“Ironically, one of these scars seems to be the idea that women are delicate and need to be protected from controversial or offensive ideas. A scar that Google just reinforced further unless, of course, there was evidence of inappropriate work product or employee interactions.”
Do you honestly think this would be your conclusion if the “manifesto” had argued that black people were “biologically unsuited” for engineering jobs?
Because it never ceases to amaze me that SO MANY people equate holding misogynists accountable with “poor, delicate women” needing protection from them. That is not the point. We do need protection from some misogynists, just not because we are especially weak or vulnerable but because misogynistic actions and opinions can very objectively harm us, and for no good reason, at least those of us in a vulnerable position in relation with those holding and enforcing misogynistic views.
But exactly the same would happen to men or to any other group out there, even lions, and I don’t think lions.
The sad truth here is that misogyny doesn’t even bother most people, or not much. I very much doubt that a racist manifesto would have so many people complaining that this idiot didn’t deserve getting fired over it.