Politically Correct Google Fires Man For Stating the Obvious

You know, I appreciate your last post Zathura. I disagree with a lot of it--in context, not as much in substance--but I appreciate that you're really thinking about this and articulating your position intelligently.

First let's get the memo out of the way, because that part matters less.

Let's agree to disagree about Damore's views being offensive or not. I read as much of the memo as I cared to, as it's quite long. FWIW, I did a stint in Silicon Valley with a female mentor, so I saw firsthand the ongoing insult that was the bro-culture. So I have little patience for it. I don't personally feel that qualifies as having a "narrow lens," but if you have a different opinion that's ultimately fine.

I do push back against the notion that all "ist" and "ism" labels are meaningless except in fringe. Almost any Black man in America could tell you how "ism" is part of the world he walks in almost daily. They're not crying wolf--I've seen it in ways large and small with my own eyes. It's pretty freaking mainstream.

That said, you're right in that some people cry "ism" at the slightest provocation. And I mean it when I say I'm glad to hear that you personally have benefited from having conversations that could have otherwise been shut down. Growth is a fantastic thing, and I wholeheartedly agree that this is ultimately a place for healing.

But because the isms are real, the conversations they beget absolutely should be called out and, at times, not tolerated. People less aware than you use the "you're crying wolf" argument to promote their own intolerance/bigotry/sexism/whatver. (Another one that gets used is "but it's free speech"--misapplying the definition as was done in this thread.)

When is someone crying ism unreasonably and when is a someone inappropriately trying to wrap their ignorance in the first amendment? Where's the line? That's a judgment call. On this site, I err on the side of respecting the ostensible safety of the environment over the OP's possible education. You sound like you represent the other view. Which of us is "right?" Likely another judgement call.

But It occurrs to me that had you started this thread you would have titled it differently and began the conversation differently--and we wouldn't be talking right now. So there is something to be said about intent and sensitivity.

So no, I'm not arguing for homogeny of opinion. We disagree, but I don't consider you being offensive. Yes it can be a tricky balance, as I think our varying views demonstrate.

I guess, in spite Damore's memo, diversity can be a good thing.

(I know, I know--but I had to wrap this up and I couldn't resist.)

 

It seems we have a misuse penalty of the term 'politically correct' on our hands boys. What shall we do about it?

 

You honestly have the time to engage this thread with such respectable complexity?

Respect bro

 

Thanks, @Leo3000, for your response. It's unfortunate because I was looking forward to your counter arguments with regards to the memo. Regardless, I'll acquiesce to agree to disagree and move on. I wish you well in your goals and in your recovery. 58 days clean is quite impressive, and I hope to reach that milestone again soon.

 

And this is in USA right? Imagine How
South America is doing here?
Let me Tell you,if world war 3 will happen,It Will be against the left

 

And cue the OP.

Truthfully, it's understandable why you'd be defensive, since you started this and no doubt feel "under attack."

But it's interesting that you accuse me of snobbish moral superiority, righteousness, being condescending, of berating you--did you read your own posts, kind sir?

Exactly who is sitting on the "High Throne of Righteousness"--the guy who traded compliments with someone with whom he disagrees? Or the guy who just said things like "your indignation is absurd"?

I didn't argue the memo's validity or lack thereof with @zathura--who was orders of magnitude more mature than you're currently being--so I won't argue it with you either.

But I will be clear about this: I took your thread to task not because I think less of you, but because I thought you as a member of this community and this community as a whole are better than this.

Admittedly, you're not helping that assertion with your defensive, insulting tirade. But you're right about one thing: if I did swing by and just think you all sexist idiots I would have insulted you accordingly and moved on my righteous way. Notice that isn't what happened.

The reason I'm bothering to write you now, even though you gave me zero indication of being anything but righteous yourself, is because of the minute possibility that you could be willing to broaden your view even slightly. Because if you could in future be even just a little more sensitive to how your words can be perceived by other fellow addicts in need, then it's worth the time typing this. Why? Because you're an active member here, and thus part of this community.

That's my way of attempting to hold you accountable to the reason why we're all here together--to help and support each other for our mutual growth and healing.

Pretty indignant, righteous, condescending, snobbish, intolerant, "leftist" of me, yes?

 

I want to acknowledge you for getting off your original position and stating that if you could you would have done things differently in starting this thread. You don't seem like someone who admits such things easily. So I want you to know, before all else, that I see that, I get that.

You're a puzzling guy, noonoon. You're still acting like the indignant righteous blowhard you keep accusing me of being, even when I'm not attacking you. After you gave a nod to the only real point I've been making, you continue to insult me. The stench of my magnificence? Blinded with nausea by the halo that shines about my head? Who are you talking to? Clearly not me. How many insults, snide comments, and sarcastic personal assaults have I thrown your way? And yet how many have you thrown mine? Shall we count and compare?

I think we're on two different websites. It seems like you're in a typical internet forum, arguing with another axe grinder. Ironically enough, that's one of the points I kept raising initially: this isn't a typical forum where a typical group of strangers get together to discuss things. We're a very specific group of strangers who get to know each other in a very particular way. So let me clear with you about this:

I'm your brother in recovery.

I'm someone with whom you share a deeply personal journey. I'm someone who has access to an intimate, vulnerable part of your life you likely share with few others, if any at all. I'm someone who will celebrate your wins and benchmarks, both large and small. I'm someone who will offer you kindness and support during your darkest, most empty and desperate times. I'm someone who knows you, who gets you, in ways that few others in your life can.

I'm your brother in recovery.

Does that mean we agree on everything? Does that mean we even necessarily like each other? No, it doesn't. It means I have your back in ways that people off this site cannot. It means I share a part of my life with you that the closest people to me only glimpse. It means that this place is important to keep safe for people who aren't as strong as we are. It means you call me out if I'm falling short of doing my part to caretake for this community. And if you fall short it means I damn sure do the same.

That isn't moral superiority. That isn't even judgment. That's support--for you, for me, for this space that joins us together in which we do some pretty godd*amn important work for ourselves.

Why do I bother? Because I'm your brother in recovery.

Can you hear that? Man to man, addict to addict, can you genuinely hear that?

 

Good ol sjw post