Isaac Fields
Aug 8, 2017 · 2 min read

The memo doesn’t seem that discriminatory, in fact it seems the goal is to increase diversity through non-discriminatory means.

“I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more.” GAH! What blatant sexism and racism, amirite?

“Only facts and reason can shed light on these biases, but when it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence. This silence removes any checks against encroaching extremist and authoritarian policies.” I find this part rather enlightening when it comes to how you think silencing dissent is a good idea. Your call for censorship has already been combated with logic, though it seems the people calling the shots at google are as illogical as you.

“The same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness[11], which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn’t harbored the violent leftists protests that we’re seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silence, psychologically unsafe environment.” Both you and google think employees need to feel psychologically safe, and so does the person who wrote the manifesto.

“I hope it’s clear that I’m not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn’t try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).” What is discriminatory about treating people as individuals, rather than as members of a group?

“Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women’s representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts.” This is against discrimination, yet somehow being against discrimination is now bigoted?

“Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive: sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offense and our self censorship, leading to authoritarian policies. Speaking up without the fear of being harshly judged is central to psychological safety, but these practices can remove that safety by judging unintentional transgressions.” What’s wrong with feeling free to speak your mind without being judged for accidentally running afoul of the PC police? How is freedom to say what you think inherently sexist or racist, as your article seems to imply?

Why are you so against a call for fairly increasing workplace diversity?