As I mentioned, bat shit insane is an avenue to notoriety and attention for people with little skill in satisfying their desire for self respect.
As I mentioned, bat shit insane is an avenue to notoriety and attention for people with little skill in satisfying their desire for self respect.CA always has bat shit insane prop propsals out for signatures. It's the nature of the CA prop system to allow all correctly formatted prop proposals to try and collect enough signatures to get on the ballot. The only "approval" process is the correct forms are filled out correctly.
As I mentioned, bat shit insane is an avenue to notoriety and attention for people with little skill in satisfying their desire for self respect.
CA always has bat shit insane prop propsals out for signatures. It's the nature of the CA prop system to allow all correctly formatted prop proposals to try and collect enough signatures to get on the ballot. The only "approval" process is the correct forms are filled out correctly.
M: I disagree. You do not need to a willingness to agree with the culture. You can't dictate people's opinion. You can take action as a company if you do something the company sees as inimical to its culture. Remember the culture at Google seems to be creating an atmosphere where typical biases against women are not voiced in a way that would cause stress or an atmosphere they would perceive as a threat to women working there,
M: I see little difference between a company culture and a company mission statement, goals that are articulated and expected to be perceived and executed by employees. Pinheads are prone to miss this social context, sort of an Asperger's thing, I believe more prevalent in males.
M: You dismiss the fact he got fired and the company still standing behind doing so. It seems quite possible to make a scientific case that Blacks are intellectually inferior to whites and Whites inferior to Asians just by looking at race and IQ scores, a case that with some frequency is made in academic circles. But it will get you fired from a university for making such a case no matter how much you point at one set of data. That is because the likelihood that it is racial bigotry that drives such a claim is more likely than not that it was driven by scientific fidelity to data. You are making a similar case but you don't see it.
M: There are no analogies that are not flawed in some ways. My analogy was an accurate easily visually accessible way to show a parallel to your sort of thinking. You bore in and nitpick when you need to step back and see a bigger picture.
Change your perspective. Imagine that I am right and see if you can figure out a way to see that. Do it for yourself. I don't have to have you agree with me to be happy. I am not worried the world is about to collapse if you don't agree with me. I am not wedded to a need to be right.
Yes, it is clear here that a lot of people have no idea how the proposition system works. This entire thread is dumb.
Would you say this entire thread serves as an example of the thread topic?
Haha I was just editing my post to say that. The explosion of dumbness in this thread does serve as a pretty amusing object lesson in how you are correct.
I meant the contents of most posts in this thread have been dumb, not your OP. Sorry for not being clearer!
Would you say this entire thread serves as an example of the thread topic?
You can't get to that level, but you can judge that level from your level.Yes well, I do not think Google is on my horizon sadly. I do not have the cognitive abilities to get to that level. Sadly, its also true that peer reviewed research is frowned upon at Google. They company may have good intent, but, they are wrong about this topic.
You can't get to that level, but you can judge that level from your level.
You really are a hoot and a half.
God, yes. The duh-version into transgenderism proves it entirely. I mean, go ahead- find a more emotionally loaded & irrational topic for conservatives & I'll bow down before you. Well, other than "Lock her up!".
Do you think you have all the information that Google had about this case?Um, yes. I know that I do not have the skills or ability to get a job at Google.
Anti-Vax
Climate Change denial.
Chemtrails.
False Flag conspiracies.
9/11 Truthers (love the "hologram" believers)
Alt-med beliefs.
Food fears.
GMO fears.
WiFi fears.
Jade rocks up your vajayjay.
Flat Earth
Mental Illness denial
AIDS denialism
Psychology denialism.
All of it identical science denial.
All of it a rejection of intellectualism and expertise.
All of it examples of Dunning Kruger.
Every anti-intellectualist looks for a foot in the door to try and tear down all of it. It seems in this thread they think that gender studies is an opportunity to do just that.
Do you think you have all the information that Google had about this case?
I ask because you're judging their choice to terminate the guy and making a blanket statement that they don't value peer-reviewed research.
This has been a very difficult time. I wanted to provide an update on the memo that was circulated over this past week.
First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace. Our job is to build great products for users that make a difference in their lives. To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects “each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.”
The memo has clearly impacted our co-workers, some of whom are hurting and feel judged based on their gender. Our co-workers shouldn’t have to worry that each time they open their mouths to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo states, being “agreeable” rather than “assertive,” showing a “lower stress tolerance,” or being “neurotic.”
At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint). They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent. So to be clear again, many points raised in the memo—such as the portions criticizing Google’s trainings, questioning the role of ideology in the workplace, and debating whether programs for women and underserved groups are sufficiently open to all—are important topics. The author had a right to express their views on those topics—we encourage an environment in which people can do this and it remains our policy to not take action against anyone for prompting these discussions.
The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree—while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct. I’d encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own. I will be doing the same.
I have been on work related travel in Africa and Europe the past couple of weeks and had just started my family vacation here this week. I have decided to return tomorrow as clearly there’s a lot more to discuss as a group—including how we create a more inclusive environment for all.
Here is my take on gender studies:
I do not know nearly enough to form an independent opinion on the matter. Nor does anyone in this thread.
Therefore, logically and rationally I must defer to the expertise and consensus in science on the subject.
Period.
Do you think you have all the information that Google had about this case?
I ask because you're judging their choice to terminate the guy and making a blanket statement that they don't value peer-reviewed research.
Do you think you have all the information that Google had about this case?
I ask because you're judging their choice to terminate the guy and making a blanket statement that they don't value peer-reviewed research.
@interchange absolutely can. That is why I requested the only practicing psychologist on this forum to comment.
Predictions were that that testosterone would rise at puberty to moderate levels, which supported reproductive physiology and behavior. Sexual arousal and challenges involving young males would raise testosterone levels further. In turn, this would facilitate direct competitive behavior, including aggression.
Conclusions Testosterone administration, 600 mg/wk increased ratings of manic symptoms in normal men. This effect, however, was not uniform across individuals; most showed little psychological change, whereas a few developed prominent effects.
Young men experience peaks in criminalbehavior and testosterone production at around the same ages. When they marry, men experience a decline in both testosterone production and criminal offending when compared with single men of the same age.
It seems that marriage has a civilizing effect on men because it reduces their testosterone levels.
Since the 1980s, business leaders have used personality tests and behavioral predictors to better understand themselves and their team members. With the goal of maximizing team performance, understanding how differing management and work styles interact provides an invaluable springboard for forward movement; simply knowing how to communicate effectively with other team members can greatly increase the success of collaborative efforts and minimize conflict. As with any science, however, incomplete information can create problems rather than solutions.
With few exceptions, leadership training programs have often painted a somewhat skewed picture of the quintessential successful leader: decisive, visionary, passionate and, all too often, impatient and brash (although this is sometimes described as “direct”). Some of the reasoning behind the notion that success requires an element of abrasiveness arose from early confusion of the terms “aggressive” versus “assertive.”
Striving to increase workplace diversity is not an empty slogan — it is a good business decision. A 2015 McKinsey report on 366 public companies found that those in the top quartile for ethnic and racial diversity in management were 35% more likely to have financial returns above their industry mean, and those in the top quartile for gender diversity were 15% more likely to have returns above the industry mean.
In a global analysis of 2,400 companies conducted by Credit Suisse, organizations with at least one female board member yielded higher return on equity and higher net income growth than those that did not have any women on the board.
In recent years a body of research has revealed another, more nuanced benefit of workplace diversity: nonhomogenous teams are simply smarter. Working with people who are different from you may challenge your brain to overcome its stale ways of thinking and sharpen its performance. Let’s dig into why diverse teams are smarter.
Anyone that tires to make the case that blacks are intellectually inferior because of their average IQ score would be wrong. IQ, while being a good at measuring mental abilities is not great at measuring all things. I have a higher IQ than my GF, but I and almost everyone that knows US would say she is smarter in the broader sense of the word. My greatest strength is in conceptual reasoning but even that is only in the 80%. If anyone tries to just measure on IQ, they will miss a great many things.
The very premise of this thread is a perfect example of Dunning Kruger effect imo.Anti-Vax
Climate Change denial.
Chemtrails.
False Flag conspiracies.
9/11 Truthers (love the "hologram" believers)
Alt-med beliefs.
Food fears.
GMO fears.
WiFi fears.
Jade rocks up your vajayjay.
Flat Earth
Mental Illness denial
AIDS denialism
Psychology denialism.
Moon Landing denialism (thanks brad)
Space denialism in general (see flat earth)
All of it identical science denial.
All of it a rejection of intellectualism and expertise.
All of it examples of Dunning Kruger.
Every anti-intellectualist looks for a foot in the door to try and tear down all of it. It seems in this thread they think that gender studies is an opportunity to do just that.
Considering the fact that gender identification may extend to biological as well and mental issues, a lone psychologist is not enough. You need a consensus of psychiatry and psychology.
Anything other than that is merely an uninformed or partially informed opinion.
The fact of the matter is this subject is still being studied. The world's greatest experts have not yet reached a consensus. So who the fuck is anyone on this board to make any determination at all?
Dunning Kruger.
The very premise of this thread is a perfect example of Dunning Kruger effect imo.
I don't know. I noticed that recently Schumer and McConnell had some great things to say about each other indicating to me there may yet be some political self awareness that sets a floor to how deeply disgusting politicians may be willing to go. I also believe that stress levels and conservatism track parallel. I believe too that personal info devices and an ability to express oneself to an audience facilitates showcasing the worst of our natures as being an asshole starts to feel safe. Also I have seen data indicating we are still advancing toward liberal ideals on a world wide scale. Perhaps most importantly I believe we created God in our true image with new copies appearing every time a child is born.I am becoming lonely. There are more people and fewer humans.