If you put $5,000 into a humor detector on January 1, 2017, then you’d be able to comprehend the meaning behind my comment today. Have fun with that knowledge.

Thought experiment: Suppose he wrote a memo whose claims were scientifically valid. Suppose further that this memo had exactly the same text as the real memo (i.e. in this scenario pretend the established science happens to agree with all of his claims rather than disagree with any of them).

Manifesto writer’s intentions are not subject to anyone’s perception of the validity of his arguments. His intention was to create dialogue and raise awareness (check). His criticism was suppression of and retribution for expressed ideologies (check).

“Supposably” is my pet peeve...

He did not call women neurotic, which is the adjective of the mental functional disorder neurosis. Neurotic does not appear in the document.

I wonder how long it’ll be until a liberal employee of a predominantly conservative corporation gets fired for writing a similar ‘screed’ about some liberal cause celebre, and your writers and commentariat start tripping over themselves to reverse their arguments...

Four Scientists Respond to the Google Memo:

I think that’s taking his arguments to some bizarre extreme. At its core, the writer is calling out what he feels to be oppressive and discriminatory practices at Google, as well as unsustainable and ineffective methods for combating sexism and inequality. He does not disagree with the fundamental idea of equality,…

Some can argue that he has the right to express his opinion without fear of being fired for it.

And who’s the final authority on who’s opinions are valid and who’s are not? You? And do the valid ones coincidentally align with your own?

Telling people not to blow the whistle on discriminatory and oppressive practices is itself oppressive. Simply because you disagree with him doesn’t make his intentions any different from someone on the opposite “side” making the opposite claims (calling out sexism against women, policies that oppress women, etc.). …

Regardless of how valid or invalid his opinions are, isn’t an internal message board exactly the correct place to create a discussion about internal issues? He gets fired for having an opposing viewpoint meanwhile the person who leaked internal company communications gets zero punishment.

I can find no tortuous interpretation of Enlightenment conceptions of free speech that support this particular assertion. Perhaps you would take it upon yourself to explain how the *ideal* (not the Constitutional reality, but the Enlightenment ideal) of free speech includes such pitchforks-and-torches mob response and…

Yeah. Also, if you’ve read any actual alt-right stuff, that guy’s memo was hardly a “screed.” Compared to the real and often truly evil stuff, it was a model of civil discourse. If no one can say their piece in a somewhat evenhanded way like he did, you’re going to end up with even more “CNN IS HITLER!!!” and less “I…

Unpopular opinion: As an athiest democrat, that believes in diversity, I struggle to understand the popularity of seeing people fired for writing their opinions, even if its not my cup of tea. There are so many kind people ive met, that I think are completely delusional people, i see them praying to magical beings,…

It is good to remember that these people don’t want free speech. They want freedom from criticism for themselves.

There’s pretty much nothing you wrote supported by empirical evidence. First, brains are obviously “sexed.” When a female brain starts regulating the level of luteinizing hormone to start the menstrual cycle, you’re saying the exact same thing happens in a male?

• ‘There are different races of people’
  

Anyone who has been around long enough to have an informed perspective knows that men are more likely (he does say that traits overlap) to put in the extra hours, take on more stressful jobs and accept more danger. He did point out that men suffer 93% of deaths on the job which somewhat buttresses his point.

Classical liberal refers to libertarian values, not what we think of modern day liberal.