cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply


Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?

  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Come chat and see that we're all a bit crazy on IRC!
  • Do not post any artwork from sexyfur.com and/or
    Jeremy Bernal. This is now a bannable offense.
Flockmod!

File: 1312658156605.jpg - (80.35 KB, 604x539) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
82283 No.3469316

Finally somebody called out the diversity bullshit going on in tech today. To no surprise the SJWs are proving his point causing a shitstorm merely because somebody holds an opposing view despite presenting it in a calm manner open for civilized debate. Every article on the matter has misrepresented his writing as "anti-diversity" despite literally the first three words of it stating otherwise, including the site that finally published it in "full" (and then omitted several extras). That or they misrepresent him claiming women are biologically incapable of being engineers, which is also not true as he explains. But what does he know? Oh, he's a Harvard PhD biologist and senior software engineer.

http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320

Nothing states my views better than his bullet point right here:

>Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression

This is what SJWs get wrong and the irony of it is getting old.

I also applaud him for reminding everyone that these diversifying hiring practices are illegal.

>Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]

I can't wait for this to all be over.

No.3469320

What makes me laugh is how hard the author is trying to preempt the internal document with a "Poisoning the well" tactic where she talked about unrelated shit as if this memo was the source of a lawsuit against google itself.

Also, it blatantly states that data charts were removed and that hyperlinks to sources were removed. So further attempts to legitimize viewpoints and science(data) that doesn't meet Kate's little worldview over there at gizmodo.

Any SJW infest tech company becomes a revolving door of employees. The non-SJW self-eliminates, and the SJWs get fired for spending more time in the HR office than they spend at their desk engineering anything, so they get fired.

Best part? The SJW goes onto twitter to blast google (or see mass effect Andromeda as another potent example) or decides to sue the given company for "discrimination."

Also, I'd be willing to bet Gizmodo still has a lower female employee ratio than google does. Just like Kotaku criticized Konami while they had a writing staff of 15 males and 3 females, which was markedly worse than Konami who employed female concept artists and character artists. (character artists are the most sought after art job, btw.)

No.3469321
File: purrgatory.jpg - (101.90 KB, 443x443) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
104346
>in tech

And education, and politics, and business in general..
If we don't discriminate, how will we get better tech?
If we don't discriminate, how will we get better furries?
If we don't discriminate, how will we get a better future?

No.3469407
>Oh, he's a Harvard PhD biologist

Got a source for that? As far as I can tell, the author isn't known.

>despite literally the first three words of it stating otherwise

Prefacing 3000+ words with "I'm not sexist, but..." doesn't affect the tone of those words.

No.3469415

>>3469407

Facts are sexist.

No.3469417

Opinions are facts.

No.3469418

>>3469417

When they have been tested over a large number of examples, achieved, and when graphed have a correlation approaching 1 or -1, definitely.

But I'm sure your wishful thinking is just as rigorously tested.

No.3469419

>>3469418

>When they have been tested

Which "facts" are you talking about? Is this like the "fact" OP claimed the author was a "Harvard PhD biologist"?

>But I'm sure your wishful thinking is just as rigorously tested.

I think you're assuming quite a lot from that poster's three words. Not very factual of you.

No.3469420

>>3469419

Context, buddy, context. Work past that autism and learn social skills.

No.3469440
File: population-overlap.jpg - (36.50 KB, 1050x836) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
37380

Bloomberg confirms that he has been fired for "perpetrating gender sterotypes."

Disregarding an argument due to a lack of a present source is itself a fallacy, but here you go dipshit. >>3469407 >>3469419
https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-damore-b277b62b/

Several people have also been criticizing him for not listing any sources, but as Gizmodo conveniently left out, there are dozens. They also left out this handy graph where he again specifically condemns reducing people to stereotypes. The examples of misrepresentation are innumerable. Nobody is actually reading his paper. Having been let go the irony regarding the main point in his paper is overwhelming at this point.

http://diversitymemo.com/

No.3469442
File: 1502140087043.jpg - (1504.57 KB, 3168x2136) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1540683
No.3469447

>>3469440

They fired him and 100% proved him right.

No.3469453

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/08/07/revealed-inside-googles-sjw-cabal-blacklists/

Cool, the beating heart of the internet today is run by fucking BAM and antifa supporters. Did no one ever tell them growing up that they'd have to learn to work side by side with people they don't like? Did their parents ever tell them that being an adult means having to enact at least a small amount of emotional labor besides having a my-little-pony workplace environment?

Holy fucking shit, these people sound like children refusing to go to school because people are meanie heads.

No.3469462

So when does Google's stock go through the floor?

No.3469478
File: 1438802569171.png - (120.77 KB, 250x418) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
123665
>we should hire people based on merit, not skin color or gender
>that's racist and sexist!

And now he's fired.

No.3469495
File: 0ruibsri.png - (166.23 KB, 1050x1618) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
170220

>>3469440

No.3469500
File: 56e877721e0000c60071046e.png - (1182.86 KB, 897x1497) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1211247

>>3469453

>breitbart
No.3469501

>>3469500

Thanks for the free bump, enjoy your bag of dicks.

No.3469504
File: 63848_Riiko_ezgif-save.gif - (60.89 KB, 100x100) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
62354

>>3469501

>thread not bumped by post
>THANKS FOR THE BUMP :^)

Ya'll a buncha cunts ya know that?

No.3469505
File: 1454259321128.png - (105.03 KB, 450x420) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
107550

>>3469504

You need to sage to post without bumping.

No.3469508

>>3469316
>>3469440

You're probably angered at how they omitted information and outright lied about him. It's perfectly justifiable for you to be angered.

Liberals and leftists always lie and omit information to deceive people all the time. Those same people become surprised when their utopian economic system turns out to be a genocidal poverty-stricken one like Venezuela and the USSR. Liars will attract liars and they will die off on their own hands.

No.3469522

>>3469501
did you know andrew breitbart died on the toilet from doing too many speedballs?

No.3469524
File: c1.png - (11.33 KB, 485x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
11599

>>3469505

No.3469525
File: c2.png - (21.45 KB, 490x266) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
21969

>>3469505

No.3469526
File: c3.png - (41.40 KB, 476x272) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
42397

>>3469505

No.3469527
File: c9.gif - (289.16 KB, 707x147) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
296101

>>3469505

No.3469528

"In average"
"Generally"
"In general"

The fucking entire thing is filled with weasel words and provides zero sources for his "evidence".

It's his opinion presented as facts. You can either agree or disagree with it, but there is no way you can take those as facts.

That being said, I think everyone overreacted. It's a person's opinion and he's entitled to it. He shouldn't have been fired for it.

No.3469529
File: 1419050058373.jpg - (50.86 KB, 275x340) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
52078

>>3469527

But how would we know you didn't actually bump it without including sage in every field?

No.3469531

>>3469528

They removed his sources, read past the title. Here's a quote:

>"The text of the post is reproduced in full below, with some minor formatting modifications. Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted."

The link to the full paper with actual sources is here:
https://archive.is/yeEbv

And the reason why they removed his sources was because they wanted to prove their false narrative. These cretins rely on the omission of truth to justify their bullshit, and you people continuously believe in their outright dishonesty. If they gave you a turd and told you that it was chocolate ice cream, you would gobble it all up. LISTEN AND READ.

No.3469537
File: narh.png - (290.24 KB, 487x436) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
297206

>>3469529 I see what you're doing now. You sure got me! I was all worked up for real!

No.3469543

>>3469495

>80:20

More like 60:40, and that's considering the graph is exaggerated to make it more visible, although I'm sure this distribution or worse is indeed true for some metrics. It's not offensive, it's life. These merely prove that just because there aren't 50% women in a position doesn't mean women are being oppressed, and that, yes, women can be engineers and other "masculine" professionals too.

>>3469528

>zero sources

The guy above put it nicer than I was going to.

No.3469545

>>3469528

You're proving you never read it. He sourced it, the only real weasels is media outlets like gizmodo who even stated that they took out the hyperlinks. The hyperlinks WERE the fucking sources. He is not misrepresenting his opinion as fact. Four actual PH.D. related to the subject weighed in and said he was reasoning correctly and that his conclusions were NOT wrong.

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/

Get rekt.

No.3469569

>>3469543

>More like 60:40, and that's considering the graph is exaggerated to make it more visible

No, it's approximately 80/20 and I counted by using the tool in Photoshop that reports the number of pixels in a selection to calculate the relative areas under the curve. It's a feature of normal distributions: when you pick a value away from the mean, the number of people falling on the left or right side increases exponentially.

But thanks for illustrating my argument: it does look like 60/40 and that's the entire point. The idea of displaying overlapping distributions to argue that "people are largely the same" is just obfuscation of information by throwing the raw data in your face, because the author knows you won't bother to check.

No.3469570

>>3469543

>These merely prove that just because there aren't 50% women in a position doesn't mean women are being oppressed

Assuming the distribution at the limit was 60:40 against 50:50 - that is, out of 100 men plus 100 women, 40 women and 50 men got the job, you'd have a gender distribution of 45:55 which is the kind of figure that people assume should be the case. A couple percentage points difference is considered acceptable, and that is the argument of the graph: it's saying "look, we're not all that different, so there shouldn't be all that much difference in jobs either."

But where in reality the difference is 80:20 against 50:50 the ratios naturally become 25:75 or worse because women won't even apply for such jobs knowing they're unlikely to succeed, there the SJWs begin to gnash teeth and wail for gender quotas and point at the graph saying "look, were not that different, it must be oppression!".

No.3469583
File: girls_who_code.png - (239.89 KB, 652x669) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
245648

>>3469570

>women won't even apply for such jobs knowing they're unlikely to succeed

Let's take this a step further. During my time in community college taking intro courses to various IT classes (database/server admin, network security, programming, etc.) the ratio of men to women was vastly skewed in every field. In a class of 30, there would typically be 2 females. The vast majority of the students in these intro classes signed up on the notion that they would become famous bloggers/youtube celebs/make videogames for a living. Not even 6 weeks into the semester, classroom attendance was down 60-70% from all the faggots dropping out when they realize they needed to actually read and work nonstop to keep up with the curriculum.

By the time the courses for the semester were over, the total students remaining out of 30 were as follows:
*Programming - 6 males.
*SQL - 1 female, 6 males.
*Network security - 1 weird fat guy that might have been a tranny, 8 males.
*Windows Servers - Same fat/tranny guy, 7 males.

When the next semester started with advanced/obscure IT courses, I only saw 2 females total, with 1 making it to the end. So can it really be stated that females are simply "not applying" to jobs they deem male oriented, or is it that the amount of females applying is next to none, and companies snatch them up immediately on a diversity quota, yet even then there's STILL not enough to form equal ratios?

No.3469604

>>3469583

What's really sad is a huge amount of women are being socially pushed away from engineering and coding NOT by the schools and NOT by the job itself... but by the fucking media.

When you tell every woman she's going to go into a job, be expected to work really long and hard hours, and she will be treated as inferior while there, or worse, a piece of ass for a pack of beta males, 99% are going to opt out.

Now tell them that they're going to earn less, or be harassed by your customer base. What do you think they're gonna do? Self-eliminate.

The media throwing gloom, doom, terror and bullshit at women is a huge part of why there is a substantial "pipeline" issue. You can't hire women into jobs if women are not training for them.

No.3469606
File: 1490440681982.jpg - (8.78 KB, 379x374) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
8988

>>3469604

IT SHOULDN'T EVEN BE AN ISSUE THOUGH. THE ENTIRE POINT OF THIS THREAD WAS ABOUT THE CANCEROUS EFFECT OF DIVERSITY QUOTAS. LITERALLY CORPORATE ENDORSED RACISM AND SEXISM, BUT IN FAVOR OF ANYONE NOT WHITE AND MALE. SO FUCKING WHAT IF THERE'S A LACK OF WOMEN IN IT, COMPANIES SHOULD HIRE ON MERIT ALONE, NOT ON THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN OR THE GENITALS BETWEEN YOUR LEGS. I AM SO FUCKING MAD.

No.3469607

>>3469583

>>females are simply "not applying" to jobs they deem male oriented

This.
When I was in college last, I spent a lot of time in the advanced tech wing of the school. You had diesel and automotive mechanics, electrical and computer tech, machining, las0rs, all those sorts of things.
The ratio of males to females was skewed very heavily male.

No.3469609

>>3469570

>knowing they're unlikely to succeed
>i.e. "To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK." -Google CEO

Except he literally said in his memo to treat people as individuals, not a group. That there are less "biologically suited" women in a group does not mean an individual woman is less "biologically suited". I really can't even say anything else here that hasn't already been stated. The extreme left are at odds with their own goal because as it turns out they are the ones being discrimatory. I'll welcome arguments about sexual harassment and other factors other than biological traits leading to workplace bias but I absolutely cannot allow their solution of throwing in more discrimination to fix existing bias.

No.3469610

>>3469606 "I AM SO FUCKING MAD."

Cry me a river, pinche gringo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImgW2GVC-hE&t=2s

No.3469613

el goog's getting fucked from both ends right now

http://www.businessinsider.com/james-damore-files-nlrb-complaint-against-google-2017-8?r=UK&IR=T
http://archive.is/RWFu5

Keep your eye on the result of the impending legal case(s) because the coverage will not be even between them, not even close, and they can't both be right without one case reaching findings mutually exclusive to the likely claims of the plaintiffs on the other...

No.3469616

>>3469609

>That there are less "biologically suited" women in a group does not mean an individual woman is less "biologically suited"

When you are choosing your education and career path as an individual, you don't yet know your talents and traits because you haven't developed and tested them. Therefore you are at a gamble: choose an occupation where 4/5 of your cohort fail, or choose something where you're more likely to succeed.

If you choose the riskier option, you're most likely to waste years of your life and many better opportunities until you finally switch careers, and even if you don't you're still more likely to find yourself at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to actually getting hired, because even at the top of your own group you're behind the top of the other groups.

In other words, you might become the next Einstein, but for every you there are three equally smart people to compete with, and unless you're somehow more visible (gender/racial quotas) then they're simply more likely to beat you to the HR office with their applications and get hired instead of you.

So wouldn't you rather choose to invest your efforts into something with better odds?

No.3469617
File: 1481524586982.jpg - (32.06 KB, 488x636) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
32828

>>3469616

>4/5 of your cohort fail

Excuse me, what the fuck? Females in IT have absolutely no problem being hired.

No.3469618
File: RUaJtB7.jpg - (15.48 KB, 400x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
15855

>>3469613

>fire a "problematic" employee who airs his grievances in a cool, logical manner supported with facts and statistics
>females thank you by suing you

I hope they win, just to rub that shit into Google's face.

No.3469619
File: women-in-stem-a-gender-gap-to-innovation-7-728.jpg - (119.32 KB, 728x941) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
122187

>>3469616
Point in case: most people educated with STEM degrees do not work in STEM - mostly because there's an over-abundance of people with STEM degrees and most of them aren't very good at it. With such a glut, the corporations can pick only the best and the rest have to find something else to do.

The effect is more pronounced for women: 26% instead of 40%. That is to say, if you're a woman thinking about getting a STEM degree, even if you find yourself somewhere in the best performing group of women, the odds of getting hired are still 40:60 against you because there are more better men to pick from.

No.3469620

>>3469617

>Excuse me, what the fuck? Females in IT have absolutely no problem being hired.

That was an abstract example, not a particular claim.

No.3469633
File: pKra7We.gif - (3.99 KB, 250x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
4085

>>3469618
What is cool and logical about a company wide email blast? Like fuckin, you don't do that for anything, not even "Stop taking my sandwiches from the fridge."

No.3469635
File: woman haters club - women welcome.jpg - (70.62 KB, 654x358) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
72318

>>3469617 I know a woman who got into the IT field (network security primarily) and she's gone on and off about rampant sexism within the field .. not necessarily in the hiring phase but with male co-workers treating her poorly, talking down to her despite the men being in a lower position or having lower seniority. Going to someplace like DefCon involves assorted unwanted pinches, grabs and unwanted sexual advances. She's hardly a feminist or SJW - doesn't believe 'all men are evil penises', knows quite a few non-jerk guys and deals with any major issues in a professional manner.

Still -- she seems to have to put up with a lot more shit than her male colleagues and has quit at least one workplace over unaddressed harassment issues.

No.3469638

>>3469616

>or choose something where you're more likely to succeed.

And here I thought people chose things they actually enjoy, because as with anyone in college if they don't like it they drop out.

>you're still more likely to find yourself at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to actually getting hired, because even at the top of your own group you're behind the top of the other groups.
>even if you find yourself somewhere in the best performing group of women, the odds of getting hired are still 40:60 against you because there are more better men to pick from.

I'd love a source for this, because here I am going, "Oh no, here they go comparing individuals to groups again."

>but for every you there are three equally smart people to compete with

And? Quotas notwithstanding, for each of the three males there are three equally smart competitors too (two male, one female). Everyone is at 25% chance. With quotas, however.... Lol.

>>3469633
You mean an internal social network that actively promotes having discussion and that everyone is at will to participate in or not?

No.3469641
File: what each country leads the world in.png - (1757.19 KB, 4000x2395) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1799361

Both Stefan Molyneux and Jordan Peterson interviewed the guy fired from Google.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN1vEfqHGro

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agU-mHFcXdw

Stereotypically, the guy is a skinny nerd who can barely articulate his words and seems slightly socially awkward. This does not surprise me though. Many studies have shown that people with high IQ tend to have trouble speaking, but are incredibly adept at writing and articulating their thoughts through writing.

Pic unrelated.

No.3469642

>>3469635
I know someone with similar experiences, at the same time recruiters are falling over themselves trying to recruit her. Different issues.

No.3469643
File: google no platform.jpg - (88.62 KB, 512x667) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
90744

>>3469641

The interview with Peterson he talks about meetings where Google may have illegally coached people to discriminate against non-leftist view points, which is what prompted the entire memo to be written in the first place.

This also aligns with internal memos of Google employees confirming that they are trying to de-platform view points (AKA Youtube). Pic related.

No.3469649
File: 1500012743645.jpg - (42.76 KB, 493x449) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
43785

>>3469633

>company wide

I swear the people talking shit about this manifesto never actually read it or understand the context behind it. It was shared with a select group of coworkers and one of them shared it with the rest of the company. And no, it wasn't an attack against Google so much as a warning about the consequences of diversity quotas.

You're walking. There's a puddle in front of you. You have adapted the politically correct trait of averting your gaze from the ground. I tell you that if you keep heading in that direction, you're going to get wet. Is that a threat?

No.3469652

Literally DDoSing the people agreeing with him.
http://bigleaguepolitics.com/quillette-website-attacked-promoting-scientists-support-google-memo/

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/
https://archive.is/VlNfl

No.3469659
File: 1349923102229.jpg - (226.47 KB, 960x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
231910

>>3469649

>I swear the people talking shit about this manifesto never actually read it or understand the context behind it.

You're not supposed to read it. The people pushing this diversity crap don't want anybody to read it. If it were some poorly worded racist tirade this would be easier to dismiss. Not hard to laugh at "God loves men more so he made them natural born leaders!" Instead it's a argument structured as a cited academic paper. "Status is the primary metric that men are judged on [4], pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for the status that they entail. Note, the same forces that lead men into high pay/high stress jobs in tech and leadership cause men to take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths."

Also some (((people))) are using diversity as an excuse to express their hatred for white people. They are arguing from a dishonest standpoint from the get-go.

No.3469674

Holy shit it won't stop. Nobody wants your shitty opinion articles in their news feed, they want NEWS.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/08/09/google-memo-how-to-get-fired-diversity-silicon-valley/

>Editor's Note: Comments have been disabled for obvious reasons.

What a fucking coward.

No.3469676

>>3469638

>And here I thought people chose things they actually enjoy, because as with anyone in college if they don't like it they drop out.

Augustus, meet real world - real world, meet Augustus. Very few people ever get to do what they "enjoy", especially when talent and preference don't often meet. You may like to draw flowers, but you're not Rembrandt, so off you go to cleaning floors or stamping documents etc. People who don't understand this end up in poverty for trying to persist in a field they're simply no good at, or in a field where there's no demand. The smart people train skills that are in demand regardless of what they would prefer to do.

>I'd love a source for this, because here I am going, "Oh no, here they go comparing individuals to groups again."

Again, the comparison is valid when you don't know where in the group you are. You don't know how good you're going to be until you go through school, get your grades, and start applying for jobs. If 40% of men get hired in STEM jobs but only 27% of women, then as a woman if I was looking at my odds for a) succeeding at graduating in STEM and b) landing a STEM job afterwards, I would see that my odds are rather slim.

>Quotas notwithstanding, for each of the three males there are three equally smart competitors too (two male, one female). Everyone is at 25% chance.

That's not how it works. You're confusing things. It starts with the assumption that you do end up graduating, but you still don't know how good your grades are going to be and how competent in your field you'll become. All you know is that for every one of you, there are three others who are just as or more competent, who are likely to get hired first.

It's like the monty hall problem. Every box has an equal probability of being empty, sure, but your first pick is more likely to be empty than not. It seems paradoxical but it's not because the population of boxes changes by exclusion. Similiarily here: you don't know where within your group you are, but you can see your own group's track record and determine your odds that way. Being male or female is like entering the monty hall game, where some of the boxes are pink and some blue, and the blue boxes contain the prize with 75% probability and the pink boxes with 25%, though no box is guaranteed to win, and you're forced to take your designated color, and you have to take $200,000 in student loans to be allowed to open your box.

Would you?

No.3469678
File: leninfeel.png - (39.69 KB, 756x760) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
40641
>kulak loses favor with bourgeoisie, gets cast out of towering monument to capitalist oppression
>proles point fingers at one another and pointlessly circlejerk over the ethics of it instead of demanding revolution immediately
No.3469694

>>3469633

See, that's the impression you're left with because you don't know the whole story.

Essentially, google headquarters was sending all the white people to "diversity" classes, and white females were allowed to opt out. In these classes, they spent most of the time basically telling white males to be ashamed of themselves. So literally, you're paid to sit there and be yelled at for white-penis-original-sin. Weekly.

And google even knows that these courses were overreach, because they're keeping them secretive as hell. No cameras allowed. No sharing the handouts. No recording the lecture both on pain of being fired, and for being sued civilly.

That's why the memo happened. It wasn't some random guy who out of the blue was like "lemme get myself in the news!"

No.3469697

>>3469635

Men deal with shit in tech too. Abusive bosses and unwanted sexual attention is a universal human issue that exists because we're humans. In fact, harassment was studied using platforms like twitter and found most of the online abuse was directed at men.

It's just that no one gives a fuck, men suck it up and they "toxic-masculinity" through that shit like troopers, and then mysteriously we have a suicide rate of like 5 to 1 gender-wise.

The problem is not a disparity, it's just a sad universal truth of being in a shit-world. It's just that men aren't bawling about it. Not saying that women are, if anything, 99% of this diversity shit is championed, chaired, or founded by men who are trying to get tail on the grounds that "I'm not like the other guys."

Don't believe me? In 2016 and 2017 some of the biggest male "Ally" voices out on twitter and youtube got done for domestic violence, child abuse, pedophilia or assault charges. One even got dinged for revenge porn.

It's like the priests who preach the evils of homosexuality, but then fuck same-sex kids after confession. Hiding how nasty they are by acting as saints.

No.3469698

You know I come from a country where sexism still exists and gays still get ostracized, just not officially. However the equivalent of STEM degrees here aren't seen as a guy thing or a girl thing. What is known is that you need a degree or you're going to be fucking poor. If I remember correctly my college classes were split roughly 50/50 on gender. And while my workplace has more men than women in the programming departments, the women can code just fine and everything runs smoothly.

I'm just wondering how the hell civil discourse broke down so terribly over there on just about any non-issue pertaining to the country. I swear I'm going to start believing in conspiracy theories soon with how much the news distracts people from shit that's actually important.

No.3469699

>>3469698
the xenoestrogens in the plastic and food supply control the american thought process.

No.3469708

>>3469697
It's called moral licensing.

It's also the reason why religious people in general are the biggest assholes around. They substitute actual good deeds with imaginary good deeds like praying.

No.3469710

>>3469678
So "kulak" is the new "cuck", apparently.

No.3469711
File: chainsaw weasel.jpg - (48.48 KB, 799x577) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
49640

>>3469676

You stupid motherfucker, there isn't a gender disparity because employers prefer men over women, there's a gender disparity because THERE ARE FEWER WOMEN TRAINED FOR AND APPLYING TO THESE JOBS. EVERY WOMAN WHO APPLIES TO AN IT JOB GETS IT, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, BECAUSE DESPITE THE FACT THAT SHE MIGHT BE LESS QUALIFIED THAN A MALE COUNTERPART, THE COMPANY WANTS TO MAKE EVERYTHING LOOK LIKE AN SJW PARADISE WITH EQUAL SHADES OF COLORS AND GENITALS.

Name ONE female who was turned away from an IT role at a tech syndicate and I will eat my shoes.

No.3469715

>>3469676

>especially when talent and preference don't often meet

Well good thing we have educational facilities to make up for that so people can learn to better their skills rather than being inherently good.

>If 40% of men get hired in STEM jobs but only 27% of women, then as a woman if I was looking at my odds for a) succeeding at graduating in STEM and b) landing a STEM job afterwards, I would see that my odds are rather slim.

Your own graph shows woman earning more with a STEM degree and/or job so those odds still seem fine. Smaller chance, better reward.

>who are just as or more competent
>or more

Now you're just changing the terms. Your entire debate here comes off as a slippery slope. You already said the field is saturated. For every white male there are hundreds more equally or more competent white males. Everyone is already disadvantaged.

No.3469718

>>3469710
Kulaks are still the same as they've always been. Scum who sell out their fellow proletariat to the bougie pigs.

No.3469724

>>3469718

>> Typing this shit while I own personal property, and the fruits of capitalism.

Aaaayye lmao.

No.3469725

>>3469724

>peasants rising up against monarchy while living on the King's land
>checkmate peasants!
>slaves rebelling against their masters while working their master's fields
>checkmate slaves!
>proletariat demanding full communism while using capitalist property
>checkmate proletariat!

Piggy loves you, Kulak trash.

No.3469726

>>3469715

>Well good thing we have educational facilities to make up for that so people can learn to better their skills rather than being inherently good.

Aaand now you went full retard left. The whole point is that there are inherent differences in people, such that you cannot arbitrarily train everybody to do everything at the same level. The point is that you don't know your own limits until you reach them, so you're wiser to look at how other people of your type are doing to get a sense of what you can expect of yourself.

>Your own graph shows woman earning more with a STEM degree and/or job so those odds still seem fine. Smaller chance, better reward.

Different argument, and the pay is not that much higher to compensate for the lower probability of success.

>Now you're just changing the terms.

Don't cling to semantics. It hardly matters for the point.

>Your entire debate here comes off as a slippery slope.

I don't see how slippery slope would apply here.

> You already said the field is saturated. For every white male there are hundreds more equally or more competent white males. Everyone is already disadvantaged.

Different argument again. You're confusing the topic. Again the point is that you can't know who within those groups you end up being, so when the corporations pick employees you want to be in the group that has a higher chance of being selected in the first place. If you want to make the most of your STEM degree, to have the best odds of the best outcomes, you want to be male, and if you can't be male then you might want to reconsider your career in STEM.

No.3469729

>>3469715
Or, let me put it this way:

Suppose we're at a fun fair and there's a box game that costs you $10 to play. There's four boxes and one prize. Trick is, the color of your t-shirt determines whether you're allowed to open box number 1, or choose out of boxes 2,3,4. If you're wearing a red shirt, you automatically get box 1, and if you're wearing blue you get to pick.

As confusing as this might seem, it's really very simple. The odds of the prize being in boxes 2,3,4 is 75% so it's more likely that a person with a blue shirt will grab it than a person with a red shirt.

So if youre wearing a red shirt, would you play the game?

No.3469732

>>3469711

I can pretty much confirm this. A bitch can be shit-poor at programming, but she'll always get hired. Then she'll have 2 or 3 guys helping her dumb ass get through even the simplest project. It's disgusting.

No.3469737
File: DClFQiLXkAE0BOc.jpg - (84.41 KB, 1000x609) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
86431

>>3469726

>if you're male you have a higher probability of being hired

Kill yourself.

No.3469762

>>3469737

>Kill yourself.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Women in STEM end up in the lower range of skill as applicants compared to men as well as being less numerous, so there's a double disadvantage without any "patriarchal bias" or oppression.

No.3469767
File: 1449540029685.png - (107.47 KB, 245x267) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
110047

>>3469762

Women in STEM fields are less skilled than men BECAUSE they have easier times getting hired you fucking dolt. There is literally no disadvantage to being a female, especially in IT. Either put up some statistics showing otherwise or shut your cock holster.

No.3469770

>>3469767

>Women in STEM fields are less skilled than men BECAUSE they have easier times getting hired you fucking dolt.

That's a completely different thing. Both are true at the same time: women in general don't fare as well as men in STEM subjects, yet they graduate in disproportionately large numbers and get hired because of positive discrimination. One is naturally lowering the proportion of women in the tech field, and the other is unnaturally increasing it, yet even with the positive discrimination it's difficult to get even ratios because the women themselves also drop out of education and jobs that they just can't handle:

https://thinkprogress.org/women-are-leaving-science-and-engineering-jobs-in-droves-6f0e9eab1d64/

> A new study released Wednesday by the Center for Talent Innovation finds that women call it quits 45 percent more often in their rookie years at such STEM jobs than men.
>There is literally no disadvantage to being a female, especially in IT. Either put up some statistics showing otherwise or shut your cock holster.

I already did, and any evidence I present you'd dismiss anyways because it contradicts with your preconcieved notions.

No.3469777
File: 1478414322624.jpg - (29.38 KB, 294x297) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
30089

>>3469770

Your initial argument is that women are disadvantaged due to the fact that there are more men in IT, which is bullshit because few women willingly refuse to take classes necessary for IT related jobs. A less qualified woman will always have a higher chance of being hired simply because diversity quotas exist. That is a fucking advantage, not disadvantage, and a self-destructive one at that.

No.3469793

>>3469725

"slaves rebelling against their masters"

I'mma stop you right there because you're being retarded.

You are not the counter culture. The masters are the liberal elite.

You have three major news networks. 4 major publications in print media. All the top social networking websites (facebook, et el.)

More than half the government plus the presidency for the past 8 years.

Functionally all of hollywood and popular music.

Almost all college campus.

Google's had leaks, and those leaks point to the fact that google actually curates the search results for communism to ensure sympathetic websites reach the front page. It's the beating heart of advertising, email, and web searches. Youtube is owned by google, and also curates trending content to be pro-socialism, pro-communism, and pro-SJW. It openly demonetizes and will shortly platform anything to the contrary. They're even rolling out an AI that is trained to censor comments based upon "Toxicity" when in reality, it's trained to weed out non-liberal-commie-scum beliefs.

No.3469796

And lastly, for what? Rebelling against having nice things? You want to become a shit hole like every communist country ever? You want tragedy of the commons to be universal instead of one or two shitty cities in each state?

Boo hoo, fucking move to the People's republic of China. Save an already mostly communist country from going capitalist. Or are you a racist who doesn't like the Chinese?

No.3469798
File: SFHEBsx.png - (238.42 KB, 468x551) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
244147

>>3469793

>all these instruments of capitalist oppression support liberalism!

Wew lad

>the puppet apparatus which covers for the CIA supports liberalism!

WEW LAD

>the bourgeoisie entertainment complex that promotes complacency in the proletariat supports liberalism!

LAD. WEW.

>college campuses that teach identity politics instead of focusing on the the history of class struggles support liberalism!

STOP LAD I CAN'T WEW MUCH HARDER

>right-accelerationist megacorporations and essjaydoubleyews are communists!

UNCLE JOE GIVE ME STRENGTH

No.3469799

>>3469798

That's a fancy way of ignoring the fact that most of society with a platform has views like yours and is the actual establishment.

Communism sucks, and you deserve to be thrown out of a helicopter.

No.3469800
File: this-button-also-gulags-kulaks.png - (182.91 KB, 500x777) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
187300

>>3469799
Yeah okay but have you considered that you're a Kulak? What are you doing outside of your gulag?

No.3469801

>>3469798

Also, how the fuck are you oppressed? Because you don't want to work? Because you're a lazy faggot?

You can go anywhere you want. You can become a citizen of any other country. You speak the most popular business language in the world and you can get a job teaching it in many countries. You have unrestricted access to any goods or services you want, save prostitution.

How the fuck are you oppressed? Are you equating with having to provide something to receive something with oppression?

Please stop breathing comrade, the planet should just push oxygen into your lungs for you! Stop laboring away for the evil oppression that is physics!

No.3469802
File: 412.jpg - (75.88 KB, 803x688) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
77696

>>3469801
Kulaks aren't comrades, back to gulag you go!

No.3469803

>>3469802

I'm waiting faggot. How are you oppressed?

No.3469804
File: pipe.jpg - (8.67 KB, 183x275) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
8883

>>3469803
Letting you out of your gulag is the ultimate oppression bootlicker. :-)

No.3469809

>>3469803

Your talking to a tankie you dumb bastard, all the stalin memes should have been a dead giveaway

No.3469810

>>3469809

Is that like an involuntary celebat?

No.3469811
File: kulaks.jpg - (32.52 KB, 429x352) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
33305

>>3469810
And here I thought you went back to your gulag where you belong!

No.3469812

>>3469804
There's a trope for that - http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FeelingOppressedByTheirExistence

No.3469813

>>3469810

Standard center-to-libertarian-left American progressives can successfully argue that major news networks, major print media, top social networking websites, the US government, functionally all of hollywood and popular music, almost all college campus and Google are all center-right to far-right.

Communists (anarcho-communists, Leninists, garden-variety Marxists, etc) can successfully argue that the entire structure is fundamentally capitalistic.

Tankies can successfully argue that they aren't liberals and that they view 1984 as an instruction manual.

No.3469815

>>3469813

http://nypost.com/2017/08/04/china-destroys-sassy-bots-after-they-bash-communism/

Even Chinese AI knows that it's a pipe dream to believe in communism.

Also, thanks for the breakdown.

No.3469823

>>3469801

Probably he's lazy as fuck and lost his job to an Indian engineer or a Mexican labourer.

No.3469844

>>3469823

>>lost his job but not because those can do it better, but do it cheaper
No.3469845

>>3469844 that has been debunked,they don't work the same job cheaper as in reduce the actual value of the work, its the same work same job those people are just basically taking jobs that should be going towards those that work for legal minimum wage as opposed to chingy chan who is willing to accept less pay because his country's money is worth significantly less than ours. choosing to accept less pay in a world where people expect more for their work is equal to theft of jobs simply because someone from overseas wants a job but is unwilling to compete in our markets and quickly jump into the chinese markets or whatever.

No.3469850
File: 1478018943267.jpg - (27.38 KB, 498x320) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
28039

>>3469845

>they don't work cheaper, they just get paid less

Codolt, do you even listen to the shit that spews from your mouth?

No.3469855

>>3469850

I don't think he even tries.
But then, you can't blame Latinos for the lack of jobs, they should blame big corp for moving the jobs to China.

Besides, a lot of whites never liked to work on fields.. and now that they get replaced from their easy sitting jobs.. all other jobs are suddenly "muh jobs"

No.3469856

>>3469844
It's almost like the bourgeoisie are exploiting the working class and turning the proletariat against each other, wow, why didn't someone think of this before.

Oh well, time to get back on my knees for capitalism while blaming everyone except for the bougie pigs for my misfortunes. If I suck enough dick maybe they'll throw me some crumbs. I'm so alpha and smart.

No.3469857

>>3469856

Crumbs my fucking ass. You entitled little shit. You have air conditioning, cheap entertainment, cheap food, twice the life span of your ancestors both commie and not commie. Your dishes get washed by a goddamn machine. Your shit isn't shoveled, it's flushed through pipes, never to bother you with it's wretched stink.

And you think you're getting crumbs. You think you're hard done by.

There is no value in your life because you do not value anything in your life. You are a pampered middle class baby who never had to earn what your parents earned for you.

No.3469865

>>3469857

funny thing..

There are some studies that say that the life expectancy has for the first time ever.. decreased.

And the companies are extremely happy of this. As they expect to pay way less on pensions.

>>3469857

>You have air conditioning, cheap entertainment, cheap food, twice the life span of your ancestors both commie and not commie.

Yeah, except you now need to work 2 jobs on average to barely meet needs.

And most of the new generation do not even own a property.

No.3469871

>>3469857

>things could be worse so stop pointing out all the problems you dumb commie!
>what happened to my job, my healthcare and my home, those blacks must be responsible somehow
No.3469874
File: cloroxcan.jpg - (39.19 KB, 750x718) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
40131

>>3469857

To be fair none of the things you listed are symptoms of entitlement, they're just technological advances combined with cheap mass production. Saying someone is entitled because they have AC or radio is like saying a starving African is entitled because he has plenty of mud for a hut. The bare minimum standard of living in first world countries affords a lot of "luxuries".

No.3469879

Reminder: automation exists to do work for you so you can take it easy and still get just as much work done. Automation does not exist so that some fat bougie pig can make even more fucking money while throwing workers out on the streets. We could all be living in a golden age of leisure right this moment if it weren't for the bourgeoisie.

No.3469887

>>3469879

>We could all be living in a golden age of leisure right this moment if it weren't for the bourgeoisie.

Reality time: 80% of the workforce isn't doing anything productive. They're consuming value for an occupation, producing trivial luxuries and enticing other people to spend more so they could eat off the cart on the way. It's retail work, serving coffee, advertisement, or just plain bullshit and downright conning people into paying money for absolutely nothing.

It's not the bourgeoisie - it's the people themselves who create their own poverty. If it wasn't for the necessity to work to earn money, people would just eat and fuck, and make more people until they're just as poor. The bourgeoisie are just the top of the shit-iceberg - don't kid yourself thinking you could somehow get rid of them, because a socialist revolution will only replace them with a different elite of another name, who have to grab all the resources for themselves to stop the masses from simply breeding out of control.

No.3469889

>>3469887

>without backbreaking labor people would just endlessly produce more children!
>why do developed nations with more automation and more free time have declining birth rates, it must be a communist plot to feminize men
No.3469890

PS: If automation allows work to get done and people to get paid for sitting around doing nothing? Mission fucking accomplished.

No.3469891

>>3469889
Its simple but most ivory tower retards cant fathom: In shitskin and poverty countries, children are FREE WORKFORCE for their family.

There are no such as retirement there, they fuck a ton of low quality offspring in hope that they will take care of them when they grow old.

No.3469892

>>3469891
Wow professor how did you manage to crack the code? Those ivory tower intellectuals never would have guessed that large families are used for additional labor. What a breakthrough.

Holy shit bro what if automation, leisure and an easier life allows people to have more time and effort to spend on intellectual pursuits and self-improvement instead of base survival strategies? I think we may be onto something big here.

No.3469893

>>3469889

>>why do developed nations with more automation and more free time have declining birth rates, it must be a communist plot to feminize men

Because you have to work 2 jobs just to keep up with the joneses - otherwise you end up on the street for failing to pay your rent, and you're excluded from all social circles as untouchable.

No.3469894

>>3469893

>affluent families have lots of children because they don't have to work as hard so they spend all their leisure time fucking
>poor people never have kids because they're working all the time and don't have time for fucking
>checkmate commies
No.3469895

>>3469892

>Holy shit bro what if automation, leisure and an easier life allows people to have more time and effort to spend on intellectual pursuits and self-improvement instead of base survival strategies?

Automation does not necessarily lead to leisure. Population just keeps increasing until the demand meets supply, and the cost of obtaining anything is just as high as ever.

The modern society is one guy who works hard to make anything happen, and five other guys giving a song and dance to get a piece of it, while complaining about how hard they have to sing and dance.

The question is, why don't they start doing something productive instead? Answer is: because it's still easier to pretend to be useful than actually work for a living. Individuals may be hard-working, altruistic, rational and intelligent, but the masses always take the easy way out, because the point of evolution and biology is not the individual but the genes they carry.

The genes you carry don't care if you are just barely surviving, as long as you're surviving, so they maximize their own survival by compromizing your individual welfare to get more copies of themselves out there in the world. Your high living standard is superfluous to the continuation of life, so the great masses always procreate until everyone is poor in one way or another.

Having to work the rat race in the first world society is one kind of poverty, because you run out of time and opportunities to procreate when you're trying to make yourself a living.

No.3469896

>>3469894

>>poor people never have kids because they're working all the time and don't have time for fucking

Guess why they're poor? Because they keep popping babies.

"Oh, oh, I'm gonna start a family with my plumber's salary, and make five kids even though I can't afford to buy a car."

That is the problem.

No.3469897

>>3469895

>populations flatlining or declining in first world nations around the world
>populations always increase, it's true because my theory would be wrong and the commie would be right otherwise, and if the commie is right that means we could be living in a paradise right where machines do most of the work while the proletariat reaps the rewards!
>how awful
No.3469898

>>3469896

>poor people have to work two jobs to keep up with the jonses, that's why they don't have kids
>poor people keep popping out kids all the time, that's why they're poor
>checkmate commies
No.3469901

>>3469865

Bullshit. You work 2 jobs because both refuse to put you on full time because the affordable care act married benefits to that status. It's not because your pay is crap. It's because they're dodging a healthcare entitlement.

No one working full time at minimum wage is below the poverty line.

No.3469903

>>3469874

What I am saying is entitlement, is complaining that you're living off crumbs, when the life you are living is 99% better than 99% of humans that ever lived. You have accommodations better than even the wealthiest fucks prior to 1930.

To call this blessed lifestyle "Crumbs" is just showing your cultural relativity.

No.3469905

>>3469889

Bitch please, what backbreaking labor have you or anyone you known ever done? Even digging a fucking hole people can use jackhammers, backhoes, and air-spades.

You're like george jetson whining about his push-button finger.

No.3469907

>>3469898

Poor people breed wildly off of free government cheddar. The more poverty you have, the more likely you are to squirt out kids because fucking is a cheap and easy way to entertain yourself and release stress.

Breeding oppression against poor people is NOT at all a reality in our evil capitalist system because we're all collectively forking over money so the dregs of society can fuck like rabbits and abandon their kids.

I'd much rather have 5 bourgies running around who believe in free speech than 5 people who believe in sharia law.

No.3469910

>>3469901

>You work 2 jobs because both refuse to put you on full time because the affordable care act married benefits to that status.

Aka. there's too many people applying for the job, so the corporation can pull that kind of bullshit to save a penny. Again, issue is overpopulation and people trying to get off easy, not "the bourgeoisie".

No.3469913

>>3469898

>>poor people have to work two jobs to keep up with the jonses, that's why they don't have kids

That's the poor who try to give a shit, but they're not getting anywhere because there's too many people competing for the same McJobs. They get marginally better living standards, but they're essentially just running to stand still.

>poor people keep popping out kids all the time, that's why they're poor

That's the lower classes who don't bother at all, and vote for whomever gives them welfare to make up the difference.

You see, both are true.

No.3469914

>>3469910

Don't blame overpopulation. The number of jobs split, one job became two jobs, the same hours are being worked, just by different people. It is all to avoid the healthcare rules. President Obama didn't direct the justice department to go slap wrists for it either, because he could misrepresent it as jobs created.

No.3469925
File: dealdog.jpg - (49.82 KB, 622x584) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
51019

>>3469901

Ironically, the only jobs that pay minimum wage are always part time.

No.3469929
File: makes_porky_happy.png - (62.12 KB, 163x191) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
63613

>>3469901
>>3469903
>>3469905
>>3469907
>>3469910
>>3469913
>>3469914

>the bourgeoisie narrative has been destroyed! panic! must kulak faster! must booklick harder! the proles will put me up against the wall if they start to rise up!
No.3469931

http://www.diversitymemo.com

I have yet to see someone refute the argument in the memo.

No.3469932

>>3469914

>Don't blame overpopulation. The number of jobs split, one job became two jobs, the same hours are being worked, just by different people. It is all to avoid the healthcare rules.

Guess why? Because there are now two people to work the job of one. If there wasn't such an oversupply of labor, the corporation couldn't do that. The problem is still too many people applying for the same McJobs, instead of moving out of the cities and looking for more productive work instead.

Flipping burgers and ringing the till at Walmart is easier in the immediate now, compared to building a better future digging ditches and fixing bridges. The intelligence of the crowd is like that of an amoeba: it's very efficient at making solutions, but also very short-sighted.

No.3469934

>>3469932

Xcept if you live in a shit overtaxed faggotrupean country, where the taxing system is defined in a way that companies tend to hire one person for 1,5 persons tasks...

and this is not small and medium businesses, tes*o and all the big dipshit multi-company does that.

So imagine you go and get into a shit job as you cant get a job in your field as you are not born with 1-3y of working experience and special knowledge of that company's wishes and fishes about special shit software and programming language what they want you to know out of the box (even for junior spots)...

They put the contract at you, and tell you "you are fine with 3 shifts and a 'supervisory' workshifts?" what means they can say you have to work an other 4h on top of the 8h of a workday and you cant refuse it, and on top of that they have "work-hour frame" what means they dont have to "pay you" your extra hours, till 3 months (I dont remember the exact part of the law). Have I mentioned they dont have to pay your for your extra hours, they simply say they give it back to you as extra day off...

Because thats what you want when you work a shit day, waiting to finally end it, and you get told to stay and work for an extra 4h...

Oh and you can be assigned to any kind of task and work what does not require a degree, it cant exceed 51% of your overall work-hour, that's what the law says XD.

No.3469939
File: 1446721877069.png - (212.19 KB, 457x370) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
217282

>>3469932

You're retarded. God damn, I don't know how you failed to grasp that his argument.

No.3469943

>>3469932 if those very people work 2 jobs they are not that smart just greedy count actual jobs available then compare population deduct business owners themselves and deduct from available jobs by 5% due to population doing more than one job, and you have about %10 of the population unemployed or %15 of the population taking away from other people just to be able to live how they want.

reality is this welfare exists because greedy joe wants to keep livng in a house outside his financial means so he works 2 jobs and puts one person out of work.

this is why there needs to be an employment law where each person is restricted to one employer at a time forcing those on welfare seeking work to be chosen without the hiding of true motives most often being discrimination for having not interviewed or even bothered to call or email back.

if you want better pay find a better job, don't work 2 jobs then complain about welfare when it exists cause of those types

No.3469950

Okay because people are literally fucking dumb.

I'm a corporation, and suddenly if I work this motherfucker for 30 hour or 40, I become responsible for greater and greater amounts of his healthcare. I'm a yum! brand franchise who owns pizzahut, tacobell and KFC.

We can't keep our shareholders happy if we lose profits to this.

We'll hire Chris to work 29 hours as a night manager, and Jason to work 29 hours as a day manager. Both for our KFC location. We'll "assist" them in finding more hours at one of those combination gas station food locations that are both KFC and Tacobell in one. Due to the fact that our stores are franchised, and the owners are two different people, we'll get Chris and Jason some part time 15-20 hours under a different franchise owner, giving both people 40 hours a week worth of income.

We have now dodged the healthcare act.

There were 2 jobs. 2 jobs were split into 4 jobs to skirt the law. 2 people fill those 4 jobs.

People are working two jobs not because they need 50-60 hours to make ends meet, they're working 2 jobs because between the two jobs, it was originally the hours of one job and big money is just playing a shell game.

It's not just fast food, either. Lowes and Home Depot are also keeping workers at 29 or less. The guy that works at home depot also probably works at lowes, and his coworkers likely work at home depot too.

The man hours did not decrease, they just got harder to schedule into.

No.3469963

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html

No.3469971

>>3469950

sounds good on paper but. the EIN during tax time will be the same .

what most don't understand or weren't informed of is that ACA cost many people their jobs. thanks Obama!

No.3469974

>>3469895

> because it's still easier to pretend to be useful than actually work for a living. Individuals may be hard-working, altruistic, rational and intelligent, but the masses always take the easy way out, because the point of evolution and biology is not the individual but the genes they carry.

Produce what?
What is "productive" for you?

In the last 10 years, companies expect you to be as 3 times as productive for 1.10 the pay.

You dont want the prices? who cares.. your job will be moved to china.
Anything produced physically? It's outsourced out.

No.3469975

>>3469606

>SO FUCKING WHAT IF THERE'S A LACK OF WOMEN IN IT, COMPANIES SHOULD HIRE ON MERIT ALONE, NOT ON THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN OR THE GENITALS BETWEEN YOUR LEGS. I AM SO FUCKING MAD.

Except its well proven that MERIT alone doesn't do shit.
There has been countless of test and studies that show that women being productive as same as men, still get PAID LESS.. EVERYWHERE.

Worse if you're black.

Also, you're implying "merit". What is the merit that YOU should get the job over another person who might be as skilled or more, and work for more hours or for less pay?

Reminds me of how a ton of white men keep claiming "MUH JOBS" "THEY STOLE THEM!" Like they somehow own these specifically slots of work offers.

No.3469987

>>3469974 we complain about the jobs on our soil fuck the changs and their soil

there is no outsourcing thats a myth. theres just no regulations regarding who must be hired to just do a job and how much it pays per hr. when someone chooses to hire someone for less pay they are hurting the economy to get further.

No.3469991
File: 1451382055332.jpg - (41.11 KB, 480x622) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
42098

>>3469975

>There has been countless of test and studies that show that women being productive as same as men, still get PAID LESS.. EVERYWHERE

Name a single one fuckboy. Go on, I'll wait.

No.3470024

>>3469975

Bullshit, the methodologies are always shown to be flawed and constructed to garner the result desired. Like for example, when trying to prove that white people are the biggest terrorists, they created a data sample that ranged from just after 9-11, to just before Nice France and Orland, to purposely exclude the death tolls. By any other merit like frequency of attacks, or the same merit with a 20 year data sample (you know, a generation?) you see it's clearly muslim terrorism.

If the MERIT was there, then why are black people and women failing to get hired or interviewed in applicant-blind resume processes at diversity focused tech companies? Why does it turn out the people they take interest in, the people with the best portfolio, end up being white?

Are you accusing the hiring managers, some of which are women, or are black, just subconciously exclude their own race / gender through ESP and telepathy?

No.3470026

>>3469975

Further, google has done a coding contest for many years now. You're sat down, you're given tasks to solve, and often times the tasks are actually real problems that google is working on. You do well? You get an internship.

Not fucking once have the judges, some of whom are colored, some of whom are women, put a woman in the finalists leg of the competition. Oh, by the way? All the coding samples are presented without name, race or gender.

If they've got just as much MERIT, why are they not floating to the top of open contests?

No.3470028

>>3469974

>Produce what?
>What is "productive" for you?

Productive is that which adds to the total amount of real value in society through physical labor or mechanical production, directly or indirectly, or adds to the real value of something by refinement. Real value is that which is directly or indirectly useful and applicable back into generating more real value, so that the people can use it to become even more prosperous.

For example, a potato is real value. A car is real value. The muscle power of your arms are real value. Sustaining and increasing these enable the growth of society and is therefore productive.

A concert ticket is not real value. A copyright to a hollywood movie is not real value. Money is not real value. Sustaining and increasing these consumes the real value necessary for growing the society and is therefore unproductive.

No.3470036

>>3470026

>If they've got just as much MERIT, why are they not floating to the top of open contests?

According to racist, misogynist leftists internalized oppression prevents blacks and women from doing their best which is why we need to treat them like royalty at all times.

No.3470041

>>3470024

> then why are black people and women failing to get hired or interviewed in applicant-blind resume processes at diversity focused tech companies?

Bullshit.

There has been many histories of guys just changing their names and having all the info exactly the same.. and they would get hired. When they actually got refused when having ethnic names.

Discrimination is there.

White fuckboys just want to see themselves being the victims when they cant get shit as easily as before when they stomped on everyone to get first place.

No.3470044

>>3470026

>If they've got just as much MERIT, why are they not floating to the top of open contests?

Because there is no 50/50 in terms of Tech?
Women are not interested in that just the same way that certain jobs are not liked by men.

It's amazing on how easy is to spot the lazy "meninists" in this forum.

No.3470049

>>3470041

Why don't you cry more about it you dumb nigger.

No.3470053

>>3470041

You're remembering wrong, that study was about scientific papers being accepted into journals and NOT hires or hiring.

Let's actually source some things though; here's a left organization talking about the whole "Blind" process. http://prospect.org/article/race-blind-admissions-are-affirmative-action-whites

This is why "Being colorblind is racist" is pushed. Minority organizations do not want a level playing field, they do not want merit, because doing that would mean missing out on sympathy points in admissions, hiring, or even peer review.

Proof of this claim? NPR to the rescue; http://www.npr.org/2016/04/12/473912220/blind-hiring-while-well-meaning-may-create-unintended-consequences

""KAYA THOMAS: I am studying computer science. And I am the only black woman studying computer science in the class of 2017.

KING: She's going to be looking for a job, probably in Silicon Valley. A lot of companies there say they want to hire more women, more people of color. And when I told her about this option, having your voice changed in an interview.

Would you do it?

THOMAS: No, I would not do that.

KING: She worries that if companies use blind hiring as a fix to eliminate bias, they might stop actively recruiting people like her.""

No.3470054

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/30/study-blind-recruitment-aimed-at-boosting-female-hires-actually-does-the-opposite/

More evidence.

No.3470055

>>3470041

So, you got any evidence and stories besides your feels? Do I need to hit you with the numerous examples of the UK government having to cease blind hiring practices because it was further increasing the gender disparity and race disparity?

I mean holy fuck, the fact that it occurs in two different cultures? That's the gold goddamn standard of fucking sociology.

What the fuck have you got, a one-off article from Salon that is from 2004?

No.3470056
File: 1500921787164.jpg - (17.07 KB, 211x191) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
17478

>>3470041

>There has been many histories of guys just changing their names and having all the info exactly the same.. and they would get hired. When they actually got refused when having ethnic names.

Post proof. You still haven't cited one of your "countless studies" that you were called out in >>3469991

Just admit it, you're a feminazi who doesn't have a clue what you're talking about, otherwise you'd be posting citations to back your bullshit claims.

No.3470101

>>3470049

>cry more about it you dumb nigger.

I rest my case lol.
so easy.

No.3470104

>>3470056

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/entry/jose-joe-job-discrimination_n_5753880

heres one dickwad.

No.3470106

>>3470054

Do you even read what you're writing, check the linked articles.

"“But five years after instituting required training for managers, companies saw no improvement in the proportion of white women, black men, and Hispanics in management, and the share of black women actually decreased by 9%, on average, while the ranks of Asian-American men and women shrank by 4% to 5%,” the authors note.

“Trainers tell us that people often respond to compulsory courses with anger and resistance—and many participants actually report more animosity toward other groups afterward.”

Dobbins and Kalev note that “a number of studies suggest that [diversity training] can activate bias or spark a backlash.”"

Note the special last sentence...

"[diversity training] can activate bias or spark a backlash.”"".

Nothing to do with hiring.
Just that managers, etc.. actually acted WORSE on hires of minorities.

Just shows that they have some ingrained hate and these supposed training made things worse. Nothing to do with "blind" shit.

Also this gem

"The study’s result stands in contrast to other trials conducted in Australia. The Australia Bureau of Statistics doubled its percentage of female management with gender-blind recruitment in 2016."

This study contradicts OTHER studies... that actually saw recruitment increases.

No.3470154

>>3470106

It was throwing shade on the previous findings. Let me spell it out for you.

Conditions A, B and C.

A. Sexism/racism bias suppresses hiring of minority.
B. Positive bias suppresses majority hiring, increases minority hiring.
C. Bias is removed. All things equal, hiring would be representative of population balance (within those trained for a field.)

B is always going to be the most helpful to minorities. C is always going to be the most fair. The article points out that while C is better than A, B is still the best.

They want B numbers, and saw a decline with C. Therefor, C is worse than B. 2016's study was A versus C, not B versus C.

Do you follow now, you dumbfuck?

No.3470169

>>3470154

"It also means that introducing de-identification of applications in such a context may have the unintended consequence of decreasing the number of female and minority candidates shortlisted for senior APS positions, setting back efforts to promote more diversity at the senior management levels in the public service.”"

Note.. PROMOTING TO SENIOR MANAGEMENT.

"The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview.

Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door.

"We should hit pause and be very cautious about introducing this as a way of improving diversity, as it can have the opposite effect," Professor Hiscox said"

"Women are almost 50% of the Australian workforce, but are under-represented in management and executive level positions. This is evident not just in the private sector but also in many areas of the APS. In 2016, women comprised 59.0% of the APS as a whole, but accounted for 48.9% of its executive level officers and only 42.9% of its Senior Executive Service (SES) officers."

The study is focusing almost explicitly in leadership and management positions.

No.3470173
File: 1477856780270.jpg - (79.53 KB, 950x948) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
81434

>>3470104

>huffington post blog
>buzzfeed video

That's some truly unbiased, scientifically quantified shit right there. Thanks for the attempt Ramirez.

No.3470174

>>3470169

Isn't high pay and high prestige jobs all we care about when it comes to gender equality? I mean, I'm not seeing a push for female sanitation workers or male teachers.

No.3470186

>>3469726

>Aaand now you went full retard left.

I'm the one agreeing with the memo, you're the one who went full retard right.

No.3470199

>>3470186
No, you made the mistake of repeating the leftist myth that people can be educated and trained arbitrarily without regard to their traits and limits.

The whole point of social constructivism comes from a pseudoscientific crank called Lysenko who disregarded genetic evolution in favor of a version of Lamarckism (gained features are inherited) because it was "politically correct" in the Soviet Union under Stalin. The basic idea was that genes don't even exist (!), and Mendelian inheritance is therefore bullshit, and therefore it's possible through education and training to produce the perfect Homo Sovieticus that would be the living embodiment of the communist ideology.

No.3470201

Lysenko was a fast-talking P.T. Barnum type of guy who Stalin originally recruited to talk the disenfranchised peaseants into returning to their fields, by promising them incredible increases in yield and prosperity through new Soviet Science.

He had some bunk ideas like deliberately freezing wheat kernels to simulate a cold season and get them to germinate earlier, which happens to work, but he instead claimed that the procedure is changing the whole species of plant to one that germinates earlier in the year thanks to his own cuckoo theories. As a result, millions of peasants were given seeds of the wrong type for their climate and told to sow them at the wrong times, resulting in massive crop losses and famine - which Lysenko blamed on sabotage and the kulaks to save face.

Stalin was so fond of the guy that he became the leading Soviet expert on inheritance and genetics, and used his powers to literally kill anyone who dared to criticize. It wasn't until 1962 that Lysenko was ousted as a complete charlatan, but by that time the ideas of social constructivism and "tabula rasa" psychology had spread to the west and taken hold in the leftist social sciences and humanities that to today continue the bold Lysenko tradition by balkanizing themselves from the "hard" evidence based sciences as much as possible.

No.3470205

Or, Lysenko's other idea that stripping the leaves off of cotton plants would "toughen them up" and change the proportion of leaves to flowers to make more cotton in subsequent generations. Of course the plants that survived the treatment produced perfectly ordinary yeilds, but Lysenko measured "slight improvements" by statistical error and claimed to have succeeded.

Apply the same crazy notions back to social sciences, and you start to see how the SJWs think they can shape the society to be more equal by bullying and harassing men to "toughen them up".

No.3470466
File: life_offensive.gif - (232.84 KB, 1023x496) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
238428

>>3470173

>bitches about "unbiased"
>original OP post was about gizmodo.
>all links posted are hardly of any real scientific authority.

Gotta move goalposts and pull fallacies right?

No.3471117

https://medium.com/the-mission/im-an-ex-google-woman-tech-leader-and-i-m-sick-of-our-approach-to-diversity-17008c5fe999

>If we increase the inflow of women into tech education, we will automatically increase diversity in hiring.

Dang, who would have thought it was that simple?

No.3471118
File: manipulation-FI02.jpg - (81.18 KB, 800x419) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
83124

>>3470466

manipulation on other people offends me


Delete Post []
Password