>I check the social media profiles of their prominent engineers and search with keywords like "feminism", "women" and "she". See how they talk about women in the field, whether they follow women on Twitter, whether they posted angry anti-Hillary memes.
By diversity you (and many others) actually mean "people who are followers of/subservient to my ideology and preferably in a different shade than male and pale". The world is not a university campus where you can be sheltered from conflicting opinions. There are all kinds of humans out there who are good and decent, and some of them don't even tweet about feminism, believe it or not. Your zealous reluctance to work with someone because they posted the wrong memes in their spare time is incredibly infantile and unprofessional.
You're not against "mono-culture" (you're even actively looking to stay within your bubble), you're against mono-cultures that aren't yours. At least be honest enough to admit that rather than operate under this false pretence of being virtuous.
>if my boss is going to be a white dude, he had better have publicly condemned sexism in a way that feels constructive and genuine to me.
If my boss is going to be a black woman, she had better publicly condemned theft in a way that feels constructive and genuine to me.
This thread is straight out of a dystopian novel, where "white dude" is said in disgust and the wellness of a place is judged by how few straight white males are there. I hope the irony is not lost on you and the other champions of anti-isms in this thread.
I live in a European city/country with a lot of muslims and they are nothing but a problem - generally speaking (this one cool muslim guy you know is not a rebuttal), they refuse to assimilate, are an enormous burden on the welfare state and are overrepresented in crime. Demanding similar anecdotes from the OP however is an appeal to authority.
You only have to take off your rose tinted blinders and look at the state of affairs in muslim majority countries to see what happens when they are significant in numbers. Even in a "moderate" muslim country like Indonesia gays get arrested. Do you think these societies are a result of their geographic location or the culture/religion? What do you think happens if you only change the location of the people and they keep their culture/religion?
It's far from a "tiny minority" that holds extremist views - there are plenty of polls (check out those from Pew Research Center) that attest to that. You are gravely mistaken if you believe all religions are the same and equally compatible with western ideals.
If you were to follow the author's advice, next week's article would be about Asian characters on the show (a comedy show) not being portrayed accurately enough for leaving out their faulty human side. You cannot win with these types. It's best not to engage them.
> Basically, I like having the opportunity of moving to any country I want, so why shouldn't the same hold for anyone who wants to come to my home country?
Why should your countrymen back home, the vast majority of which have no desire to emigrate, bear the cost of you being able to live in China?
I'd gladly give up my opportunity to move to any country if it put a stop to and reverted the disastrous waves of immigration in western Europe of the last two decades.
I stopped reading there. You have got to give them credit for being able to inject some "white guys ugh am i right" message regardless of the story. Slate is garbage.
You felt it was appropriate to interject in a conversation about slavery to wonder why none of these people online haven't helped you out financially, which a typical person would construe as asking for money, despite being a woman with the highest internet points (or something). Maybe I don't frequent HN enough to know who's who, but your replies to obstinate read like the ramblings of someone with mental problems (I don't mean that as an insult).
You're playing your own psy-ops game now. It is no secret Soros is funding all sorts of questionable institutions around the world, but it is an inconvenient truth to those who align with his ideology as it grants some validity to the other side's arguments (which is why the media barely paid attention to the OpenSociety leaks). For example, one has to wonder why an American citizen is financing Islamists in Europe [0], buying off members of the EU parliament [1] and bankrolling initiatives to sway elections in European countries [2].
It again shows that the oft repeated "men benefit from feminism too"-phrase is nothing but a weak ploy. The vilification of men is complete; sex is violence against women and male traits are "toxic". Clearly there is something wrong when dudes resort to life size dolls to satisfy their basic biological needs. The cowardly thing to do is to ridicule and lambaste the hopeless for being desperate, to refuse to consider that perhaps your mentality and snarky blog posts are part of the problem.
Honest question: what is it that happens to you when you read the words master and slave in the context of computer science? Slavery is horrible and so is killing, but I do not shed a tear whenever the words 'kill/terminate process' appear on my screen - I don't get visions of beheadings, I don't associate it with the act of ending a human life. It's a safe bet to say that no one reading about computer architecture today suffered as a slave, so saying this terminology triggers you is akin to me pretending to be bothered by loud noises because my great-grandfather went through war.
When you hear about a master/slave relationship or a male/female connector, you know immediately what is being described, which is pretty good for a method of communication. If you are unable to interpret words based on their context, I'm inclined to believe it's not the language that's the problem. I doubt that's the case though, I think these manufactured outcries are attempts at social engineering and moves in a game of power (controlling language->discourse->thought).
I suppose it comes down to whether you're arguing what started the war or what started the world war. Without the alliances, Austria-Hungary would have invaded Serbia and that would have been it.
Idealism is a belief in something unrealistic. It doesn't deserve a place on the stage of solutions. Dave Jones from the EEVBlog [0] channel did a bunch of videos explaining why solar roadways are a bad idea.
You're arguing from the arrogant point of view that the USA is the pinnacle of civilization and other nations should strive to emulate it.
European countries, and most other nations in the world, have/had native populations that enjoy cohesion through a common culture, history and ethnicity. Being American is a loose concept that a newcomer can easily adopt. Being Japanese or German carries with it more than just having the appropriate passport, and for that reason the integration of immigrants in Europe has failed completely. Turks in Germany identify as Turks despite being born on German soil. Who is to blame - the Turks, for sticking to their tribe, the Germans for sticking to theirs, or the people who forced this idea of multiculturalism on them both?
A quarter of the population in the Netherlands is of non-Dutch origin and that number will grow significantly in the foreseeable future. That change happened in a mere 30 years or so. To say the Dutch people (and Belgians, Swedes, etc) should not worry about being displaced and made a minority in their own country is to tell them to stick their heads in the sand.
Reducing peoples' thoughts and emotions to "they don't want immigration because they're racist proletarians" is inflammatory, intended to silence opposition to failed social experiments. Keeping immigration at a level that doesn't cause unnecessary friction does not mean you want to shove people into ovens. This whole debate is a battle between ideology and pragmatism.
I had a hard long think and I don't recall anyone making a plea for immigration in non-white countries. The Japanese wishing to keep their country filled with Japanese is not seen as a problem to be solved. The white farmers being marginalized in Zimbabwe and butchered in South Africa certainly didn't raise concern with the diversity aficionados either.
That's a gripping account, thanks for sharing it. It's grotesque to me to see people in the west make a case for communism knowing every implementation of it has led to the kind of extreme misery and suffering you described. I imagine it must be completely infuriating to an actual victim of that system.
I assume they're interested in acquiring information and techniques from these hacker gatherings, rather than hoping to find a terrorist there. The attendees are probably/hopefully not the target.
I always feel like people telling me to be happy with my piece of the pie and to not compare it to others is a ploy by those with a bigger piece to keep me docile and content. Do our feelings of envy not serve a purpose? Would Napoleon have become Napoleon had he not envied Ceasar?
If I had to take a guess, I'd say parent training. When we see a cute animal, we want to cuddle and protect it like it's a child of our own. People talk to their pets like they talk to babies. Humans, in contrast to most other animals, require a lot of parenting to reach reproductive age. Taking care of a cat or a rabbit hones a decent amount of the skills that are required (later) in life to produce good offspring.
By diversity you (and many others) actually mean "people who are followers of/subservient to my ideology and preferably in a different shade than male and pale". The world is not a university campus where you can be sheltered from conflicting opinions. There are all kinds of humans out there who are good and decent, and some of them don't even tweet about feminism, believe it or not. Your zealous reluctance to work with someone because they posted the wrong memes in their spare time is incredibly infantile and unprofessional. You're not against "mono-culture" (you're even actively looking to stay within your bubble), you're against mono-cultures that aren't yours. At least be honest enough to admit that rather than operate under this false pretence of being virtuous.
>if my boss is going to be a white dude, he had better have publicly condemned sexism in a way that feels constructive and genuine to me.
If my boss is going to be a black woman, she had better publicly condemned theft in a way that feels constructive and genuine to me.
This thread is straight out of a dystopian novel, where "white dude" is said in disgust and the wellness of a place is judged by how few straight white males are there. I hope the irony is not lost on you and the other champions of anti-isms in this thread.