectations when it comes to proper decorum for our President. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Urban, what happened to UPI? Did it merge with AP or Reuters or did it just disappear? I'm too busy too look it up right now.

 

Shrunk down to next-to-nothing. It's actually still around (https://www.upi.com/), owned since 2000 by News World Communications -- the Unification Church -- with a focus on niche-market clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Wikipedia article was helpful for me.  It helped me understanding the internet outrage against "Social Justice Warriors"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior

 

I'm old enough that I remember friends using this term to describe themselves.  This would've been back during the Reagan/Bush1 era.  I was finding myself not understanding the current usage of the term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mainstream Media Misrepresents a Google Engineer’s Memo

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450278/google-engineer-diversity-memo-misrepresented-mainstream-media

 

It is getting more difficult by the day to have a rational public conversation about anything. The latest panicked hubbub is over a memo about diversity in the tech industry, written by a Google engineer. Last night, that Google engineer — James Damore — was fired for supposedly “perpetuating gender stereotypes.”

 

As the memo circulated over the weekend, and after news of Damore’s firing emerged late last night, the media yet again displayed their remarkable inability to report accurately on anything that contradicts progressive dogma.

 

Instead of describing the actual substance of the memo — which was remarkably measured and data-driven — news outlets have routinely chosen to slander Damore as “anti-diversity” and to claim repeatedly that Damore argued women shouldn’t be allowed to work at tech companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this Google engineer wrote a manifesto about how women aren't well suited to be programmers and tried to back it up with a bunch of "scientific" data, and said that Google should eliminate its diversity programs that seek to hire more women.

 

How is this any different than how white people used to claim (using "science"!) that black people were genetically inferior, more prone to being violent, etc., etc., and then used that as "evidence" to promote discriminatory policies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know much about what went down but I do think it's a little ridiculous how companies are so desperate for women in tech and bend over backwards for them. Their logic for preferring to hire women is that women buy the vast majority of consumer products. Like I've said before, I actually think it boils down to the fact that people generally don't want to work with a bunch of dudes....dudes included. Women in STEM jobs get hired at a 2 to 1 ratio over men. That's not what I would call equality. On the other hand, this guy at Google is part of the same culture that is the reason why so many female engineers left in the first place (decades ago, there were actually more female engineers.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've said before, I actually think it boils down to the fact that people generally don't want to work with a bunch of dudes....dudes included. W

 

This is actually good insight here and a reason to have more women around.  Hyper masculine spaces tend to get toxic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've said before, I actually think it boils down to the fact that people generally don't want to work with a bunch of dudes....dudes included. W

 

This is actually good insight here and a reason to have more women around.  Hyper masculine spaces tend to get toxic.

 

They're called brogrammers! It's a real thing! Lol. It seems particularly rampant at startups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dude let's tap the keg and then crunch some code. Daaamnnn...I'd like to fork her repository!" Haha.

 

Sorry, that's my best brogrammer impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ They will when they have daughters maybe. I don't know. Thing is I am not about to blow up the culture to have a social experiment when things are working fine. Not saying they could not be better, but the results are sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I am afraid there may be a sexual harassment lawsuit if we mix women with them. I am not proud of the culture that has developed but tolerate it as long as the results are there right now, hoping they will mellow with age.  We are a small business and sometimes you just have to put up with certain things when you are trying to make ends meat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that offices can afford to "wait around for guys to grow up." I think there's real advantages to having both men and women on a team and I'm sure those advantages can be backed up by data. The guy at Google probably made valid arguments but women tend to be better communicators, better multi-taskers and are more collaborative than competitive. That's extremely valuable in software development and probably any other field. They're also just fun to be around!  It's not that hard to refrain from sexual harassment and belittling women in the work place. I just don't get it. I would tell my guys that there's a zero tolerance policy and that they can either grow up or be terminated, if it becomes an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm underestimating how easily you could be sued, even if you swiftly deal with the problem. Seems like a valid concern but it's definitely a situation that shouldn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If women can and continue to serve in the military despite the hyper masculine mentality and culturally accepted sexual harassment and abuse, and still continue to enlist, then I think they can survive pretty much any job regardless of the douche culture.

 

Also, I wouldn't advertise your violating employment laws, Brutus; it really isn't that hard to dox someone and file a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ As a private company with only a few employees, many of those rules would not apply to a company our size. If we grow our employee base then it would become a concern and we would have to address this.

 

We have another company that has a much different culture and we have a mix of genders in that role. Just the way it works out.

 

Just giving an example of some of the complexities a small business faces in the political correctness environment. When you have a 4 employee company, you may not love the culture, but it makes it hard to get rid of someone who accounts for 1/3 of the revenue because they may be a douche.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the dumbest argument I've ever read in my life. Women can survive the military so they can survive anything and therefore, we can belittle the issue. Give me a break. The military culture isn't all that hyper-masculine. Literally every job in the civilian world is a job in the military. Most of the military isn't infantrymen. They're cooks, barbers, accountants, doctors, you name it. Get out of here with that nonsense, for real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you serious? That's f-ing hilarious. I heard that the Army actually has one of the top culinary schools in the nation but I'm not an expert on the military and what all is going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go read the manifesto for yourself. Tell me that if a coworker published that on a company message board, you wouldn't feel weird about working with them. I mean, it has 12 subheadings, multiple charts and graphs, bulleted lists, hyperlinks, etc. Tell me that someone who takes the time to write something of that length about this topic isn't somewhat extreme in their views.

 

Also, it's just so, so wrong in so many ways.

 

The guy says that "women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men" and that "more men may like coding because it requires systemizing". Not only is that a massively sweeping generalization, it's wrong for two big reasons:

  • If it's true that women are more social and men are more focused on the work, then how does brogrammer culture exist? Brogrammer culture is a big frat party, socializing and playing foosball and drinking beer in the office. So why is that type of socializing okay but women socializing is a weakness?
  • The actual job of programming, despite what many people believe, is not just sitting at your desk typing on a computer all day. I have been a software developer for over 8 years and I spend far more time in meeting and discussions than sitting at my desk typing. You have to talk to the clients and the people who use the software to gather requirement and get feedback from them. You have to present your work to management and all stakeholders. You have to work one-on-one with QA engineers. You have daily meeting with the entire team where everybody talks about their previous day's progress and obstacles they have to doing their work. Basically, if you think that being a programmer does not utilize any social skills, you're completely wrong. (I can only think of a single project over the last 8 years where this was not the case, and that was a 2 week project where all of the requirements were already finished and they basically needed a "warm body" to come in to do the coding work. But that was a single 2 week long project out of the last 8 years of my job.) So maybe women are actually better suited for the job than men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^There used to be way more women in important computing positions up through the early '80s such as Anita Sinclair and Carol Shaw before the nerds came and ran them off. The early computer and video game people were much more hippie than neckbeard and knew all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is not so much he got fired for suggesting ways to implement things Google has claimed to be working towards as they fired him for “perpetuating gender stereotypes”.  That’s politics, and California is one of the few states that explicitly forbids firing people based on such views.  He’s got a very strong wrongful termination case.

In a real way though, this isn’t at its root about politics.  This has its roots in the long term efforts of technologically adept people in the industry to minimize the importance of “soft skills”.  The salesmen, “facilitators”, networkers, and schmoozers naturally hate that idea.

 

They’ve clearly taken over at Google, which could be why rumor has it a lot of their actual tech breakthroughs are coming from smaller subcontractors.

 

One point he made really made sense, in context.  He stated that conservatives are better at keeping things working, rather than changing them for the sake of change.  Look at Facebook.  They are constantly fiddling with new features of dubious reliability, while their integral browser is slower than the IRS refunds department and more prone to crashing than Lindsey Lohan.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, what's quite funny about this situation is that the author seems like the type of guy who would accuse liberals of being "snowflakes" and being too "politically correct". And yet, the Suggestions section of his manifesto is nothing but "stop being mean to conservatives", "it's not fair that Google has some programs that cater to only women or minorities". The hypocrisy is amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is not so much he got fired for suggesting ways to implement things Google has claimed to be working towards as they fired him for “perpetuating gender stereotypes”.  That’s politics, and California is one of the few states that explicitly forbids firing people based on such views.  He’s got a very strong wrongful termination case.

In a real way though, this isn’t at its root about politics.  This has its roots in the long term efforts of technologically adept people in the industry to minimize the importance of “soft skills”.  The salesmen, “facilitators”, networkers, and schmoozers naturally hate that idea.

 

They’ve clearly taken over at Google, which could be why rumor has it a lot of their actual tech breakthroughs are coming from smaller subcontractors.

 

One point he made really made sense, in context.  He stated that conservatives are better at keeping things working, rather than changing them for the sake of change.  Look at Facebook.  They are constantly fiddling with new features of dubious reliability, while their integral browser is slower than the IRS refunds department and more prone to crashing than Lindsey Lohan.

 

 

Facebook now has a conservative user base, so that is another point of friction between the Facebook HQ and their largely small town and rural users. I suppose changing the interface often could be an effort to lure back in the liberals that have largely abandoned the site in the past few years. I feel that strategy is not going to be effective in retaining Dems and will upset the base. Facebook does much better with Dems with their Instagram subsidiary.

 

Zuckerburg knows this change happened and is trying to roll with it, but when so many people were hired by the company already to change things all the time do you just fire them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is not so much he got fired for suggesting ways to implement things Google has claimed to be working towards as they fired him for “perpetuating gender stereotypes”.  That’s politics, and California is one of the few states that explicitly forbids firing people based on such views.  He’s got a very strong wrongful termination case.

In a real way though, this isn’t at its root about politics.  This has its roots in the long term efforts of technologically adept people in the industry to minimize the importance of “soft skills”.  The salesmen, “facilitators”, networkers, and schmoozers naturally hate that idea.

 

They’ve clearly taken over at Google, which could be why rumor has it a lot of their actual tech breakthroughs are coming from smaller subcontractors.

 

One point he made really made sense, in context.  He stated that conservatives are better at keeping things working, rather than changing them for the sake of change.  Look at Facebook.  They are constantly fiddling with new features of dubious reliability, while their integral browser is slower than the IRS refunds department and more prone to crashing than Lindsey Lohan.

 

 

Facebook now has a conservative user base, so that is another point of friction between the Facebook HQ and their largely small town and rural users. I suppose changing the interface often could be an effort to lure back in the liberals that have largely abandoned the site in the past few years. I feel that strategy is not going to be effective in retaining Dems and will upset the base. Facebook does much better with Dems with their Instagram subsidiary.

 

Zuckerburg knows this change happened and is trying to roll with it, but when so many people were hired by the company already to change things all the time do you just fire them?

 

Also the suburbanites, 30 or so and up.  Including that 45-60 demographic that has been the most conservative age group in US history since they became old enough to vote.  People I went to school with that were by no means science/tech oriented are not only on but active.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't make this stuff up:

 

ESPN pulls Asian-American announcer from Virginia football game because he has a Confederate general's name

 

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/08/22/espn-pulls-asian-american-announcer-from-virginia-football-game-because-has-confederate-generals-name.html

 

In the wake of the events in Charlottesville, Va., ESPN decided to pull one of its announcers from calling a University of Virginia football game -- because his name is Robert Lee.

 

Lee, an Asian-American sportscaster who started with the network in 2016, was moved to a different game "simply because of the coincidence of his name," ESPN said, referencing the Confederate general Robert E. Lee...

 

ESPN, which has faced accusations of liberal bias that some observers believe has led to a downtick in viewership, said it moved its announcer to the Youngstown State game at Pittsburgh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll never understand how the concept of using the Golden Rule in terms of law and social interaction is such a huge boogeyman for the Right.  To me, it speaks volumes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, not really. This was more about giving a young broadcaster a chance to not have to deal with a bunch of nonsense.

 

 

 

ESPN should be admitting that the entire thing is silly nonsense, and that they won't ever reasign their employees because they think they're name might upset people - but I see now that instead of that, they're doubling down and trying, rather unconvincingly, to somehow spin it to be about protecting the employee.

 

Who issued that statement by the way? And why is some random, unrelated reporter posting a screenshot of it on Twitter? That doesn't seem official in any capacity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't make this stuff up:

 

ESPN pulls Asian-American announcer from Virginia football game because he has a Confederate general's name

 

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/08/22/espn-pulls-asian-american-announcer-from-virginia-football-game-because-has-confederate-generals-name.html

 

In the wake of the events in Charlottesville, Va., ESPN decided to pull one of its announcers from calling a University of Virginia football game -- because his name is Robert Lee.

 

Lee, an Asian-American sportscaster who started with the network in 2016, was moved to a different game "simply because of the coincidence of his name," ESPN said, referencing the Confederate general Robert E. Lee...

 

ESPN, which has faced accusations of liberal bias that some observers believe has led to a downtick in viewership, said it moved its announcer to the Youngstown State game at Pittsburgh.

jiFfM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now conservatives are triggered over who is calling the UVA game that no one is going to watch?  Who are the snowflakes, exactly?

 

If you don't think that it's an absolute joke that someone was pulled from a broadcast because of their birth name... then idk what to tell ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...