SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a stunning example of failure to understand the meaning of the word equality, Github's "social impact team" is now actively discriminating against people based on gender and skin color; white women in particular:
One insider criticized GitHub's "social impact team," which is in charge of figuring out how to use the product to tackle social issues, including diversity within the company itself. It's led by Nicole Sanchez, vice president of social impact, who joined GitHub in May after working as a diversity consultant.
While people inside the company approve of the goal to hire a more diverse workforce, some think the team is contributing to the internal cultural battle.
"They are trying to control culture, interviewing and firing. Scary times at the company without a seasoned leader. While their efforts are admirable it is very hard to even interview people who are 'white' which makes things challenging," this person said.
Sanchez is known for some strong views about diversity. She wrote an article for USA Today shortly before she joined GitHub titled, "More white women does not equal tech diversity."
At one diversity training talk held at a different company and geared toward people of color, she came on a bit stronger with a point that says, "Some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women."
From a site policy standpoint, this really makes me want to argue for finding another host for our rehash repository, enormous pain in the ass though that would be.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday February 09 2016, @12:49AM
Still, it clearly describes something that needs a name.
So if it needs a name, why not use the accepted one, SJW. Everybody knows what is being referred to and that is the point of language for the Right. We use language to communicate ideas clearly. On the Left the use of language is to not speak clearly, which is why they use NewSpeak. We should demand political debate use language as clear and unambiguous as an RFC even if a delicate snowflake gets triggered occasionally. If the emotionally unstable can't handle adult conversation the solution is to tell them to disengage, not to demand everyone restrict their communication to avoid triggering a child. (where 'child' these days can include a 40y/o intersectional studies major who hasn't managed to graduate yet)
It also has the bonus of being historically accurate. "Social Justice" has been a thing for a longtime. A quick search in Kirk's _The Conservative Mind_ (one advantage of ebooks vs paper, especially paper without a very good index) gets a first hit on a reference to it in use as early as 1889, and by the usage it assumes all readers already know what it means. The SJWs themselves were calling themselves "Social Justice Warriors" and "Warriors|Crusaders for Social Justice" and variations for at least a decade or two. It was when their opponents distilled it down to an acronym, gave it a negative connotation and managed to make that negative meaning stick that they suddenly declared it problematic. Just like the rotation between Communist, Socialist, Progressive, Liberal, and back to Progressive as people associated a word with failed policy and suddenly calling someone that word, a word any search will turn up thousands of hits on the target associating themselves with, was suddenly impolite. When you are taking return fire it only means you are over a defended target so pour it in.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday February 09 2016, @04:33AM
So if it needs a name, why not use the accepted one, SJW. Everybody knows what is being referred to and that is the point of language for the Right.
And this is why you fail! "Death tax"? "Trickle down"? All these Frank Luntz attempts at the Big Lie technique are well past their sell-by date. No one knows what is being referred to by the "SJW" appellation, other than Right-wing nut-jobs disagree with whatever it is that it is supposed to mean. At least when you say "right-wing nut-job" people say, "Oh, you mean like jmorris?". So at least that term has reference.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday February 09 2016, @04:56AM
Like I said, right over the target! So BOMBS AWAY!
No one knows what is being referred to by the "SJW" appellation...
Oh, I see. You are just trying to stop us from looking foolish when we start talking about something nobody will know what the heck we are going on about. Riiight. Totally believe that one. Those who have been under a rock and didn't read anything about GamerGate, the kerfluffle over the Hugo awards, any other story about political correctness run amok in the last year or so where the term has moved into mainstream usage and has managed to not watch the last season of South Park AND plus on top of all that are so dim witted can't figure it out from the context or use that new fangled Google thing. So other than the more low info of your fellow Prog drones, everyone else should be up to speed enough to follow the conversation.
If the term didn't cause pain you would not squeal so loudly. If using it actually harmed the speaker you would be keeping your trap shut and allowing your enemies to self immolate.
And this is why you fail! "Death tax"?
You die, the government taxes it. Death Tax, a tax on dying. Where does this chain of logic break down over in your universe?
"Trickle down"? All these Frank Luntz attempts...
Did your mother drop you when you were a baby? Trickle down a Luntz creation? It was popularized long before Mr. Luntz entered political life. "Trickle down" probably originated with Will Rogers and is a disparaging term used by Progs to discredit Laissez faire economics.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday February 09 2016, @05:17AM
You die, the government taxes it. Death Tax, a tax on dying. Where does this chain of logic break down over in your universe?
What, pray tell, is the return address on your tax form when you have to file this "death tax"? Next you will be insisting that the Tea(bagger) Party was a real thing and not just a Dick Armey! Oh, jmorris, you are soo funny! Point remains, however, SJW is a meaningless apellation. Political correctness just means being polite in pubic venues. Taxes are the price we pay for civilization. Never let a good man down. And buy low and sell high. Reagan is dead.
(Score: 2) by julian on Wednesday February 10 2016, @07:28PM
Conservatives think that when you die with outstanding tax debt and the Govt takes what you owe from your estate that this is a "death tax".
As for political correctness, it's not mere politeness; it's enforced politeness with some very nasty consequences for trespassing those fluid rules of etiquette. The rules are also defined by a group who is hostile and bigoted against men, Europeans, Western Enlightenment values, political conservatives, those who oppose Islamism, and many others in a growing list of unpersons.
I'm not against politeness in general, broadly construed. I am against attacking someone's career, private life, and ability to function in society for violating those rules. If someone is rude to me, I avoid them, and that's all I have any right to do. I don't launch a crusade to excommunicate them from civilization. I see the regressive left doing this all the time now and it's disturbing. There are even times when I myself want to be impolite impolitic for effect. There's a place for it, and we're poorer culturally if we lose that option in the name of comfort.