I keep seeing people arguing that large swaths of people perform hate speech when only some of them do.
I agree, but that's why I wanted to dig deeper here. I have this painful addiction to fairness that dislikes people demonstrating a clear bias without acknowledging it and the excuse "not all..." is being used to avoid applying the same rules and responses to hate speech depending on who the hate speech comes from.
So in the same way I occasionally succumb and respond to the anti-semetic trolls on Slashdot, I occasionally call out the hypocrisy that people aren't acknowledging. In this instance I took the speech away from the context of the groups and individuals involved so that the 'not all...' objection ceased to be relevant and.. well, still waiting for a response.
Are you shitting me? Shit, there's practically a uniform in some Jewish communities.
Long dark skirts, high necked tops, minimal make-up and long dark hair; when it's 90% of the woman walking down the street past a synagogue and the Manchester Jewish Museum it's probably not the local skater grrls.
The misrepresentation of the memo in the media may be why the question was posed. There have been so many people leaping to vilify its author that nobody's stopped to ask "normal" people how they feel.
The responses on here have been mixed but generally very much more balanced and understanding than the media.
I mean, one of those articles quotes a 17 year old:
I have already braced myself for the sexism I will inevitably experience. Yes, I am concerned that I will not be given the same opportunities because I am a woman, but I know I have the confidence and courage to speak up to misogynists and fight for equal pay and equal opportunity for leadership positions.
No prejudgement there. No fucking experience, no expectation that actually every single fucking business she ever works for will be treating her at least on par with her male colleagues and frequently giving her advantages and benefits that they lack. Just a determination to work through the vicious sexism and misogyny that she's been told to expect and will now be ultra sensitive towards instead of realising that it's a tough fucking world and we all get shit on.
Or an article by a Youtube CEO. Fuck me, she's really been held back in her career. Damn, if she was male imagine how high she might have climbed. Here's a clue: most slashdot readers will never be CEO, let alone a business (or division) the size of Youtube. Meanwhile from her position of power she's disseminating a false narrative that she's been put down because of her gender - citing things that happen to fucking everybody, not just women.
The business insider article focusses on someone asking, "How can I not interpret [it] as an attack?" Well, maybe because at no fucking point did it attack any woman at Google.
The final article is lovely. It's also totally fucking irrelevant. Which is tougher, chemical engineering or IT? Well, given that chemical engineering appears to be even more strongly male weighted than IT does, her question may not support her argument in the way she hoped.
If you really are that out of the loop, that should inform you pretty well.
The fucking media are out of the loop. They're pushing an agenda and failing to listen to the competent qualified majority of women in the field that get on with their job, add value and respected and appreciated for their contribution.
Why the fuck are you so surprised that someone on Slashdot wants to give those people a voice? What's wrong, are you scared they might not follow the narrative?
I do dance, and I'm not as good as Ginger Rogers. I am however confident that I could have followed Fred Astaire, in heels or otherwise.
However, at that level there isn't really 'better than'. There is just 'good' and 'different'. Ginger Rogers could almost certainly lead better than I can..
I've seen those joke responses to many men too. Are you suggesting that women lack a sense of humour, or that treating them the same as men is a bad thing?
it was also a snide put-down intended (at least in part) to de-legitimise her comment
No. It wasn't. What sort of fucking paranoia are you living under that you could remotely think that to be the case?
Comical. You post an impenetrable blob of text, someone posts a joke and you response with
you are the one with the issue and should get off the internet
The only thing that could be more comical would be if your book was on self awareness.
If you think you can bully me with your comment you've got another thing coming. So for all of you reading this...it's this kind of little jerk that's the problem.
If only the link he shared had included somewhere within those 250 words a hyperlink to the department that did the study, taking the competent reader to a page that doesn't just give you direct access to the full writeup, but also summarises it and offers you downloads in multiple document formats.
On the other hand, there is abundant evidence across all sectors that simply changing the name on a resume to a female sounding name or to a black sounding name reduces the number of callbacks you receive on that resume
This isn't "all sectors" though, this is the IT industry. In this industry, the evidence suggests recruitment outcomes are better for women. e.g. http://blog.interviewing.io/we...
Forget black people being shot by police, forget the massive pay and gender gaps in the workplace, forget every real challenge facing the world
Oh no! A population group is demanding the very fucking same equality that everybody else is demanding and suddenly it's wrong?
By the way, there are no massive fucking pay gaps in the workplace and I really can't be arsed providing links to the 78 studies that demonstrate this so you'll just have to take my word on it - or try actually showing some fucking evidence of your own instead of a hate filled sexist racist rant.
No wonder you found the entire document objectionable, it challenged your bigotry.
I do my best to avoid Fox news, if that helps? It's on the list of sources for which I seek corroborating and alternate views, rather than trusting outright.
There are a mix of such sites on that informal list, across the political spectrum.
The experience of Harvey Mudd seems to point to exactly that. They have a close to 50:50 gender participation rate in engineering majors, and they have achieved it through changes to their curriculum and teaching environment.
Bullshit. Total utter fucking bullshit. They achieved that parity by intentionally accepting female applicants.
The playing field is far from fucking equal. Check out the grants available to women wanting a STEM education and compare them to the grants available to men.
Check out the programmes that are available to one gender only, and count the proportion that are available to each.
Shit, write up your CV and send it in for a job with no gender markers, and see the response rates compared to if the hiring company can tell your gender.
The playing field is stacked fucking senseless and yet people still say that women can't compete.
I'd say that sounds pretty derogatory towards those women, but clearly I'm wrong and it's total bullshit.
The first response to that comment explained why you're both wrong and irrelevant: "Found the engineer:)"
The men and women I work with care about working with other great people, about how much they get paid, about getting home to be with the kids, about doing the job and about getting lunch today.
That comment represents all of them. It may or may not have been written by a woman but it sure as hell represents the views of the ones I work with.
He did raise a key point that I hadn't seen mentioned elsewhere: After the educated skilled capable women have finished dominating law, medicine, vetting, accounting and other domains, just how many of them are left to pick up the programming jobs.
You claim I have an axe to grind, and yes, yes I do. With fascists. But it's clear that the GP has one with African-Americans, and he's dishonest enough to try to tie them to Nazis. It's sort-of mind-blowing how crazy that is.
I think you're misinterpreting him. Let me put this simply for you: mpercy is saying if if "kill all black people" is hate speech then "kill all white people" is also hate speech.
Do you agree or disagree? That's the basic question, and it would be lovely if you could answer that without ranting about fascists because both statements sound pretty fascist to me.
In the UK there was no adverse coverage of the Occupy movement's desire to protest, or their right to do so.
There were complaints that they were a fucking nuisance shitting in the street and raping each other.
You want to march past my house complaining that my cat purrs too loudly, you go right ahead. You want to camp in my garden and stop me emptying my bins, I'm going to tell you you're out of order.
This may sound odd, but as I haven't seen any actual evidence that the accused man was even driving the vehicle in question then I don't find it unreasonable to be cautious about describing his actions.
Luckily there's a socially accepted mechanism for finding out who was driving the car, what their motives were, the extent to which the driver and their vehicle were at fault for the injuries that occurred and whether this broke the law. Following completion of that process we'll all be able to speak with greater certainty on the event.
If you can't tell the difference between Nazi's and other people, then either you're an idiot, or you're intentionally trying to make some point that doesn't make any fucking sense
Slashdot Mirror
People shoot people all the time, and make no mistake, they aren't terrorists.
People run people over all the time, and make no mistake, they aren't terrorists.
You keep bleating on about terrorists but fail miserably to make anything remotely resembling a case that this is a terror attack.
Or are all of the klan lynchings and other killings fake news too?
Wait, this guy was in the klan? Sorry, that's a new claim, I hadn't encountered that one before.
Seems to me you're talking utter fucking nonsense. Is that a detraction? I'm not sure, it may just fall under justified abuse.
Hmm. Shit. If I buy the Land Rover early does that still protect me?
Unfortunately that's not a choice the man can legally make.
I dunno. Do we get a choice whether we're fucking other guys or being fucked?
I keep seeing people arguing that large swaths of people perform hate speech when only some of them do.
I agree, but that's why I wanted to dig deeper here. I have this painful addiction to fairness that dislikes people demonstrating a clear bias without acknowledging it and the excuse "not all ..." is being used to avoid applying the same rules and responses to hate speech depending on who the hate speech comes from.
So in the same way I occasionally succumb and respond to the anti-semetic trolls on Slashdot, I occasionally call out the hypocrisy that people aren't acknowledging. In this instance I took the speech away from the context of the groups and individuals involved so that the 'not all ...' objection ceased to be relevant and.. well, still waiting for a response.
Are you shitting me? Shit, there's practically a uniform in some Jewish communities.
Long dark skirts, high necked tops, minimal make-up and long dark hair; when it's 90% of the woman walking down the street past a synagogue and the Manchester Jewish Museum it's probably not the local skater grrls.
I'm not playing word police either. I'm merely noticing that you are incapable of condemning anti-white speech.
I haven't mentioned BLM, I haven't mentioned Nazis, I haven't mentioned anything other than you and your hypocrisy.
Let me show you how it's done:
"kill all blacks" is hate speech and should be countered.
"kill all whites" is hate speech and should be countered.
There, see how easy that is? Well, for people that aren't rabidly racist anyway.
The misrepresentation of the memo in the media may be why the question was posed. There have been so many people leaping to vilify its author that nobody's stopped to ask "normal" people how they feel.
The responses on here have been mixed but generally very much more balanced and understanding than the media.
I mean, one of those articles quotes a 17 year old:
I have already braced myself for the sexism I will inevitably experience. Yes, I am concerned that I will not be given the same opportunities because I am a woman, but I know I have the confidence and courage to speak up to misogynists and fight for equal pay and equal opportunity for leadership positions.
No prejudgement there. No fucking experience, no expectation that actually every single fucking business she ever works for will be treating her at least on par with her male colleagues and frequently giving her advantages and benefits that they lack. Just a determination to work through the vicious sexism and misogyny that she's been told to expect and will now be ultra sensitive towards instead of realising that it's a tough fucking world and we all get shit on.
Or an article by a Youtube CEO. Fuck me, she's really been held back in her career. Damn, if she was male imagine how high she might have climbed. Here's a clue: most slashdot readers will never be CEO, let alone a business (or division) the size of Youtube. Meanwhile from her position of power she's disseminating a false narrative that she's been put down because of her gender - citing things that happen to fucking everybody, not just women.
The business insider article focusses on someone asking, "How can I not interpret [it] as an attack?" Well, maybe because at no fucking point did it attack any woman at Google.
The final article is lovely. It's also totally fucking irrelevant. Which is tougher, chemical engineering or IT? Well, given that chemical engineering appears to be even more strongly male weighted than IT does, her question may not support her argument in the way she hoped.
If you really are that out of the loop, that should inform you pretty well.
The fucking media are out of the loop. They're pushing an agenda and failing to listen to the competent qualified majority of women in the field that get on with their job, add value and respected and appreciated for their contribution.
Why the fuck are you so surprised that someone on Slashdot wants to give those people a voice? What's wrong, are you scared they might not follow the narrative?
I do dance, and I'm not as good as Ginger Rogers. I am however confident that I could have followed Fred Astaire, in heels or otherwise.
However, at that level there isn't really 'better than'. There is just 'good' and 'different'. Ginger Rogers could almost certainly lead better than I can..
You cannot compare jobs requiring physical strength with jobs requiring logical thinking.
I fucking well can. Women can do heavy dirty work too, and don't be sexist by suggesting otherwise.
I've seen those joke responses to many men too. Are you suggesting that women lack a sense of humour, or that treating them the same as men is a bad thing?
it was also a snide put-down intended (at least in part) to de-legitimise her comment
No. It wasn't. What sort of fucking paranoia are you living under that you could remotely think that to be the case?
Comical. You post an impenetrable blob of text, someone posts a joke and you response with
you are the one with the issue and should get off the internet
The only thing that could be more comical would be if your book was on self awareness.
If you think you can bully me with your comment you've got another thing coming. So for all of you reading this...it's this kind of little jerk that's the problem.
Wait, who is the bully here?
If only the link he shared had included somewhere within those 250 words a hyperlink to the department that did the study, taking the competent reader to a page that doesn't just give you direct access to the full writeup, but also summarises it and offers you downloads in multiple document formats.
If only.
( https://pmc.gov.au/resource-ce... if you were too lazy to check)
On the other hand, there is abundant evidence across all sectors that simply changing the name on a resume to a female sounding name or to a black sounding name reduces the number of callbacks you receive on that resume
This isn't "all sectors" though, this is the IT industry. In this industry, the evidence suggests recruitment outcomes are better for women. e.g.
http://blog.interviewing.io/we...
Not just the IT industry either:
https://pmc.gov.au/sites/defau...
. Women and people of color are less likely to be promoted, to earn similar pay
You have evidence for this? I have evidence that suggests otherwise:
http://media.dice.com/report/m...
Forget black people being shot by police, forget the massive pay and gender gaps in the workplace, forget every real challenge facing the world
Oh no! A population group is demanding the very fucking same equality that everybody else is demanding and suddenly it's wrong?
By the way, there are no massive fucking pay gaps in the workplace and I really can't be arsed providing links to the 78 studies that demonstrate this so you'll just have to take my word on it - or try actually showing some fucking evidence of your own instead of a hate filled sexist racist rant.
No wonder you found the entire document objectionable, it challenged your bigotry.
I do my best to avoid Fox news, if that helps? It's on the list of sources for which I seek corroborating and alternate views, rather than trusting outright.
There are a mix of such sites on that informal list, across the political spectrum.
The experience of Harvey Mudd seems to point to exactly that. They have a close to 50:50 gender participation rate in engineering majors, and they have achieved it through changes to their curriculum and teaching environment.
Bullshit. Total utter fucking bullshit. They achieved that parity by intentionally accepting female applicants.
Harvey Mudd accepts 31% of female applications and only 12.5% of male applications.
http://time.com/money/4147738/...
The playing field is far from fucking equal. Check out the grants available to women wanting a STEM education and compare them to the grants available to men.
Check out the programmes that are available to one gender only, and count the proportion that are available to each.
Shit, write up your CV and send it in for a job with no gender markers, and see the response rates compared to if the hiring company can tell your gender.
The playing field is stacked fucking senseless and yet people still say that women can't compete.
I'd say that sounds pretty derogatory towards those women, but clearly I'm wrong and it's total bullshit.
Given the over-representation of Indians in the industry I'm fairly sure I don't get a job because I'm white.
"We're there to work" doesn't preclude working late, adding value or putting a shitload of effort to help the company.
The first response to that comment explained why you're both wrong and irrelevant: "Found the engineer :)"
The men and women I work with care about working with other great people, about how much they get paid, about getting home to be with the kids, about doing the job and about getting lunch today.
That comment represents all of them. It may or may not have been written by a woman but it sure as hell represents the views of the ones I work with.
Scott Alexander wrote an absolutely fantastic analysis of someone else's analysis of this:
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017...
He did raise a key point that I hadn't seen mentioned elsewhere: After the educated skilled capable women have finished dominating law, medicine, vetting, accounting and other domains, just how many of them are left to pick up the programming jobs.
You claim I have an axe to grind, and yes, yes I do. With fascists. But it's clear that the GP has one with African-Americans, and he's dishonest enough to try to tie them to Nazis. It's sort-of mind-blowing how crazy that is.
I think you're misinterpreting him. Let me put this simply for you:
mpercy is saying if if "kill all black people" is hate speech then "kill all white people" is also hate speech.
Do you agree or disagree? That's the basic question, and it would be lovely if you could answer that without ranting about fascists because both statements sound pretty fascist to me.
In the UK there was no adverse coverage of the Occupy movement's desire to protest, or their right to do so.
There were complaints that they were a fucking nuisance shitting in the street and raping each other.
You want to march past my house complaining that my cat purrs too loudly, you go right ahead.
You want to camp in my garden and stop me emptying my bins, I'm going to tell you you're out of order.
Is that so fucking hard to comprehend?
This may sound odd, but as I haven't seen any actual evidence that the accused man was even driving the vehicle in question then I don't find it unreasonable to be cautious about describing his actions.
Luckily there's a socially accepted mechanism for finding out who was driving the car, what their motives were, the extent to which the driver and their vehicle were at fault for the injuries that occurred and whether this broke the law. Following completion of that process we'll all be able to speak with greater certainty on the event.
If you can't tell the difference between Nazi's and other people, then either you're an idiot, or you're intentionally trying to make some point that doesn't make any fucking sense
I sure as fuck can't tell the difference between people being labelled as Nazis and other people.
https://twitter.com/Rosie/stat...
It's not a "slippery slope" to deny Nazi's web hosting.
Well according to you and Rosie most of the US Government should lose its web hosting then.
That's how fucking farcical this is.