Correction. A degree did make one more valuable, that trend has been shifting for years. And I'm not sure where you are in the world, but universities in Canada and the US have been pushing that line for decades.
You don't know me, my friends, or my family. They've stuck with me through much worse than some psycho bitch making shit up. If that's where you are in life, I'm sorry to hear that.
And yet you made the same assumption about me, based on nothing. Instead, you could have thought just a tiny bit harder and wondered if I was engaged in say working with various groups of people and helping them through things like that. Until you realize just how imbalanced the system is, and how little it takes to ruin a persons life today? You're flouting your ignorance.
Let me give you an example: Of a married couple, who had a fallout. Where the father was a hardworker, and the mother decided to become a junkie. Where CAS threatened the father to quit his job, then interceded on behalf of the mother in court that he wouldn't quit his job to look after their kids. This is despite that he had other family who would help out. We'll bump this down a few months, where the mother then goes further down the junkie hole, is getting alimony, getting welfare, getting mothers allowance, then forces and pimps both daughters(11&12) out to drug dealers for her fix. The girls run away multiple times to their father. She calls the police trying to get him arrested because they ran to him. It takes a crown prosecutor to get involved and a family court judge being removed from the bench. But those girls are still 100% fucked up now, CAS is still threatening people like that, and family courts still give the mother custody in cases like that.
So welcome to Canada. Hell welcome to the UK where it's even worse.
One would have to be fairly ignorant to not have run across it on some news website after it happened.
That covers most people who don't read the news, or around 70-80% of people you realize. Why not take your theory for a test drive, and go hit your local dunkin' donuts or tim hortons, but my guess is closer to being right.
Ever been to a Walmart and wondered why they hired someone in their 70s to cashier instead of a young person who could do it 3x as fast? It's because of that 70 year old doesn't show up to work they don't eat.
I don't know what walmarts you goto where that 70yr old is working cash. At every walmart in Canada and the US I've been to, they're hired specifically as greeters, or low traffic cashier positions like outdoors(when open), sporting goods, sometimes bakery. Funny thing though, if you think those young people are working at 3x the speed? I can tell you that walmart's own data doesn't show that. They recently started a thing called "line rushing" where an associate would scan the items in your cart while waiting for a cashier. The scanner is taken to the cashier or automated cashier totaled up and you simply pay. Those "old folks" could clear upwards of 300 people in a 6hr shift, the young kids? Most could barely hit 30. The optimum they were aiming for is 80/shift per-person.
You are blaming the universities for the decisions of the students.
No. I'm blaming students for making shit decisions. I'm also blaming universities for pushing the "a degree makes you more valuable." That's how you get degree mills.
This does not appear to be true. Whenever McDonald's has an advertising campaign for a dollar menu or lower prices, it is always followed up with "at participating restaurants". You won't find prices at mcdonalds.com, because they vary.
That's because a franchisee can opt out of the "dollar menu" options if they're not making enough money. The idea of that menu is to draw in more people to buy more things at the regular price, and with luck offset the cost.
A big mac is the same price in London as in Toronto, as in Ottawa. But not the same price as in North Bay or Sudbury, though the same in North Bay and Sudbury.
Yet Tim Hortons could afford to hire people at $16-$20 an hour in Ft McMurray and other places with an actual shortage of labour and still serve $1 cups of coffee, t least until the economy crashed and resulted in a surplus of desperate workers
No, you don't understand. Tim Hortons could afford to hire people at $16-22hr because the average person there was making 100k-250k as their starting wages, there was more disposable income, more people buying things at those stores. On top of that those Tim Hortons stores were CORP owned, not franchisee. The franchisees failed to make enough money and had to turn their business back to the corp.
If you were in Fort Mac and making $22/hr? You couldn't afford rent and food. $10k/mo for appt rentals was a thing at the time there.
No, you don't understand the difference, reliable means a high chance of success. When a guy decides to pop himself off he's not going for reliable, he's going for a method that's final. That's why suicide by gun make up a huge number here in North America. The chances of you walking away from putting a.44, 9mm or.38 snub to your head and walking away is next to nil.
So what you're saying it it ISN'T both and it's in fact becoming the bedrock of our society.
The number of teenagers actually working in fast food is almost nil these days. When my sister was a regional manager for a chain of McD's several years ago, teenagers(14-18) only counted for 5% of their workforce, her friend who took over her job says it's around 3.5% now. That's across a swath of university towns, small cities and so on. You're more likely to find someone in their 30's because that's all they can get, or an old retiree there working just because they like to work or because they need the extra money to make ends meet.
On top of that "service industry" which are PT for the last decade have outpaced growth in FT jobs. More people in their late 20's and 30's are more likely to hold 3 PT jobs to make ends meet then a single FT job, again because there's no work for their lack of a skillset.
It can be both, because universities are degree mills pumping out people with useless degrees. Those people will never work in a job higher then minimum wage because there's no demand for someone who has a masters in "feminist dance theory" or the "history of harry potter and it's impact on french culture."
A 25% increase in pay would bankrupt the restaurant. Food prices are *set* by the corporate office, not the franchisee. This is the reason why here in Ontario when the min. wage jumped to $14/hr businesses started laying off employees and cutting back on previously "good will gestures" such as bonus pay. The restaurant industry is cut-throat and operates on a profitability margin of 3-6%. That's far more then even a small gas bar, which has a profitability margin of 1-3%, they don't make their money from selling gas(which is also sold at a preset price, most stations make 0.02%-0.038% profit on fuel). They make their money on drinks/food/snacks/etc.
It's not that men pick a reliable method. It's that when men pick a method of suicide they're picking a method that they're ensuring *will* kill them. They also don't care what they look like after they're dead, they don't care if it's violent, they only care that it gets that final job done. Compare this to women who will go out of their way to use methods of suicide that don't damage their appearance.
Today a whistleblower died and we all need to fill that role.
The reporter who led the charge on the Panama papers was assassinated by a car bomb a few weeks back, most people don't even know that happened. One of Wikileaks offices was raid in a professional style sweep looking for crypto keys and other information. Most people don't know that one happened either.
No, what's going on recently does very much concern me, but perhaps in an entirely different way than it concerns you. You see, I'm not a prominent public figure, I am in control of my own income (I work for myself, I'm certainly not going to fire my star employee and I'll know immediately if accusations against him -- myself -- are true or not), and really I don't care if someone comes at me; they've done it before and I'm sure they'll do it again. I will rise above it just as I have in the past.
See you don't need to be a prominent figure. All controlling your income means, is that you're a far richer target for someone if they actually decide to do something. In the current state of affairs, you won't be rising above. You'll be mired in a bog for years wondering "why did this happen" just like countless others have.
Been there, done that, moved on from retail as a result and my life has never been better. Of course, I'm not well-known enough to make national headlines; if I were, I might be more afraid of the current situation.
So you've turned around and already been accused, but still think you'd be able to ride it out if it happened today because you're low key enough. You don't seem to get that if it happened today, it wouldn't matter because your friends and family in the current "sphere" would consider you suspect regardless.
FYI, if you want some actual "toxic masculinity" you should look no further then VICE today, where they labeled a woman as a "real doll" for daring to have an opinion that differs from theirs. But they're not receiving flak for it, the left is cheering them on.
As for emailing, I might when I get time after this massive screw-up and repairs get rolled out.
I would ask you the same from my position running a business that hires people on their merits. That's both an answer and a question, ball's in your court.
Going by your other post, you obviously aren't hiring people based on their merit.
No. I brought up that it's bad when men behave in a sexist manner and you literally brought up women doing the same thing in a "what about" manner. That's textbook whataboutism.
Let's see, the current definition of "sexist manner" is a simple compliment, or greeting. That's going by the #metoo brigade.
The issue is that people like you think it's fine to be just a little less wrong than the "other side", almost as if you believe being less wrong actually makes you right. The guy who says 2+2=5 is technically less wrong than the guy who says 2+2+6, but lemme tell you neither of them are right. That's what people are pointing out when they call out whataboutism. It's not to avoid dealing with the issue, it's to ensure that both sides of the issue are dealt with; you don't like it because you don't want to deal with your side of the issue. I won't have to worry about that because I didn't harass anyone 30 years ago.
No, you believe you didn't harass anyone 30 years ago. Today? That doesn't matter, it doesn't even matter if you actually didn't harass anyone. All that matters is that you believe the victim, have you figured it out yet? No?
It sounds like you think I was saying you need to know when you've gone too far and run before you get in trouble. Wrong. If you've gone too far, you deserve what you get, next week or in 30 years, because you're part of the problem. I was talking about recognizing toxic people (try a mirror) and toxic environments and simply not offering them your talents. You've made it clear that your main talent is missing the point, though, and I don't think you're gonna change much by depriving anyone of that special skill.
And where you miss the point again. Always good to meet the "listen and believe" people, who think that if they virtue signal hard enough that they won't be the next one to be nailed to the wall. You know who was a toxic person? Bill Clinton, you know who else? Al Franken. You know what happened in both of those cases? I'm sure you do. You want to know what prostitutes look like? Try Harvey Weinstien and dozens of women who had no problems selling themselves for a leg up. And even at that there is still the other cases which may or maynot be true. But gotta believe them right.
No, I'm telling you that you have no idea and no grasp of the current state of this witch hunt going on. And your little quip there seems to be a case of projection all the way down. Especially when you've missed the point, not once, not twice, but three times. We'll see if you manage to catch it on the fourth.
You really sound like you're trying to defend actions you took three decades ago that put you on the wrong side of this whole debate by framing it as "well, women do it too and they do it worse". Sorry, doesn't matter if God himself does it, if it's wrong, and you recognize it as wrong, and you've done it, you are still in the wrong.
And you're making these assumptions based on what? Right. Nothing. But you sure are all in favor of the witch hunt, and the fact that your life can be ruined based on nothing. And I literally do mean nothing. What the hell do you think Title IX was? If the only thing you managed to get out of my statement was """well, women do it too and they do it worse"" then you need to stop, go back, re-read, figure out what I said. Where the system is applied in an unequal manner both socially and legally. Then bend over, and hope that some women doesn't decide to ruin your life by lying and there being next to no consequences for it.
Clinton idiot. It was the "black leaders" Sharpton, Jackson, et.al., that demanded that Washington do something about the "crack epidemic" of the late 90's(which started around '92/93 in really catching on). They demanded, they had marches, they had fucking meetings out the ass all demanding more police, tougher laws, higher sentences, and it was the democrats and Bill Clinton who pushed damn near everything that they wanted through.
The parts of the US that identifies as liberal feels exactly the same way about conservatives and the term's "snowflake", "cuck", "triggered" and.. really anything that falls out of your mouths to be honest.
The "left" and we'll group the DNC in here, just decided that "more of the same" is the winning path for them. So they elected a race baiting black(Keith Ellison) who's an ethnostatist(to use the left's term "a nazi") to the party to help lead it. But there's zero cries over this, none. It's not in any of the mainstream press. It's also the "progressives" who seem to be the most annoyed by that, especially since those same progressives have decided to go down the route of a purity spiral and drive most left-of-centre and liberals right out of the party.
Here's the thing if you're a liberal and so upset by this? Your "wing" of politics in the US, and in Canada have been screeching that *insert person* is a racist/sexist/homophobe/islamophobe or whatever else for neigh on 20 years at this point. Now ask yourself where were you when the progressive wing of your party decided to crank the dial to 11 the last 5-7 years. You're experiencing this for just short of a year and a half and you already hate it, now ask yourself why there is zero sympathy from conservatives, libertarians, republicans, liberals who've left and so on when they apply and/or use the rules you've used for those years. You've got your answer.
No, I've heard it all. I never said we should have female-dominated companies, either. That said, we should, and men should refuse to work there just as women should refuse to work for companies dominated by males sexist pigs as well. It's wrong no matter which gender does it, but that sure was some nite whataboutism.
Then you already know that there's a huge disparity between "what happens" when the accuser is female and the accuser is male. There's no "whataboutism" going on, more of a case that when people use "whataboutism" they're waving their hand trying to reframe something because they don't want to deal with the issue that someone has brought up. Socially, and legally you should also know just how lopsided it is as well.
The difference is I have marketable skills today and have wised up quite a bit -- if the situation turns sour I know to get the fuck out.
And won't do you a damn bit of good, when someone makes a claim against you for something 30 years ago, and everyone treats it like it happened last week right? By the time you think you should "know when to get the fuck out" it's already too late.
If you look back a ways through my comment history you'll also learn that I'm not exactly unfamiliar with female-on-male rape or domestic violence, either.
Good to know, so obvious question what are you doing to fix the problem besides handwaving with "whataboutism"?
Well, due to the fact that the #MeToo thing has gone WAAAY overboard.....if you are a man with a penis, you are pretty much now already under suspicion for sexual harassment, or worse.....now or possibly for future actions.
Hate to break it to you, but that's been going on for a couple of decades at this point. It's simply hit a new level, and it's far worse then what most people understand. Remember the shitshow when feminists went after Linus Torvalds and other male programmers who were doing internships and so on? That it later came out that a very specific feminist organization was trying to push them out with false sexual harassment claims, but most of the people realized something was up and never worked/talked/etc alone with women.
A single case of sexual harassment, true or false can cause serious damage to a man's career. A false rape claim? The guy is done and fucked, even if it goes to court and found innocent, even if the accuser recants. And a lot of guys at that point see suicide as the only way out, because there is no chance of recovery. The kids in the Duke Lacrosse team? Yeah, people still say "well maybe they did..." the bullshit over the UVA false rape claim? People still say "it might have been true..."
it's that you happen to agree with his opinions. Things like: "women should do pair programming because they're naturally more social".
That's not an opinion, that's a fact. It's the same reason why in states and provinces that have implemented "group learning" aka female centric learning, female test scores have gone through the roof, while male test scores have fallen through the floor.
there is no denying that it made his job impossible because any judgement he made subsequently would be questioned in the light of those comments.
Google directly has internal groups that exist for the sole purpose of what is discussed. He took the engineers approach, saw a problem, came up with a solution. Your comment above makes it clear that he was in the right by doing so, but he went against the current corporate culture.
it doesn't matter what I say, you just imagine some nonsense and expect me to defend it.
This coming from the person who can't click links, see a sourced bit of information and then declare that it's not there? That's pretty hilarious.
Well if you're going up against a corporation, you could argue that. You'd get slapped down by it for the court if you didn't have the peoples names, dates, times, places, and documents showing that though. It appears in his case, he does have those names, places and dates. Remember that using their names can be defamation material if he doesn't have the proof to back it up. The real question is will google let this hit the courts, or offer him a heavy payout to make it go away, and will he accept.
Slashdot Mirror
Correction. A degree did make one more valuable, that trend has been shifting for years. And I'm not sure where you are in the world, but universities in Canada and the US have been pushing that line for decades.
The moment when you don't realize there's more then one London. And the person you were replying to named all Canadian cities.
You don't know me, my friends, or my family. They've stuck with me through much worse than some psycho bitch making shit up. If that's where you are in life, I'm sorry to hear that.
And yet you made the same assumption about me, based on nothing. Instead, you could have thought just a tiny bit harder and wondered if I was engaged in say working with various groups of people and helping them through things like that. Until you realize just how imbalanced the system is, and how little it takes to ruin a persons life today? You're flouting your ignorance.
Let me give you an example: Of a married couple, who had a fallout. Where the father was a hardworker, and the mother decided to become a junkie. Where CAS threatened the father to quit his job, then interceded on behalf of the mother in court that he wouldn't quit his job to look after their kids. This is despite that he had other family who would help out. We'll bump this down a few months, where the mother then goes further down the junkie hole, is getting alimony, getting welfare, getting mothers allowance, then forces and pimps both daughters(11&12) out to drug dealers for her fix. The girls run away multiple times to their father. She calls the police trying to get him arrested because they ran to him. It takes a crown prosecutor to get involved and a family court judge being removed from the bench. But those girls are still 100% fucked up now, CAS is still threatening people like that, and family courts still give the mother custody in cases like that.
So welcome to Canada. Hell welcome to the UK where it's even worse.
One would have to be fairly ignorant to not have run across it on some news website after it happened.
That covers most people who don't read the news, or around 70-80% of people you realize. Why not take your theory for a test drive, and go hit your local dunkin' donuts or tim hortons, but my guess is closer to being right.
Ever been to a Walmart and wondered why they hired someone in their 70s to cashier instead of a young person who could do it 3x as fast? It's because of that 70 year old doesn't show up to work they don't eat.
I don't know what walmarts you goto where that 70yr old is working cash. At every walmart in Canada and the US I've been to, they're hired specifically as greeters, or low traffic cashier positions like outdoors(when open), sporting goods, sometimes bakery. Funny thing though, if you think those young people are working at 3x the speed? I can tell you that walmart's own data doesn't show that. They recently started a thing called "line rushing" where an associate would scan the items in your cart while waiting for a cashier. The scanner is taken to the cashier or automated cashier totaled up and you simply pay. Those "old folks" could clear upwards of 300 people in a 6hr shift, the young kids? Most could barely hit 30. The optimum they were aiming for is 80/shift per-person.
You are blaming the universities for the decisions of the students.
No. I'm blaming students for making shit decisions. I'm also blaming universities for pushing the "a degree makes you more valuable." That's how you get degree mills.
This does not appear to be true. Whenever McDonald's has an advertising campaign for a dollar menu or lower prices, it is always followed up with "at participating restaurants". You won't find prices at mcdonalds.com, because they vary.
That's because a franchisee can opt out of the "dollar menu" options if they're not making enough money. The idea of that menu is to draw in more people to buy more things at the regular price, and with luck offset the cost.
A big mac is the same price in London as in Toronto, as in Ottawa. But not the same price as in North Bay or Sudbury, though the same in North Bay and Sudbury.
Yet Tim Hortons could afford to hire people at $16-$20 an hour in Ft McMurray and other places with an actual shortage of labour and still serve $1 cups of coffee, t least until the economy crashed and resulted in a surplus of desperate workers
No, you don't understand. Tim Hortons could afford to hire people at $16-22hr because the average person there was making 100k-250k as their starting wages, there was more disposable income, more people buying things at those stores. On top of that those Tim Hortons stores were CORP owned, not franchisee. The franchisees failed to make enough money and had to turn their business back to the corp.
If you were in Fort Mac and making $22/hr? You couldn't afford rent and food. $10k/mo for appt rentals was a thing at the time there.
No, you don't understand the difference, reliable means a high chance of success. When a guy decides to pop himself off he's not going for reliable, he's going for a method that's final. That's why suicide by gun make up a huge number here in North America. The chances of you walking away from putting a .44, 9mm or .38 snub to your head and walking away is next to nil.
So what you're saying it it ISN'T both and it's in fact becoming the bedrock of our society.
The number of teenagers actually working in fast food is almost nil these days. When my sister was a regional manager for a chain of McD's several years ago, teenagers(14-18) only counted for 5% of their workforce, her friend who took over her job says it's around 3.5% now. That's across a swath of university towns, small cities and so on. You're more likely to find someone in their 30's because that's all they can get, or an old retiree there working just because they like to work or because they need the extra money to make ends meet.
On top of that "service industry" which are PT for the last decade have outpaced growth in FT jobs. More people in their late 20's and 30's are more likely to hold 3 PT jobs to make ends meet then a single FT job, again because there's no work for their lack of a skillset.
It can be both, because universities are degree mills pumping out people with useless degrees. Those people will never work in a job higher then minimum wage because there's no demand for someone who has a masters in "feminist dance theory" or the "history of harry potter and it's impact on french culture."
A 25% increase in pay would bankrupt the restaurant. Food prices are *set* by the corporate office, not the franchisee. This is the reason why here in Ontario when the min. wage jumped to $14/hr businesses started laying off employees and cutting back on previously "good will gestures" such as bonus pay. The restaurant industry is cut-throat and operates on a profitability margin of 3-6%. That's far more then even a small gas bar, which has a profitability margin of 1-3%, they don't make their money from selling gas(which is also sold at a preset price, most stations make 0.02%-0.038% profit on fuel). They make their money on drinks/food/snacks/etc.
It's not that men pick a reliable method. It's that when men pick a method of suicide they're picking a method that they're ensuring *will* kill them. They also don't care what they look like after they're dead, they don't care if it's violent, they only care that it gets that final job done. Compare this to women who will go out of their way to use methods of suicide that don't damage their appearance.
Today a whistleblower died and we all need to fill that role.
The reporter who led the charge on the Panama papers was assassinated by a car bomb a few weeks back, most people don't even know that happened. One of Wikileaks offices was raid in a professional style sweep looking for crypto keys and other information. Most people don't know that one happened either.
No, what's going on recently does very much concern me, but perhaps in an entirely different way than it concerns you. You see, I'm not a prominent public figure, I am in control of my own income (I work for myself, I'm certainly not going to fire my star employee and I'll know immediately if accusations against him -- myself -- are true or not), and really I don't care if someone comes at me; they've done it before and I'm sure they'll do it again. I will rise above it just as I have in the past.
See you don't need to be a prominent figure. All controlling your income means, is that you're a far richer target for someone if they actually decide to do something. In the current state of affairs, you won't be rising above. You'll be mired in a bog for years wondering "why did this happen" just like countless others have.
Been there, done that, moved on from retail as a result and my life has never been better. Of course, I'm not well-known enough to make national headlines; if I were, I might be more afraid of the current situation.
So you've turned around and already been accused, but still think you'd be able to ride it out if it happened today because you're low key enough. You don't seem to get that if it happened today, it wouldn't matter because your friends and family in the current "sphere" would consider you suspect regardless.
FYI, if you want some actual "toxic masculinity" you should look no further then VICE today, where they labeled a woman as a "real doll" for daring to have an opinion that differs from theirs. But they're not receiving flak for it, the left is cheering them on.
As for emailing, I might when I get time after this massive screw-up and repairs get rolled out.
I would ask you the same from my position running a business that hires people on their merits. That's both an answer and a question, ball's in your court.
Going by your other post, you obviously aren't hiring people based on their merit.
Most days around the Great Lakes the temps range from -10C to +30C and are perfectly comfortable in the right gear.
It was -27C two days ago, and two yeas ago it was -20 to -30C for nearly a month. "rare days" where the count exceeds 3 weeks...
No. I brought up that it's bad when men behave in a sexist manner and you literally brought up women doing the same thing in a "what about" manner. That's textbook whataboutism.
Let's see, the current definition of "sexist manner" is a simple compliment, or greeting. That's going by the #metoo brigade.
The issue is that people like you think it's fine to be just a little less wrong than the "other side", almost as if you believe being less wrong actually makes you right. The guy who says 2+2=5 is technically less wrong than the guy who says 2+2+6, but lemme tell you neither of them are right. That's what people are pointing out when they call out whataboutism. It's not to avoid dealing with the issue, it's to ensure that both sides of the issue are dealt with; you don't like it because you don't want to deal with your side of the issue. I won't have to worry about that because I didn't harass anyone 30 years ago.
No, you believe you didn't harass anyone 30 years ago. Today? That doesn't matter, it doesn't even matter if you actually didn't harass anyone. All that matters is that you believe the victim, have you figured it out yet? No?
It sounds like you think I was saying you need to know when you've gone too far and run before you get in trouble. Wrong. If you've gone too far, you deserve what you get, next week or in 30 years, because you're part of the problem. I was talking about recognizing toxic people (try a mirror) and toxic environments and simply not offering them your talents. You've made it clear that your main talent is missing the point, though, and I don't think you're gonna change much by depriving anyone of that special skill.
And where you miss the point again. Always good to meet the "listen and believe" people, who think that if they virtue signal hard enough that they won't be the next one to be nailed to the wall. You know who was a toxic person? Bill Clinton, you know who else? Al Franken. You know what happened in both of those cases? I'm sure you do. You want to know what prostitutes look like? Try Harvey Weinstien and dozens of women who had no problems selling themselves for a leg up. And even at that there is still the other cases which may or maynot be true. But gotta believe them right.
No, I'm telling you that you have no idea and no grasp of the current state of this witch hunt going on. And your little quip there seems to be a case of projection all the way down. Especially when you've missed the point, not once, not twice, but three times. We'll see if you manage to catch it on the fourth.
You really sound like you're trying to defend actions you took three decades ago that put you on the wrong side of this whole debate by framing it as "well, women do it too and they do it worse". Sorry, doesn't matter if God himself does it, if it's wrong, and you recognize it as wrong, and you've done it, you are still in the wrong.
And you're making these assumptions based on what? Right. Nothing. But you sure are all in favor of the witch hunt, and the fact that your life can be ruined based on nothing. And I literally do mean nothing. What the hell do you think Title IX was? If the only thing you managed to get out of my statement was """well, women do it too and they do it worse"" then you need to stop, go back, re-read, figure out what I said. Where the system is applied in an unequal manner both socially and legally. Then bend over, and hope that some women doesn't decide to ruin your life by lying and there being next to no consequences for it.
cough Reagan cough...
Clinton idiot. It was the "black leaders" Sharpton, Jackson, et.al., that demanded that Washington do something about the "crack epidemic" of the late 90's(which started around '92/93 in really catching on). They demanded, they had marches, they had fucking meetings out the ass all demanding more police, tougher laws, higher sentences, and it was the democrats and Bill Clinton who pushed damn near everything that they wanted through.
The parts of the US that identifies as liberal feels exactly the same way about conservatives and the term's "snowflake", "cuck", "triggered" and.. really anything that falls out of your mouths to be honest.
The "left" and we'll group the DNC in here, just decided that "more of the same" is the winning path for them. So they elected a race baiting black(Keith Ellison) who's an ethnostatist(to use the left's term "a nazi") to the party to help lead it. But there's zero cries over this, none. It's not in any of the mainstream press. It's also the "progressives" who seem to be the most annoyed by that, especially since those same progressives have decided to go down the route of a purity spiral and drive most left-of-centre and liberals right out of the party.
Here's the thing if you're a liberal and so upset by this? Your "wing" of politics in the US, and in Canada have been screeching that *insert person* is a racist/sexist/homophobe/islamophobe or whatever else for neigh on 20 years at this point. Now ask yourself where were you when the progressive wing of your party decided to crank the dial to 11 the last 5-7 years. You're experiencing this for just short of a year and a half and you already hate it, now ask yourself why there is zero sympathy from conservatives, libertarians, republicans, liberals who've left and so on when they apply and/or use the rules you've used for those years. You've got your answer.
No, I've heard it all. I never said we should have female-dominated companies, either. That said, we should, and men should refuse to work there just as women should refuse to work for companies dominated by males sexist pigs as well. It's wrong no matter which gender does it, but that sure was some nite whataboutism.
Then you already know that there's a huge disparity between "what happens" when the accuser is female and the accuser is male. There's no "whataboutism" going on, more of a case that when people use "whataboutism" they're waving their hand trying to reframe something because they don't want to deal with the issue that someone has brought up. Socially, and legally you should also know just how lopsided it is as well.
The difference is I have marketable skills today and have wised up quite a bit -- if the situation turns sour I know to get the fuck out.
And won't do you a damn bit of good, when someone makes a claim against you for something 30 years ago, and everyone treats it like it happened last week right? By the time you think you should "know when to get the fuck out" it's already too late.
If you look back a ways through my comment history you'll also learn that I'm not exactly unfamiliar with female-on-male rape or domestic violence, either.
Good to know, so obvious question what are you doing to fix the problem besides handwaving with "whataboutism"?
Well, due to the fact that the #MeToo thing has gone WAAAY overboard.....if you are a man with a penis, you are pretty much now already under suspicion for sexual harassment, or worse.....now or possibly for future actions.
Hate to break it to you, but that's been going on for a couple of decades at this point. It's simply hit a new level, and it's far worse then what most people understand. Remember the shitshow when feminists went after Linus Torvalds and other male programmers who were doing internships and so on? That it later came out that a very specific feminist organization was trying to push them out with false sexual harassment claims, but most of the people realized something was up and never worked/talked/etc alone with women.
A single case of sexual harassment, true or false can cause serious damage to a man's career. A false rape claim? The guy is done and fucked, even if it goes to court and found innocent, even if the accuser recants. And a lot of guys at that point see suicide as the only way out, because there is no chance of recovery. The kids in the Duke Lacrosse team? Yeah, people still say "well maybe they did..." the bullshit over the UVA false rape claim? People still say "it might have been true..."
it's that you happen to agree with his opinions. Things like: "women should do pair programming because they're naturally more social".
That's not an opinion, that's a fact. It's the same reason why in states and provinces that have implemented "group learning" aka female centric learning, female test scores have gone through the roof, while male test scores have fallen through the floor.
there is no denying that it made his job impossible because any judgement he made subsequently would be questioned in the light of those comments.
Google directly has internal groups that exist for the sole purpose of what is discussed. He took the engineers approach, saw a problem, came up with a solution. Your comment above makes it clear that he was in the right by doing so, but he went against the current corporate culture.
it doesn't matter what I say, you just imagine some nonsense and expect me to defend it.
This coming from the person who can't click links, see a sourced bit of information and then declare that it's not there? That's pretty hilarious.
Well if you're going up against a corporation, you could argue that. You'd get slapped down by it for the court if you didn't have the peoples names, dates, times, places, and documents showing that though. It appears in his case, he does have those names, places and dates. Remember that using their names can be defamation material if he doesn't have the proof to back it up. The real question is will google let this hit the courts, or offer him a heavy payout to make it go away, and will he accept.