anti-diversity — not targeting person as your statement says
sexist — not targeting person as your statement says
racist — stating blacks have lower cognitive ability is racist, no? or are you defending saying blacks have lower cognitive ability? its one or the other. plus, its still not targeting the person.
sexist — not targeting the person
racists — still not attacking said individual, just referring to racists as a group
sexists — still not attacking said individual, just referring to sexists as a group
sexism — again, not attacking individual
racism — again, not attacking individual
catastrophic failure — this is so far the closest thing to a possible attack on the individual, but i would say far from being a slur, but whatever, i’ll grant you this one just to favor your argument since you aren’t here to defend the view point.
racists — again, still not attacking individual
sexists — again, still not attacking individual
bigots — i’m beginning to feel like a broken record
demeaning, insulting ridiculing — these three words aren’t even remotely pointing in the direction of the author of the memo
bigots, racism, sexism,hatred,bigotry, hatred, bigotry, bigots, sexism, racism, bigotry, bigotry
ok, i got tired of it. did you read it or only scan the article? because if you read it, you’ll be admitting you have zero reading comprehension because those words weren’t targeting that individual. this article attacked google more than it did the author. nice try though in trying to make a certain group seem like a victim. what’s the word folks on the right like using on the internet these days? virtue signaling? am i using that right. i’m not sure. but clearly, something triggered you. (did i use that term right… i admit i can’t follow the new slang these days).
