By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
method114 said:
DonFerrari said:

He sent an internal Memo, he wasn't publically complaining... and several companies say they incentivize employees to voice their opinions...

You can even see the answer google gave (according to someone before in this thread) that they are favorable to voice out, but since he was saying woman are inferior (he didn't say it) it would cause a bad environment so they had to fire him. So you can see they are very mischevous on the dealing of issues.

In that case Google is just dumb. I read what he said and in a way he was saying women were inferior but nothing was factually incorrect as far as I saw. Men and Women are both inferior to each other in different ways. This isn't something that is new we've known this for a while.

Someone could arguee that he said they were inferior. But he were talking more about difference in interest and not in capacity, and that the capability distribution of the male and female population are different but there is a very big overlap. So in a way even arguing he said women are inferior he didn't said all women are inferior to men. It would be like a female could be better than any male and vice-versa at something, but on the average population men are better with math and woman are better at team work and things like that. But that hiring anyone based on the steriotype would be dumb, same on policies, each of those would need to look at each individual person traits. But aknowledging the differences between people and groups they could tailor better their diversity driver in a way that would attract more individuals of that group they want without having to make discrimination.

Like, if a reason for females to not thrive to CEO positions or engineering is the long hours and stress, allow someone to be part-time engineer without discrimination, take a little of the burden of the CEO so that a mother can have the position without leaving the childs behind, etc.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."