you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vulptex[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Most recently, he wants to ban "woke" speech. He already tried to ban it on college campuses. No, not taking it out of the cirriculum in state schools, actually banning it. He has either lost his mind or is controlled opposition, planting radical far-left policies into the conservative platform and playing into the narrative that conservatives are a bunch of bigoted, racist, *phobic fascists. He brags about being the "culture war champion", which should be a huge red flag. If it comes down to him and Biden Harris I'm not voting for either of them.

Isn't he just being a different kind of woke himself by doing this? Isn't he becoming the very thing we swore to defend against?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

I heard he had some kind of Anti-Woke bill, but didn't know much about the specifics. I'd be pretty concerned with the outright banning of any speech on college campuses. Even the curriculum laws are inappropriate for a university, they are adults, not kindergarten students.

I will say this though, there is a problem with wokism on college campuses. When I was getting my degree we would get essay topics about some of these issues, and you would fail if you expressed an unwoke opinion or argued an unwoke point, no matter how good your essay was.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

I will say this though, there is a problem with wokism on college campuses ... you would fail if you expressed an unwoke opinion or argued an unwoke point, no matter how good your essay was.

Translation: I got a bad grade for saying something offensive, even though I thought I wrote it well.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

I'll give you an example.

They loved to talk about women in engineering. They'd show us stats like only 20% of Engineers are women, and only 19% of Engineering grads are women, and use both of these stats to support the idea that women are being discriminated against by tech companies.

I wrote that they were clearly misinterpreting the data. If only 19% of the Engineering graduate hiring pool is women, but 20% of the Engineers are women, their data does not support the conclusion that women are the subject of discriminatory hiring practices in Tech. You can never have 50% women hires if only 19% of the candidates are women. In fact diversity reporting gives clear incentive to hire a woman over a similarly qualified man, which is why at the most desirable tech jobs like Google, the talent is more than 25% women, and they are over-represented.

The problem here is obviously happening much earlier than hiring, and much earlier than college, you have to address this before students choose majors.

I'm clearly correct but I got an F. Imagine getting an F for using data science to interpret the data in the department that does data science. They would rather have me be woke and literally subvert the principles of data science they are supposed to be teaching.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

You're clearly correct, maybe because you are misrepresenting the position a little bit. Regardless;

The problem here is obviously happening much earlier than hiring, and much earlier than college, you have to address this before students choose majors.

Is the correct answer. Incentives toward women for scholarships and other resume-builders are more meaningfully impactful than workplace diversity requirements, in my opinion.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You're clearly correct, maybe because you are misrepresenting the position a little bit. Regardless;

Yes, I was annoyed that they wanted me to parrot their nonsense when their own data didn't support that conclusion. So I took the opposite position, but I don't think I was out of line. I wasn't saying 'fuck bitches', I was saying 'earlier intervention'. My position was better supported than theirs, and I was clearly punished for lack of a woke opinion

[–]Vulptex[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

They won't admit that because the real agenda is just to give women and other "minorities" preferential treatment.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It gets worse than this. If you're white or a man, all their algorithms will be designed to discriminate against you.
When an algorithm fails to discriminate against you sufficiently, then they write articles about how "AI is racist against nonwhites" or "sexist against women" and the rightwingers laughs, "see AI is being neutral", not realizing that the AI is not being neutral, just not hostile enough towards men or whites.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I could turn in a poorly written essay regurgitating the woke opinions and get an easy A, any time I attempted a critical analyses of such an opinion it was unacceptable. The incentives were pretty clear

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Holy moley

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

First of all, it's not a class on not being offensive, so the paper being well-written should be all that counts.

Second, have you seen some colleges? Literally everything is "offensive" at woke colleges. It's where the most hyperwoke, radical SJWs hold the woke olympics. It's a breeding ground for the most insane "progressivism" and cancel culture imaginable. Even 99% of libtards couldn't survive a second there without getting run off and declared a literal Nazi because of a perceived "microagression".