I’m not obligated to entertain your fantasies.
When you make a factually provably wrong assertion and then try to hold that up as a viable alternative viewpoint, you are doing nothing more than demanding that I listen to your arguments for your belief in Santa Claus.
Study after study shows pay gaps in gender. Gaps that appear with the first year out of college, before people have married, before “life choices” have had a chance to even kick in. Women do work as well as or even supervise men yet are paid less for being a member of the exact same team, often contributing far more.
So when you try to argue that we must listen to someone wailing that women are not paid less, you are starting from a position that has already been factually disproved in study after study after study.
Likewise with rape. There is no other crime where the victim suddenly becomes the interrogated as when women report a sexual assault, yet police statistics show that false reports of rape are in the same range as false reports of any other crime. Again, this matter has been studied repeatedly, across many police forces, across many geographic regions so why are women automatically suspect when we report a sexual assault but if anyone reports a stolen wallet or car, the treatment is completely different?
You are literally arguing that I have to make room for someone who believes he can turn lead into gold and that I must “respect” that assertion and treat it with kid gloves.
No. Just no. We’re not going to spend time allowing you or any other person to drag falsehoods into the corporate sphere and then demand that your belief in the Easter Bunny be given the same respect as data from scientific studies and surveys.
Your entire rant overlooks that point — that almost everything you decry has been proven, in study after study, to be a real problem. The dialog should be why that is the case and how to change it, not to question it because it makes men, especially white men, uncomfortable.
Your argument that we should critique these ideas respectfully ignores that these ideas have already been critiqued to death and that you bringing them up is not some new fresh viewpoint. You are regurgitating old, disproved ideas just because you like the sound of them. Your demand to treat already disproved ideas with kid gloves is a demand to waste time on things we already know to be false.
You tell me why we should do that. Tell me why without making generalized vague complaints about “political correctness”. We don’t go back in science and treat the ancient Greek idea of four primal elements seriously just because someone raises that question today. We don’t go back in science and treat geocentric claims with the same authority as heliocentric claims.
And that is what you are arguing for, just because some people hold views that are verifiably false and refuse to adjust their own perspective. Neither Google nor anyone else has an obligation to deal with your view that the earth is flat, Mr. Bernier.