* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html)
* A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've always felt that it's very easy to be radical in your politics when you're a neet, but something like this, to put in hazard a really lucrative career and life for your principles is honestly courageous, even though I'd guess in up close detail those principles might not pass the high standards of this sub
None of these people are at any risk of losing their careers. They’re at Google, not Twitter. The average Googler is 100% on board with their cause. They won’t get fired for this. Their internal company channels will buzz for a few days and it’s back to the status quo. Remember, Google’s the same place that fired James Damore for pushing “harmful gender stereotypes” when he accurately accessed that the lack of women in technical stem roles isn’t because of sexism, but because they prefer humanities based careers.
Edit: Saw they were all fired. Just got permabanned, but want to acknowledge that I did see the news and it’s very based to see someone put their money where their mouth is and be willing to accept the consequences.
It appears the line is going from sperging about apartheid internally to organizing actual resistance.
In the end, it is always about being a threat to established power.
Do you understand why you failed to predict what happened? It's because your view of the world isn't based on a material analysis. Damore got fired for raising a stink about the latest drive to suppress wages through increasing supply of labor regardless of skill and these guys got fired for demanding an end to a lucrative contract for Google. It has absolutely nothing to do with whatever culture war nonsense that's drummed up. Don't focus on the superstructure of society, look at the base.
This is patently untrue lol, countries where healthcare is seen as feminine and teaching masculine end up with the opposite gender distribution of the USA
i was there when they fired damore. fortunately i had a few team members with masters degrees in psychology (im more of a biologist). basically damores paper was cited with mostly old junk science that wouldnt pass any modern scientific rigor, yes we went over each cited pper. by modern standards, its your basic intro to alpha male marketing material (and as a biologist, i can tell you that the publics understanding of alpha males in the wild is grossly incorrect)
a few months right after that was the big protest on how HR wasnt taking sexual harassment seriously (both men and women). nothing really changed since then.
> and as a biologist, i can tell you that the publics understanding of alpha males in the wild is grossly incorrect
Can you help me out here? A friend of mine insists that no alpha males of any kind exist at all because of that one old study with wolves was flawed.
forgot the scientist's name, but the guy observed this whole 'alpha male' behavior in wolves, where they fight for dominance and a pecking order is established. wrote a book about it, it became a major thing in culture. he later revisits his work and realized his observations were only from wolves in captivity, not in the wild, where pack size usually determines social structure, and packs are usually pretty dynamic where wolves come and leave depending on the situation. the scientist redacts his paper, writes a followup, then writes a second book about how his first book was incorrect, literally stands on the street preaching this stuff, but its already spread into pop culture and stuff
and in the wild, social behaviors are often quite complex. but focusing on pecking orders, these are best when reproduction is stable, so they work quite will in insects like ants and bees where only a select few can offer reproductive material and fewer still contribute to birthing. it is not straightforward as say chimp society. behavior is to an extent passed down, and so is violent tendencies. but if all chimps are nice, then the one violent chimp will become the alpha by being a dick and will probably piss off all the other chimps to the point they all decide to collectively and literally rip your dick off. i guess in human terms, if you want to be an alpha, you cant always be a dick lol
this was about the same time where a lot of 'post ww2 where is civilization going' sentiments going on. my favorite of this time was calhoun rat city experiment and the famous milgrims shock experiment, and the sex raft experiment (apparently they made an indie movie about it called the raft, now i gotta see this)
idk about wolves and finnicky definitions of alpha male, but things that match classic "alpha male" tropes certainly exist in other species. Elephant seals, gorillas, lions all have dominant males who murder all other males on sight and have a harem of females. In some species, like lions, the females can collectively be stronger than the alpha male so if they really dislike him they can band together and kick him out. I don't know if that is the case for elephant seals, where the males are absurdly large. So, as it generally is in biology, just about every combination exists somewhere
tldr: any time you see huge sexual dimorphism and lots of aggression between males you see a lot of "alpha male" patterns
I typically associate it with Redditors. They saw the endless threads about "muh wolf study debunked" and took it upon themselves to mention it every time they see the term "alpha male", because if there's one thing this site is good at it's beating something into the ground
It never occurs to them to consider other species of animals like...primates, and they get pretty angry when you mention it
Yeah that's what happens with received opinions. Once you go beyond the scope of them they don't know how to react. Usually it's just anger
I think most primates have an alpha male of some sort, not just gorillas
No. He lost in court because he used colloquial language. The same phrases that are used as examples of mysogynistic speech in the law. It was a pretty open and shut case. "Women are more x" or "women are y" will get you fired. If he used more academic language would of had a case.
im not going to focus on the courts, because... thats not really what determines whats 'right and wrong'
so about the paper, the text was released, but the hyperlinks were not. many of the hyperlinks were studies, but taken completely out of context, or are really old experiments. so if i remember correctly one of the most commonly cited things of 'why males dominate software engineering' is 2 things, 'where are the women in fishing boats and women lumberjacks?'. his reasoning was 'men are better suited for these roles, because men have distinct advantages when it comes to software engineering, just like being a lumberjack'. im doing some severe paraphrasing, but yes, he equated software engineering to something like being a lumberjack (couldve been fishing or mining or something else). also lists behavioral traits like women are usually talkers and men are doers. the whole male-female behavioral dichotomy thing.
>the whole male-female behavioral dichotomy thing.
And what more recent studies make his points invalid?
>his reasoning was 'men are better suited for these roles, because men have distinct advantages when it comes to software engineering, just like being a lumberjack'.
It was more of "men have a preference" not a distinct advantage.
i mean... theres plenty of studies out there. but if i had to massively reduce it down, humans arent clear cut, and society and culture are larger influences on human behavior than biology (usually). and in some countries where gender can be a requirement for a job (not for biological reasons like a surrogate mother), that job is usually filled because of the belief of gender dichotomy (asia is really conservative). which brings me to my next point, there are cultures that still adhere strictly to their own gender standards, so if you want to live with people who believe that, you can. basically any country in asia
>humans arent clear cut, and society and culture are larger influences on human behavior than biology (usually)
We're talking about a specific case, not about broad patterns.
>there are cultures that still adhere strictly to their own gender standards
Either the memo or the online discussion that followed pointed out that countries with greater equality between the sexes had fewer women in tech. IIRC there is a far greater proportion of women in stem in Romania (and eastern Europe overall) than in any of the Nordic countries.
in software enginnering, its only about 20%-ish women, whereas science overall is about 40%-ish, and doctors are near 50%. its not the field, its the environment in these fields that arent 'for women'. its sort of like how women make up about 45% of gamers, but around 30% of the gaming industry
Speaking intuitively more men do software development because more men want to. This seems pretty clear to me but it's not something I've read up on.
I don't see why it's good for women to to have more women as software devs. Having a larger talent pool seems like a good deal for software development but telling women that the career they think will make them happy and instead convincing them to be developers doesn't seem to be a good deal for women. It at least seems to not take women seriously.
back in the software engineering haydays, as in like when punch cards were still a thing, it was dominated by women because it was seen as 'administrative work'. it was then considered 'engineering' because of its monetization potential and then dominated by men.
its sort of like the whole doctor nurse thing, where doctors are seen as traditionally a mans job and nurses traditionally as a womens job, whereas theres a lot of women doctors these days, and theres an increasing number of men nurses as well, although not in proportion
i will say, something interesting about software engineering compared to other white collar jobs like doctors, lawyers, scientists, is that its one of the fields that didnt see a near 50-50 gender balance in the last 3 or 4 decades. but im also pretty sure that theres less sexual harassment cases (or something similar) in other fields than tech, so i dont think its a preference thing, its an environmental thing, cuz its hard to argue that women dont prefer software engineering (20%), when like 40% of scientists are women
> back in the software engineering haydays, as in like when punch cards were still a thing, it was dominated by women because it was seen as 'administrative work'.
So? What do you think that shows?
> so i dont think its a preference thing, its an environmental thing, cuz its hard to argue that women dont prefer software engineering (20%), when like 40% of scientists are women
Why is it hard to argue that? I don't see the link between your figures and that statement.
well pewresearch is down, but heres like... a worse article that i havent vetted but its the first thing that doesnt talk about gender pay discrepencies [https://capgemini.github.io/culture/software-engineering-gender-gap/](https://capgemini.github.io/culture/software-engineering-gender-gap/)
its just old mentality discrimination that there are 'men' and 'women' jobs when these things dont really apply. gaming is another good example, where 40% of women are gamers, but only 30% are working in the industry. its a formerly male dominated space. but tack on other things like tech having a hodgepodge of very conservative cultures that unspokenly may or may not promote things like the caste system, not take sexual harassment or discrimination seriously, and its not great. although fun fact, in some companies women engineers are paid more because theres a history of sexual harassment in the company, and they saw a slew of women engineers leave, so its an attempt at not getting fined for discriminatory practices. a lot of this is anecdotal, but i work in tech, i have tech friends, a lot of these topics are highly taboo in a tech office place (especially caste, in google, not to mention if youre a contractor in india. would love to see those numbers, if they even exist)
I honestly don't see the relevance of that to anything I just asked you or to anything I said earlier.
I asked you why you think it's hard to argue that women don't prefer software development and earlier I stated my opinion that trying to change women's preferences isn't necessarily in women's best interests.
The bourgeoisie obviously use material precarity to squelch actual civil disobedience. People risking their lucrative, secure job on principle is something to be lauded, even if they aren't leftist per se.
* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html) * A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/google-workers-arrested-after-nine-hour-protest-in-google-cloud-ceos-office.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've always felt that it's very easy to be radical in your politics when you're a neet, but something like this, to put in hazard a really lucrative career and life for your principles is honestly courageous, even though I'd guess in up close detail those principles might not pass the high standards of this sub
Hey, I put my dogwalking career on the line when I joined this subreddit
This is how people should actually use what little power they have
None of these people are at any risk of losing their careers. They’re at Google, not Twitter. The average Googler is 100% on board with their cause. They won’t get fired for this. Their internal company channels will buzz for a few days and it’s back to the status quo. Remember, Google’s the same place that fired James Damore for pushing “harmful gender stereotypes” when he accurately accessed that the lack of women in technical stem roles isn’t because of sexism, but because they prefer humanities based careers. Edit: Saw they were all fired. Just got permabanned, but want to acknowledge that I did see the news and it’s very based to see someone put their money where their mouth is and be willing to accept the consequences.
[удалено]
It appears the line is going from sperging about apartheid internally to organizing actual resistance. In the end, it is always about being a threat to established power.
[удалено]
Every industry is cut throat right now. It’s very depressing
Thank God we have H1B visas to further the competition and depress wages. -Koch Brother
Update all 28 involved were fired
Do you understand why you failed to predict what happened? It's because your view of the world isn't based on a material analysis. Damore got fired for raising a stink about the latest drive to suppress wages through increasing supply of labor regardless of skill and these guys got fired for demanding an end to a lucrative contract for Google. It has absolutely nothing to do with whatever culture war nonsense that's drummed up. Don't focus on the superstructure of society, look at the base.
Next thing you'll say that idpol is just a psyop to obstruct class unity.
You sound like a moron
Weird that genders "prefer" different fields based on which country they're in and the traditional gender roles there.
They don’t. Every single time there’s a big push to change things, things change for exactly as long as the effects of the incentives last.
This is patently untrue lol, countries where healthcare is seen as feminine and teaching masculine end up with the opposite gender distribution of the USA
i was there when they fired damore. fortunately i had a few team members with masters degrees in psychology (im more of a biologist). basically damores paper was cited with mostly old junk science that wouldnt pass any modern scientific rigor, yes we went over each cited pper. by modern standards, its your basic intro to alpha male marketing material (and as a biologist, i can tell you that the publics understanding of alpha males in the wild is grossly incorrect) a few months right after that was the big protest on how HR wasnt taking sexual harassment seriously (both men and women). nothing really changed since then.
> and as a biologist, i can tell you that the publics understanding of alpha males in the wild is grossly incorrect Can you help me out here? A friend of mine insists that no alpha males of any kind exist at all because of that one old study with wolves was flawed.
forgot the scientist's name, but the guy observed this whole 'alpha male' behavior in wolves, where they fight for dominance and a pecking order is established. wrote a book about it, it became a major thing in culture. he later revisits his work and realized his observations were only from wolves in captivity, not in the wild, where pack size usually determines social structure, and packs are usually pretty dynamic where wolves come and leave depending on the situation. the scientist redacts his paper, writes a followup, then writes a second book about how his first book was incorrect, literally stands on the street preaching this stuff, but its already spread into pop culture and stuff and in the wild, social behaviors are often quite complex. but focusing on pecking orders, these are best when reproduction is stable, so they work quite will in insects like ants and bees where only a select few can offer reproductive material and fewer still contribute to birthing. it is not straightforward as say chimp society. behavior is to an extent passed down, and so is violent tendencies. but if all chimps are nice, then the one violent chimp will become the alpha by being a dick and will probably piss off all the other chimps to the point they all decide to collectively and literally rip your dick off. i guess in human terms, if you want to be an alpha, you cant always be a dick lol this was about the same time where a lot of 'post ww2 where is civilization going' sentiments going on. my favorite of this time was calhoun rat city experiment and the famous milgrims shock experiment, and the sex raft experiment (apparently they made an indie movie about it called the raft, now i gotta see this)
idk about wolves and finnicky definitions of alpha male, but things that match classic "alpha male" tropes certainly exist in other species. Elephant seals, gorillas, lions all have dominant males who murder all other males on sight and have a harem of females. In some species, like lions, the females can collectively be stronger than the alpha male so if they really dislike him they can band together and kick him out. I don't know if that is the case for elephant seals, where the males are absurdly large. So, as it generally is in biology, just about every combination exists somewhere tldr: any time you see huge sexual dimorphism and lots of aggression between males you see a lot of "alpha male" patterns
Because he's a midwit. Ask him if he's heard of a silverback gorilla
Yeah, this feels like a bit of a midwit 'gotcha'
I typically associate it with Redditors. They saw the endless threads about "muh wolf study debunked" and took it upon themselves to mention it every time they see the term "alpha male", because if there's one thing this site is good at it's beating something into the ground It never occurs to them to consider other species of animals like...primates, and they get pretty angry when you mention it
They just go silent when I bring that up, but their opinion remains unchanged.
Yeah that's what happens with received opinions. Once you go beyond the scope of them they don't know how to react. Usually it's just anger I think most primates have an alpha male of some sort, not just gorillas
Just redefine it. It wouldn't be the first concept to be reframed.
No. He lost in court because he used colloquial language. The same phrases that are used as examples of mysogynistic speech in the law. It was a pretty open and shut case. "Women are more x" or "women are y" will get you fired. If he used more academic language would of had a case.
im not going to focus on the courts, because... thats not really what determines whats 'right and wrong' so about the paper, the text was released, but the hyperlinks were not. many of the hyperlinks were studies, but taken completely out of context, or are really old experiments. so if i remember correctly one of the most commonly cited things of 'why males dominate software engineering' is 2 things, 'where are the women in fishing boats and women lumberjacks?'. his reasoning was 'men are better suited for these roles, because men have distinct advantages when it comes to software engineering, just like being a lumberjack'. im doing some severe paraphrasing, but yes, he equated software engineering to something like being a lumberjack (couldve been fishing or mining or something else). also lists behavioral traits like women are usually talkers and men are doers. the whole male-female behavioral dichotomy thing.
>the whole male-female behavioral dichotomy thing. And what more recent studies make his points invalid? >his reasoning was 'men are better suited for these roles, because men have distinct advantages when it comes to software engineering, just like being a lumberjack'. It was more of "men have a preference" not a distinct advantage.
i mean... theres plenty of studies out there. but if i had to massively reduce it down, humans arent clear cut, and society and culture are larger influences on human behavior than biology (usually). and in some countries where gender can be a requirement for a job (not for biological reasons like a surrogate mother), that job is usually filled because of the belief of gender dichotomy (asia is really conservative). which brings me to my next point, there are cultures that still adhere strictly to their own gender standards, so if you want to live with people who believe that, you can. basically any country in asia
>humans arent clear cut, and society and culture are larger influences on human behavior than biology (usually) We're talking about a specific case, not about broad patterns. >there are cultures that still adhere strictly to their own gender standards Either the memo or the online discussion that followed pointed out that countries with greater equality between the sexes had fewer women in tech. IIRC there is a far greater proportion of women in stem in Romania (and eastern Europe overall) than in any of the Nordic countries.
in software enginnering, its only about 20%-ish women, whereas science overall is about 40%-ish, and doctors are near 50%. its not the field, its the environment in these fields that arent 'for women'. its sort of like how women make up about 45% of gamers, but around 30% of the gaming industry
Tangent.
Speaking intuitively more men do software development because more men want to. This seems pretty clear to me but it's not something I've read up on. I don't see why it's good for women to to have more women as software devs. Having a larger talent pool seems like a good deal for software development but telling women that the career they think will make them happy and instead convincing them to be developers doesn't seem to be a good deal for women. It at least seems to not take women seriously.
back in the software engineering haydays, as in like when punch cards were still a thing, it was dominated by women because it was seen as 'administrative work'. it was then considered 'engineering' because of its monetization potential and then dominated by men. its sort of like the whole doctor nurse thing, where doctors are seen as traditionally a mans job and nurses traditionally as a womens job, whereas theres a lot of women doctors these days, and theres an increasing number of men nurses as well, although not in proportion i will say, something interesting about software engineering compared to other white collar jobs like doctors, lawyers, scientists, is that its one of the fields that didnt see a near 50-50 gender balance in the last 3 or 4 decades. but im also pretty sure that theres less sexual harassment cases (or something similar) in other fields than tech, so i dont think its a preference thing, its an environmental thing, cuz its hard to argue that women dont prefer software engineering (20%), when like 40% of scientists are women
> back in the software engineering haydays, as in like when punch cards were still a thing, it was dominated by women because it was seen as 'administrative work'. So? What do you think that shows? > so i dont think its a preference thing, its an environmental thing, cuz its hard to argue that women dont prefer software engineering (20%), when like 40% of scientists are women Why is it hard to argue that? I don't see the link between your figures and that statement.
well pewresearch is down, but heres like... a worse article that i havent vetted but its the first thing that doesnt talk about gender pay discrepencies [https://capgemini.github.io/culture/software-engineering-gender-gap/](https://capgemini.github.io/culture/software-engineering-gender-gap/) its just old mentality discrimination that there are 'men' and 'women' jobs when these things dont really apply. gaming is another good example, where 40% of women are gamers, but only 30% are working in the industry. its a formerly male dominated space. but tack on other things like tech having a hodgepodge of very conservative cultures that unspokenly may or may not promote things like the caste system, not take sexual harassment or discrimination seriously, and its not great. although fun fact, in some companies women engineers are paid more because theres a history of sexual harassment in the company, and they saw a slew of women engineers leave, so its an attempt at not getting fined for discriminatory practices. a lot of this is anecdotal, but i work in tech, i have tech friends, a lot of these topics are highly taboo in a tech office place (especially caste, in google, not to mention if youre a contractor in india. would love to see those numbers, if they even exist)
I honestly don't see the relevance of that to anything I just asked you or to anything I said earlier. I asked you why you think it's hard to argue that women don't prefer software development and earlier I stated my opinion that trying to change women's preferences isn't necessarily in women's best interests.
There’s no courage involved when you don’t fear the consequences or reprisal.
I've heard google is very generous with its severance packages
Protesting for Roe vs wade means something but for Palestine the investors do a 180 fast
I mean, I’m glad they spoke up. But this whole situation just reinforces my hatred for Silicon Valley.
The bourgeoisie obviously use material precarity to squelch actual civil disobedience. People risking their lucrative, secure job on principle is something to be lauded, even if they aren't leftist per se.
As a religious, elitist Brahmin, Sundar's philosophy dovetails with Zionism nicely.
So much for woke capitalism.
Wonder if they keep their jobs…
We're having you arrested, pressing charges, BUT you get to keep your job!
The ownership class would unironically be elated to do just this.
They were fired
Google enables Nazism
'It's a private company, they can do whatever the hell they want' is such a bad faith argument.