There are many, many books in the world. Only very few of them are good. I don't know the percentages - perhaps 0.001%%

The good books are worth reading, but they are difficult to find.

As for information from web sites vs information from books: some books are just the content from web sites blown up into book format. So there is no general rule of "books are better than web sites", either.

Even though I am a fast reader (I think), I find many books too wordy.

I actually read the memo by Damore.

But OK, "batshit crazy" goes more for the "movement" as a whole. This is just crazy. Or maybe just legal weirdness?

If a company publicly hires James Damore now, SJWs will probably launch a campaign against that company sooner or later, so I wonder how employable he is these days?

It's only because they don't have enough power yet that more people haven't died.

Analogy to the Holocaust: of course it is not the same thing, I was using an extreme example to make the point obvious.

Nevertheless, SJWs are not a force of good in the world. And "proactive social justice", as I said, is just a way to mark the territory and grasp power.

""When you are used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.""

That's just a lame bullshit excuse to not look at what is actually happening. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter if you do it in the name of good or not. If you prefer to hire non-white female people, you are racist and sexist. It's absurd that those same racist and sexist people then get to send normal people to diversity training and accuse them of being racist.

If you look at individuals, the injustice of the "proactive social justice" approach is patently obvious.

I am emotionally charged on that subject, yes - but that is after years of dealing with it.

I think Damore made a pretty good effort at putting his thoughts into rational discussion points, and it didn't help. I think to make any headyway on that topic, if it is possible at all, will require psychology, not rational arguments.

However, as I said, I think Google is entitled to do it in their own way. I just personally don't want to work for a company that doesn't employ rational thought and discussion for trying to solve problems.

I am not proposing to implement a law that forces companies to allow open discussions. I am just saying I personally don't want to work there.

Diversity training and safety - I wrote it elsewhere. It signals "this is SJW territory". In a similar vein you could say "why does a Swastika tattoo make you feel unsafe? Just don't say you are Jewish or homosexual".

I am stating the fact that I would feel unsafe working for a company like Google. Whether my feeling of being unsafe is warranted is up for discussion. That I have the feeling (or expect to have it) is a fact.

By the way, forcing people through diversity training is also like that: it is saying "you are racist and need to be reprogrammed". That is likewise not a good entry for discussion. Except that compared to my comment on an internet forum, it is official company policy.

Indoctrinating people on why they should behave in a certain way is a different matter. And again, the insult of assuming employees are in need of such training.

I don't claim to have a recipe for converting racists. Maybe a good start would be not to hire them in the first place?

This statement by the NBL just proves to me that the NBL is a batshit crazy untrustworthy institution. (Add the NBL to the list of places I wouldn't want to work for...).

I guess that is just the modern world, people have so different views (perspectives) that no reconciliation seems possible.

In any case, no need to discuss the Damore memo again, I just wanted to point out that there are different sides, and these recent articles seem to represent only one side.

Good point. I guess what feels particularly unfair to me is that (afaik) Damore published his paper on an internal board, after having been encouraged to state his opinions in a diversity training session. He didn't start out accusing Google publicly. Also, another bit that feels unfair to me is the interpretation of his memo as "hateful".

Other than that - I personally think companies should be allowed to fire whoever they want. Them firing Damore (among other things) just makes them a company I don't want to work for.

Nothing against AirBnB, it might be a fine, solid company doing a good job. But what about them is inspiring?

A couple of people are unhappy, out of a workforce of 100000. So what?

It also mostly seems to be political reasons. I would imagine a lot of people working for Google just want to do a good job for a good salary, not make Google a vehicle for their political opinions.

I think people pushing their political agenda within a company tend to harm the company and it should therefore be ok to fire them.

That said, I haven't wanted to work for Google for years. But I am from the opposite side from these veterans. I felt it was very unjust when James Damore was fired, and I really don't want to work at a place that distrusts its workers so much that it forces them to go through diversity trainings and things like that. I would feel "unsafe" at Google.

Not that the situation couldn't be improved, though.