Philipp Pfeiffenberger It was a really shitty analysis. No mention of social factors that are turning women off the field, jumping from “there are some bio differences therefore we should not expect 50/50” to “we should stop working towards equality”…
Like · Reply · 13 · August 14 at 5:07pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I would argue if it was shitty an analysis it wouldn’t have triggered the debate it has. To the contrary, it brought up an important conversations that was being shamed out of existence.
Yes, he didn’t do a great job of addressing social factors turning women off to the field, but perhaps that’s because that angle was overly covered by the incumbent institutions at Google, like the diversity training he attended that inspired the memo.
A proper analysis of nearly any human endeavor would take into account at least three perspectives: Biological, Psychological and Sociological. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopsychosocial_model)
The Authoritarian Left is currently over representing the social factor due its historical underrepresentation and underrepresenting the biological and psychological factors that James Damore emphasized. This is unhealthy reductionism that will lead to suboptimal outcomes all around.
He didn’t come to the conclusion we should stop working towards equality. That was your ideological bias improperly filtering his argument, which is worth self-reflecting on.
Here’s what he actually said,
“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).”
Alexandros Pagidas I’m going to leave that here: http://www.nydailynews.com/…/google-wrong-article-1…
Why Google was wrong – NY Daily News
James Damore, a software engineer at Google, wrote a memo in which he argued that there are differences between men and women that may explain, in part, why there are fewer women than men in his field of work. For this, Google fired him. Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, sent Google employees a memo sayi…
NYDAILYNEWS.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 2 · August 14 at 5:12pm
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Yeah dude, that article was shitty when you posted it yesterday, and it’s shitty today. When he says, “Damore’s memo did not harass or intimidate anyone”, we can respectfully throw out his arguments because he clearly is not aware of what is actually g…See More
Like · Reply · 10 · August 14 at 5:19pm
Manage
Myka McLaughlin
Myka McLaughlin This is such a complex subject!!! I am intimidated by how complex this is. Ravi Mishra, I am a woman. My life’s work is working with women. I feel very much part of the women’s movement, and even a leader in it. And part of my process of becoming an empowered woman has been to a) discover the incredible and unique beauty of being a female and b) confronting the shadow sides of my feminine. One thing I find myself concerned with as a leader within the women’s movement is that I fairly often hear comments that seem to make woman/feminine = awesome, men/masculine = bad. While I hear this from women often, I’ve also noted how many men seem to have internalized this too. I am worried about this. I believe the only way we can truly heal the gender divide is through all of us honoring each other as brothers and sisters, who bring completely different and similar and complimentary skills and perspectives to the table. I believe we women need you men, and visa versa. I try to be vigilant with this in myself and in the women’s movement and culture I am part of creating. When I started reading Damore’s essay (which I have not finished), I felt at least open minded to consider how he was pointing out an inherent bias in limiting discussion about something that can seem so overtly sexist. It’s just so tricky because there is no value in being opened minded about the merits of Nazism or genocide. But there has been huge value in making sure we protect the rights of people to speak and publically gather and practice religion, no matter what their views and opinions are as long as they are not harming anyone. My sense is that Damore’s main point was more akin to the later – asking us to make more space for dialogue on this topic. Even if Damore is unskilled at making this argument, even if he is more sexist than he realizes and can’t see his blind spots, I – as a woman – want to be vigilant that the women’s movement I am co-creating doesn’t demand a monopoly on women are discriminated against therefore women are always right. Max Marmer – in this way, there is some way that I can sympathize with the intent of your post. But I definitely struggle with your delivery. This is all extremely complex and your seeming lack of humility and vulnerability makes your point far less valuable to me. I think we need some serious “transcend and include” consciousness to navigate and resolve these waters, and your delivery feels decisive, and thus, perhaps counter productive. (Oh dear, I feel super vulnerable trying to unpack this in a public forum. I welcome your pushback, as it’s the only way forward for working together, but I’ll be so grateful if you can offer me debate that is kind and respectful at the same time. I don’t have any of this figured out…)
Love · Reply · 3 · 8 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Thank you Myka for this post. This is one of the best comments on the thread so far.
It is a super complex subject. I am asking myself what can be done if people are not willing to see this and instead reduce the issue to very simple black/white, us/them, sensitive/insensitive categories?
As for my delivery, I have commented on my intention and rationale for deliberately ratcheting up the provocative tone in various threads. I can copy/paste in relevant passages if you would like, or you can find them, most were on a thread with Becca. Whether my approach to kickstarting this conversation was ‘right’ is debatable and I’m open to that debate and having it. It’s also a yet unfinished topic as there is plenty room for follow up posts.
Let me know once you’ve taken a look at those threads and we can dialogue more.
Like · Reply · 7 hrs
Ravi, please read this part of my post and reflect on it before you comment again:
Let it be known that if you are Angry, you are not Seeing Clearly.
If you are Triggered, you are not Seeing Clearly.
If you are attached to your role as Victim or Hero or others as Oppressor, then you are not Seeing Clearly.
If you don’t believe me, study your religion’s version of the Dharma.
Then come back to me.
The Dalai Lama said, “anger does not get you anywhere… Thinking this way you realise that anger is no use for solving problems. It creates more problems…If you can calm your mind and be patient, you will be a wonderful example to those around you.”
Like · Reply · 1 · August 14 at 5:28pm
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Max I don’t think you’ve understood anger in your practice and life if your response is to keep peddling the same Dalai Lama quote. Actually staying with Tibetan Buddhism, you might know something about the wisdom energies. Anger is a meaningful emotio…See More
Like · Reply · 4 · August 14 at 5:49pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer In Tibetan Buddhism anger can be transmuted to clarity but only if you have a sufficiently developed Emptiness practice, respectfully, you have clearly demonstrated in this thread that you do not.
Like · Reply · August 14 at 5:54pm
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Roger that. You might want to take a second and just reflect on what the Dalai Lama’s stance on this might be before posting stuff like this.
Like · Reply · August 14 at 6:22pm
Manage
J Li
J Li The purpose of a spiritual teaching against acting from anger is to help us better ourselves. From each individual perspective, we can always aspire to act more productively from love and not anger.
But this is completely different than using spiritu…See More
Like · Reply · 9 · August 14 at 6:37pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I didn’t say people couldn’t be angry. Or that I’m policing anger.
Just that, that which is expressed from anger does not possess full clarity.
Have you ever seen the Dalai Lama angry. Despite what the Chinese have done to the Tibetan people. If you want a female example, have you ever seen Pema Chodron angry?
I’m all for holding a safe space for anger, for what it’s worth. I recognize that most people don’t have the capacity to control their anger, and that expressing anger often better than repressing anger.
Like · Reply · August 14 at 7:01pm
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra This post exactly crystalizes our lack of true communication. Especially as a white male – but also in general – you need to understand how your words, actions, and how you move through space is perceived by other people. You didn’t say that people couldn’t be angry explicitly, but your posts repeatedly attempt to delegitimize someone else’s comments because they come from anger. That delegitimizing is essentially policing, particularly when you are constantly wielding systemic and structural power.
You don’t see how you’re policing anger, you don’t see how that memo was harmful to women. You’re lacking awareness of how other people are experiencing situations because your identification with your own experience is so strong that you are not able to make space for other people and what they’re experiencing. THIS IS WHITE PRIVILEGE and why it’s so absurd that you seem so proud of it.
I can totally see how you think you’re right, how your rigid adherence to anger having no use make sense to you. The reality is that anger is actually the correct response – not acting from it, but experiencing it – to the google memo and even more so to the events from this past weekend. And the funny part here is that the actual angry people aren’t commenting on this thread because they think so little of you they won’t even try to engage you in conversation.
And you might want to think about why this google memo elicited your angry-not-angry rant instead of someone dying as the hands of white supremacists.
I’m stopping here – you’re welcome to reach out via direct message.
Like · Reply · 15 · August 14 at 7:25pm
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Denis Baranov you might appreciate the above ^
Like · Reply · 1 · August 14 at 7:26pm
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La Ravi Mishra thank you!!!
oh dear . . . “I am not ashamed of my White Male Privilege”… so then what is your stance exactly? Max Marmer
Like
· Reply ·
3
· August 14 at 6:43pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer …What is my stance on what?
Like
· Reply · August 14 at 6:55pm
Manage
Becca Fresco White male privilege
Like
· Reply · August 14 at 8:18pm
Manage
Max Marmer I’m not sure what to say at that level of unspecificity…
…most white men don’t recognize their inherent advantages and are unconscious of systemic forces that benefit them.
But since you know Wilber I can speak in a more precise language…White Male Privilege is a construct that emerges in a post-modern context. Post Modernists are right to put modernity into a context and highlight the importance of social and cultural constructionism. But most post-modernists don’t realize they also are situated within a context….that this Universe and Multiverse is a holarchical system of context within context within context that is all part of a Grand Game where Everything Matters and Nothing Matters all at the same time and you should play the game and laugh at the absurdity of it all once…and if white male privilege has got you tripped out, zoom in, zoom out and say, “ah beautiful”.
Like
· Reply · August 14 at 8:37pm
Manage
Caeli La Max Marmer although that is a lovely and very colorful word salad, it definitely didn’t answer Becca’s question. If you are not ashamed of your White Male Privilege, then how do you feel about it? Besides essentially saying if you feel any kind of discomfort about it, you should “zoom out and say ah, beautiful” — how do you feel about having it, if not ashamed? What Becca and myself now are implying is that if you have white male privilege, you should feel ashamed of the fact that it exists (not guilty/shameful for having it, since it wasn’t a choice)- but you should feel ashamed of its existence and you should use that power to work towards equality. If white male privilege has got you tripped out, zooming in/zooming out and saying “ah, beautiful” in response is absolutely not appropriate.
Like
· Reply ·
2
· Yesterday at 11:41am
Manage
Max Marmer Thanks for you comment Caeli. Here’s my reply.
Shame is not an emotion I choose to partake in. Shame, anger, ignorance, greed etc are all emotional poisons one can choose to abstain from.
If it is word salad to you, that means you didn’t understand what I was saying.
It points to a larger evolutionary and spiritual perspective that is the basis for the cessation of much suffering and illusion.
I can see how the universe emerged from nothing, is evolving and developing towards higher order and the current station of male privilege and its correction towards gender equality is just a blip on the cosmic radar. As MLK said, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards progress.” I am supportive of that progress and using my power to support it, but also critical of some of its attempted incarnations.
Watching the evolutionary cultural tides ebb and flow really is a beautiful sight, but if your perspective is caught in one of the waves choking on water, gasping for air, like many people who have read this thread are…well then it doesn’t feel so beautiful or pleasant, but it’s merely a matter of illusory identification and perspective – for the sun is always shining above the clouds. In a very real sense, one has the choice to experience asphyxiation or not.
See Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning for how one can maintain perspective in the hardest of times (the holocaust).
Like
· Reply · Yesterday at 12:58pm
Manage
Becca Fresco Max Marmer dude, that’s the thing about wealthy white male privilege, you are not feeling caught in the tides of the ebb and flow, you are not left gasping for air, afraid for your life, facing constant insurmountable hurdles to your progress . . . because, among other things, you are a wealthy white male. Not everyone has the privilege to choose to zoom out and say ah, beautiful, because their fucking kids and husbands and friends are being shot down in the street. hierarchy of needs, right? or if you maintain that no matter what people always have this choice, and if they are not choosing “ah, beautiful” among the systematic oppression of their people than at least some compassion and allowance for how hard that is to chose, would become you. And I’d also like to see you take on more real challenge in your life to prove your adeptness before you lecture people on the choices of attitude you think they have…
If you have wealthy white male privilege than it’s important to use it for the benefit of all, and this is where we might disagree about what that is. From here it looks like you are simply using it to protect some bullshit pseudo-scientific lofty justification of gender inequality with big words and complicated concepts. To me there seems to be a lot more urgent stuff to call out as a privileged person and I’ve seen you do none of that. So your choice here has me wondering about where your center of gravity really is; I know you self asses it as quite high, but the feedback you are getting from this communication you have put out . . . suggests otherwise.Max Marmer
Like
· Reply ·
5
· 20 hrs · Edited
Manage
Caeli La ^^^ Becca articulated my feelings exactly. Also, it’s a common manifestation of privilege to assert your argument using unnecessarily big words and complicated concepts that you know most people won’t comprehend. You know they probably won’t understand…See More
Like
· Reply ·
2
· Yesterday at 3:50pm · Edited
Manage
Myka McLaughlin Max Marmer I really appreciate all that you have clearly oriented your life attention to – books, education, philosophy, spirituality, etc. it’s one of my favorite characteristics in someone – intellectual curiosity, care and rigor!! And… there is an important difference between spiritual information and concepts, and embodied wisdom. I love that you are so full of philosophical/spiritual information – it shows how much you care about being awake and aware! And I do sense there’s such a wonderful phase ahead (for me too!!!) where some of your/our concepts actually fall away and you will live more from that transcendent “ah-beautiful” place in a way that soothes and heals the people around you, rather than agitates them.
Like
· Reply ·
2
· 8 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer Thank you for that acknowledgement, Myka.
I guess my reply to this comment is much the same as the one I just left you on the other thread.
The conversation probably starts with you getting up to speed on what I already shared with Becca about my intentions and then what I would add is…
I would love to be able to just come from that soothing place, but I find myself asking myself whether it would be effective. I am much more this way in person. I don’t need to be as provocative when I am one on one and face to face because I can meet people where they are and ask questions to uncover exactly what I perceive they need.
Writing to a generalized collective is a different story.
I also don’t believe it is in people’s best interest to always receive soothing energy. If you think about some of the teachers and programs who have been very successful in enabling and triggering personal transformation, they often put people on the spot in uncomfortable situations — well known examples would be those like Landmark and Tony Robbins, lesser known other spiritual teachers I could name.
I see a healthy transformational cultural as possessing both agitating energy (to create dissonance with the status quo) and soothing energy. And these don’t necessarily need to come from the same person. Yes, I could be more soothing and beautiful. But the lack of emboldened clarity in the system, causes me to adaptogenically emphasize, the good and the true, somewhat at the expense of the beautiful.
…As I am willing and capable of enduring, handling and responding to, what many have called privately, ‘the toxic swamp’ on this thread.
Like
· Reply · 7 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer I also should add that my value for supporting people’s transformation is much stronger than my value for supporting people’s comfort.
I am committed to this. I recite the Bodhisattva vow every day.
———————
When one mans job loss outweighs generations of underpayment undereducation blah blah blah of an entire gender. You’d have credibility if you’d ever authored a screed about how badly women have been treated in the workplace overall. Coding isn’t for everyone, man or woman, but eugenic analysis of why the field is so male heavy, the very construction of the question, written not from direct experience but through a lens of privilege, in an overall tech bro environment known for harassment, just doesn’t interest me. He’s asking the wrong questions if he’s interested in justice. But if he’s interested In giving a bunch of white guys a reason to not make changes in their culture, or to defend the privileged’s right to privilege, by all means, his memo did that. Idea suppression, holding ones tongue, and listening more deeply can be more helpful than opining without an experience base. You just sound angry and overboard in this post. – 3x tech CEO and mom of 6
Like · Reply · 21 · August 14 at 6:18pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer It’s not about one man’s job loss, it’s about a broad movement and pattern of behavior sweeping through the cultural left and its institutions in universities and corporate cultures.
“You’d have credibility if you’d ever authored a screed about how badly women have been treated in the workplace overall.”
That’s not a domain I felt called to write about as I don’t have as much of a unique contribution to make on that topic. I would write something in response to that right invitation. But I don’t have much experience in that domain, as I’ve made the choice to spend virtually zero time in conventional corporate culture. My post here was about psychology, culture, cultural evolution, communication, spirituality etc in a broader environment than mere workplace politics which I do feel I have a unique perspective to contribute.
I haven’t been shy about standing up for women publicly in other related domains. I found a comment I posted supporting women in the realm of domestic violence — https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10101633726470968…
in 2014 I wrote a post about how Gurbaksh Chahal was unfit to be CEO and should resign after allegations about his domestic violence came out. I then tied this to the moral bankruptcy of many Silicon Valley VCs. I said a precedent should be set and something should be done. A friend from Change.org encouraged me to step up to the plate and lead a campaign. I did, and it contributed to him being fired soon after.
http://www.maxmarmer.com/…/morally-bankrupt-silicon…/ //
http://www.maxmarmer.com/…/the-firing-of-gurbaksh…/
https://www.change.org/…/gurbaksh-chahal-ceo-we-demand…
See my comment to Philipp about Bio-Psycho-Social perspectival analysis. You can’t reduce all bio perspectives to eugenics.
————
Anu Khosla dismissing women’s opinions about something that concerns us isn’t at all empowering to us. you can’t just say you’re for women’s empowerment and then write off what we have to say.
Like · Reply · 7 · August 14 at 6:58pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Anu, I’m not being dismissive, I’m actively engaging in conversation on this thread.
The exchange of opinions between men and women, where disagreement is often a consequence is part of the women’s empowerment I’m a stand for. Is disagreement not a part of yours?
It’s worth noting how your language sets you up as if you’re speaking for all women. I don’t think that’s a fair characterization.
Like · Reply · August 14 at 7:35pm
Manage
Sarah E. Kornfeld
Sarah E. Kornfeld Actually, you come across as a poor listener with little interest in other people’s opinions. Your karma is most certainly messed up now….
Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 10:47am
Manage
Anu Khosla
Anu Khosla I posted this elsewhere on the thread but moving this here since i hadn’t seen you’d responded to me….
this is not a fair argument. you’re calling it “provocative” wording, but in fact your wording was dismissive of disagreement. it didn’t invite discussion, it told us if we felt differently than you we weren’t “seeing clearly”, as if your way of seeing is the only way to see. that’s bot the ame as “pursuing mutual understanding”. if you’re completely dismissing the lived experiences of others than “mutual understanding” is off the table, so it makes sense that many would choose not to engage with you.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 5:26pm
Manage
Anu Khosla
Anu Khosla in other words, the words you use are dismissive and didn’t invite exchange. you preemptively rejected anything that different from your own as emotional rather than logical, which is a disempowering way to engage others in disagreement. you’re seemingly able to pick up subtleties of my rhetoric (that i’m somehow speaking for all women just because i used the word women and invoking shared female experience) yet are astonishingly lacking awareness of the rhetorical tools you yourself are using.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 5:30pm
Manage
Anu Khosla
Anu Khosla dismissive isn’t the same thing as disengaging or ignoring
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:31pm
Manage
Sarah E. Kornfeld
Sarah E. Kornfeld Anu, let it go. he’s not there yet.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:33pm
Manage
Anu Khosla
Anu Khosla Sarah E. Kornfeld i know i knowwwww. you’re right. and thank you.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 5:40pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Anu Khosla you’re right I did preemptively negate a lot of perspectives with my post which didn’t invite discussion.
I’m sorry for that. I probably should have introduced that conceptual framework later but it came as a response to the comments I rec…See More
Like · Reply · 22 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Perhaps the comment I left to Becca on the thread about spiritual materialism and my intentions would be illuminating in this regard about my assumptions in dialing up the provocative tone in my original post.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer That you and Sarah would dismiss me so quickly without going even a couple replies deep directly speaks to a problem of how quickly you two are willing to be dismissive and engage in projections by taking a few small instances of my behavior and putting me in a box with “all the men like that” who are not even worth engaging
————-
Max Marmer Becca Fresco Here’s another post I have written on White Privilege:
http://www.maxmarmer.com/…/why-i-really-dont-like-the…/
Why I Really Don’t Like The Postmodernist Concept of “Privilege” – Max Marmer
Shit, I wanted to write a simple post about why the…
MAXMARMER.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · Yesterday at 7:03am
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco Max Marmer, cool, some reasonable distinctions, advantage and responsibility. beside the subtle smug/superior vibe I could agree. on the other hand, you are the one who infers that within the word privilege is embedded guilt and shame and I disagree. Perhaps, more accurately, that is what YOU feel from the word, and it feels uncomfortable, and then you want to make others responsible for that, (which is the typical white privilege response!) and resent it. I don’t have a problem with the word privilege, to me it very accurately describes how I experience my life, totally and incredibly privileged in every way imaginable.
Like · Reply · 20 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Write a reply…
Choose File
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Speaking your mind has consequences.
As a result of this post, 20 people have unfriended me, and probably many more think less of me.
It is this reaction that causes many to not speak their mind and share their truth.
Here is a post I wrote about how you can overcome this fear, and why your personal evolution actually depends on it.
http://www.maxmarmer.com/…/how-to-use-evoultionary…/
How to Use Evolutionary Psychology To Overcome Your Fear of Being Judged -…
MAXMARMER.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 1 · Yesterday at 7:10am
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Excerpt from the post:
Now I’m going to share one “psychological program” I use to allow me to be bold in my self-expression and why it works….See More
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 7:10am
Manage
Jackie Howells
Jackie Howells Dude are you actually serious. Evolutionary biology straight up doesn’t back you on this one. 1. There may be thousands of tribes but they are interlocking and greatly affect one another–lose one of 1000 tribes you might really be losing 500. Human cognition doesn’t work on the level you are ascribing it to when it comes to grouping with others. Secondly, if these are indeed your authentic beliefs then I am happy you expressed them, as I do believe you have shown at least half of those who had considered themselves as part of your “tribe” meaning part of your group which protects itself from harm from other groups. You seek to harm others within your own tribe, thus making you a physical and social liability. Thirdly, you may find that the tribe of those you do find who align with your beliefs are in fact, interlocked with tribes who would like to kill you for being who you were once tribally associated with (a coastal person who has ties to many jewish and buddhist tribes from what I gather). I wish you luck in this situation, since biology regarding tribal behavior shows that once you are out it is difficult to gain protection from those you have betrayed. Finally, Do provocateurs such as yourself always have something to sell at the end of these discussions? Some sort of article or product that they wanted to garner attention for?
Like · Reply · 2 · 20 hrs
———————
Megan Kerins Privilege isn’t a concept. I mean, maybe it is for someone who isn’t on the short end of the stick. I’m so vastly aware of my own privilege…as a white-presenting (quarter latina) attractive woman, I am very very aware of how my appearance grants me u…See More
Like · Reply · 10 · Yesterday at 7:17am
Manage
Mirran Raphaely
Mirran Raphaely Per usual, you impress.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 7:55am
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Thanks Megan. There is no question that privilege is a real thing, that tech is a male-dominated industry, that it is a challenging environment for women to be in with many inequities, and that the balance of power should shift more towards women.
The question is, HOW should we go about correcting for some of these issues? And that’s primarily what I’m calling out in this post.
Women gaining more safety, respect, power and equality in the work place is not (much) progress if the *process* by which it is obtained is deeply flawed, harmful and its own version of authoritarian oppression.
There is an empowered way to move towards gender equality and the way Google as a cultural institution behaved in this instance, and the way much of the liberal left is behaving these days…is not it.
There are no easy answers for how to actually make progress for women in this case. But there are hard answers and there are prerequisite conditions the container in which real progress will be made in must hold.
We’re far from that right now and that’s what I was forcefully calling attention to in this post, because the cultural current was heading so strong in the other direction.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 9:08am
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco Max Marmer so you admit that privilege is a real thing, yet you were calling out google’s actions. I’m not sure what you are trying to critique then? What part of google’s actions? What in your eyes should they have done?
Also, it seems like, as far as communications go, your attempt at a clear and level headed critique that furthers the conversation hasn’t hit the mark. No judgement here, no one is perfect in every articulation of their every idea, but perhaps some data for you? Cause I certainly don’t know what your point is, beside being left with a pretty bad taste in my mouth . . .
———–
If you feel like insulting me, I invite you to read this parable first.
ANGER A BUDDHIST STORY
One day, the Buddha and a large following of monks and nuns were passing through a village. The Buddha chose a large shade tree to sit beneath so the group could rest awhile out of the heat. He often chose times like these to teach, and so he began to speak. Soon, villagers heard about the visiting teacher and many gathered around to hear him.
One surly young man stood to the side, watching, as the crowd grew larger and larger. To him, it seemed that there were too many people traveling from the city to his village, and each had something to sell or teach. Impatient with the bulging crowd of monks and villagers, he shouted at the Buddha, “Go away! You just want to take advantage of us! You teachers come here to say a few pretty words and then ask for food and money!”
But the Buddha was unruffled by these insults. He remained calm, exuding a feeling of loving-kindness. He politely requested that the man come forward. Then he asked, “Young sir, if you purchased a lovely gift for someone, but that person did not accept the gift, to whom does the gift then belong?”
The odd question took the young man by surprise. “I guess the gift would still be mine because I was the one who bought it.”
“Exactly so,” replied the Buddha. “Now, you have just cursed me and been angry with me. But if I do not accept your curses, if I do not get insulted and angry in return, these curses will fall back upon you—the same as the gift returning to its owner.”
The young man clasped his hands together and slowly bowed to the Buddha. It was an acknowledgement that a valuable lesson had been learned. And so the Buddha concluded for all to hear, “As a mirror reflects an object, as a still lake reflects the sky: take care that what you speak or act is for good. For goodness will always cast back goodness and harm will always cast back harm.”
Like · Reply · 5 · Yesterday at 9:28am · Edited
Manage
Hide 19 Replies
Kim-Mai Cutler
Kim-Mai Cutler Buddha abandoned his wife Yasodhara seven days after she gave birth to his only child to seek enlightenment. I’m sure he didn’t help with child support or fatherhood or anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasodhar%C4%81
Yasodharā – Wikipedia
Yaśodharā (Pali Yasodharā) was the wife of Siddhārtha Gautama, later known as Gautama…
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 2 · Yesterday at 10:15am · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer It’s not abandonment if she didn’t perceive it as such.
She lived in a palace with servants and later became an arhat on the Buddha’s instructions.
So this does not undermine the story I shared.
The way you wrote your comment it is as if you are trying to undermine all of Buddhism on this basis…that is very silly.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 10:31am
Manage
Kim-Mai Cutler
Kim-Mai Cutler She did perceive it as such, at least initially. She was devastated. But she clearly had no or very little choice in the society that she lived in, and probably had to convert to be an arhat later under her husband’s instructions.
Anyway, I suggest you read about Spiritual Materialism. Don’t invoke spirituality as a way to justify your egotistical reaction to all of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiritual_materialism
And also talk to Dani Bicknell privately. I don’t know you that well. But maybe she does.
Spiritual materialism – Wikipedia
Spiritual materialism is a term coined by Chögyam Trungpa in his book Cutting Through…
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 5 · Yesterday at 10:36am
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Do you have a source that cites her devastation? I’d like to read that before commenting further.
But one does not just convert to become an arhat. You make it sound like a patriarchal enforcement. Becoming an arhat cannot come without great personal desire from one’s own volition — also called Bodhicitta.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 11:29am
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Spiritual Materialism is a real thing, but I don’t think you’re referencing the concept correctly. What quote in that wikipedia article is relevant to this discussion?
It’s also ironic that you’re citing Trungpa, as he was a preacher of Crazy Wisdom, of which this post is also an embodiment of.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 11:35am
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco dude did you just define your own post as an embodiment of Crazy Wisdom? um . . . lol
Haha · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 3:33pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco A quote for you, from you “You are entitled to your subjective opinion. But there are no facts in the subjective realm.”
data to back up your claim? who gets to decide if this post is an embodiment of Crazy Wisdom?
To me this is little statement is holographic of the rest of your post . . . Crazy wisdom not, crazy arrogant . . . closer . . .
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 3:54pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Sure this was a subjective claim not an objective one.
It is possible to seek *intersubjective* confirmation from qualified individuals – which I haven’t done but could do.
How do you think one determines whether Trungpa’s teachings are an embodiment of crazy wisdom or not?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 3:58pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco feedback
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 3:58pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer That’s what I was saying, but not everyone is qualified to give feedback.
It depends on what Wilber calls their Kosmic Address….See More
Applying the Scientific Method to Spiritual Truths – Max Marmer
(This is Q&A Follow Up from my post…
MAXMARMER.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · Yesterday at 4:06pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco of course, I knew you were going to say that/go there. AND, at a certain point, whatever your choose, take the median from all the noise and take it. in lots of ways, the more you try and sort it out, who’s feedback is valid at the levels you (think you) are playing at, is just ego bullshit. at some point you got to just take it. all. in.
For example, one of NLP’s Presupposition’s – The Meaning of Communication is the response you get.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:11pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Yes, the median public feedback is: Green/Post Modern (primarily female) consciousness’ believes I am an out of touch, tone deaf, arrogant, entitled, white privileged male.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:14pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco right. so . . . there is truth there. and to deny that is to miss some important wisdom. It’s not THE TRUTH, but . . . havent’ seen/felt you integrate that piece of things either . . . mmm?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:15pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Sure, that’s a partial truth in the field.
What does integrating it look like?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:16pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco what do you think? not interested in doing that work for you.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:16pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco also curious as to what was your intention with your post? I assume it was to further the conversation in some way, to add a clarity, distinctions, to be helpful, no?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:17pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco wondering then how you would rate yourself according to your own intention
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 4:18pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer My intention was to give voice to an important missing piece of the conversation of how identity politics is being pursued by the left. And to do it in a provocative manner that would start conversation.
Here’s the kicker:
I intentionally dialed up the provocative tone so it would be heard, because I have the hidden assumption that this perspective will by default be ignored and pushed aside.
I have the assumption that one of the only ways to have the conversation I want to have is to open it by being provocative and then attempt to bridge the gap with people who engage like you’re doing now – who can see past the provocative tone without breaking relationship and dialogue.
It’s actually a test in it of itself. Those who immediately move to attacking, dismissing and terminating the relationship, instead of debate and pursuing mutual understanding exemplify the problem of the left/this mode of consciousness.
I also expect most people to be repulsed, but to positively engage a select few and to be an exemplar for others who share the perspective I’ve expressed but feel acutely or vaguely socially pressured into silence.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 4:30pm
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco ok, Max Marmer, so as someone who took the bate to engage you here, and maybe even as your target audience, I still have no idea what your critique about the left is really about. And, because of your “kicker”, your intention to be somewhat inflammatory to get attention, in a parched and already scorched landscape I feel less and less desire to hear you or stay this out. I think your assumption that people will not pay attention unless provocatively provoked is derogatory, unnecessary and bad form. In this sense, you have absolutely fulfilled the nlp presupposition that the communication is the response you get. I actually have no respect for this angle or intention. Maybe the people responding in “anger” were testing you back — to see oh Crazy Wisdom Man how you would respond in turn to their provocative anger!!! . .. who has time/wants to play that game ad nauseam?
“It’s actually a test in it of itself. Those who immediately move to attacking, dismissing and terminating the relationship, instead of debate and pursuing mutual understanding exemplify the problem of the left/this mode of consciousness.” I could see taking this stance if you had been cleaner, clearer and more elegant in your post but as I see it your methodology for this test hypothesis is totally bunk.
Give people clean input, get clean feedback. Why stir shit? Where is your commitment to Beauty? If you wanted to be an example for people who might have this perspective but feel socially pressured in to silence, then be a fucking great example of how to respectfully and artfully engage in a well thought out, respectful debate! Right now, if I shared your perspective (which I STILL don’t know what it actually is), I would feel further isolated, silenced and vindicated in my position that I can’t voice my unpopular belief. so basically you are just proving yourself right. Congratulations.
——–
Caeli La If white male privilege has got you tripped out, you should do something about it. That’s a main reason why anger/difficult emotions exist- to propel us into action. The idea that we should transcend those emotions and just say “ah, beautiful” in response to coming to terms with white male privilege is inhuman. It also perfectly exemplifies your white male privilege, that you can feel safe and comfortable enough to simply disengage from feeling tripped out about it and look at it from an “ah, beautiful” perspective.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 12:16pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer It’s a mischaracterization to say I am tripped out by male privilege.
I am calling out a major flaw in how many Liberals are pursuing the creation of gender equality.
I’ll repost my comment to Megan here since it’s basically the same point:
There is no question that privilege is a real thing, that tech is a male-dominated industry, that it is a challenging environment for women to be in with many inequities, and that the balance of power should shift more towards women.
The question is, HOW should we go about correcting for some of these issues? And that’s primarily what I’m calling out in this post.
Women gaining more safety, respect, power and equality in the work place is not (much) progress if the *process* by which it is obtained is deeply flawed, harmful and its own version of authoritarian oppression.
There is an empowered way to move towards gender equality and the way Google as a cultural institution behaved in this instance, and the way much of the liberal left is behaving these days…is not it.
There are no easy answers for how to actually make progress for women in this case. But there are hard answers and there are prerequisite conditions the container in which real progress will be made in must hold.
We’re far from that right now and that’s what I was forcefully calling attention to in this post, because the cultural current was heading so strong in the other direction.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:05pm
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La Max Marmer You misunderstood me. I did not mean that YOU personally are getting tripped out by white male privilege. I was directly quoting and responding to your statement: “…and if white male privilege has got you tripped out, zoom in, zoom out and say, “ah beautiful”.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:07pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I am not saying one should not take action and passively say, “ah beautiful” to the matter of seeking gender equality. That’s a misunderstanding of that comment.
Anger motivates towards action for sure, that is its evolutionary basis. But as I said in my original post, if there is anger, it is not clear.
For it to be clear and pure, you must have the capacity to immediately transmute anger into clarity, with the foundation of Emptiness. If you cannot do this, you perpetuate the same samsaric karmic threads you seek to change.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 1:17pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Caeli – ok I see my misreading, you meant you plural not you singular.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:09pm
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La Max Marmer Right.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:11pm
———————-
Julia Allison My hope is that in your next lifetime (or journey) you incarnate as a minority and experience life as a member of the non dominant group.
Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 12:16pm
Manage
Hide 14 Replies
Max Marmer
Max Marmer What if I already have, many times?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 12:33pm
Manage
Kim-Mai Cutler
Kim-Mai Cutler We’re not Angry or Triggered, or Trying to Silence You like a Leftist Authoritarian Lynch Mob. We just feel sorry for you.
Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 12:44pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer No Kim, but you are trying to shame me and silence my perspective in your own less violent way.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:00pm
Manage
Kim-Mai Cutler
Kim-Mai Cutler Max Marmer if that is how you want to perceive it, then that is your choice.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 1:06pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer We disagree on this larger topic. I don’t feel sorry for you. I think I understand your perspective, I just believe it is limited and distorted in key ways, so as hinder the achievement of goals we probably agree on: gender equality.
Saying, “we just …See More
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 1:20pm · Edited
Manage
Dani Bicknell
Dani Bicknell Stop trying to over-intellectualize the debate. This is literally what you were calling out in your first inconsiderate post. JUST LISTEN. The best thing you can do is say, “hey, I actually as a white privileged man working in tech really doesn’t know what it’s like for X,Y,Z groups of people, so why not use this as an open forum to share grievances and build power though unity.” Your post and everything you are saying in response is feeding to the fact that you should not be sitting and writing when you have not stood to live the full experience.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 1:21pm
Manage
Julia Allison
Julia Allison I don’t feel sorry for you, Max. I feel embarrassed for you.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 1:24pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Dani Bicknell ok, I hear you, you don’t feel understood emotionally, and it’s not as much about the intellectual substance for you.
What do you think I am not understanding about your perspective?
Know also that listening is a two way street. And I don’t feel heard by you.
I feel you have an ‘Always Already Listening” (Landmark term because I know you know it) about White Men who don’t agree with you on a Gender Politics issue and have missed the point of my post. Which is about the process by which gender politics is adjudicated and the energy behind it, not about preserving the status quo of male dominance.
I get that you might find my tone offensive, but I was playing the legitimate role of provocateur to ignite a debate, which I have successfully done. Unfortunately a consequence of that, is because of the tone I chose, some people will be able to understand my message.
Perhaps you can summarize what you think my post was saying and I can tell you whether you’ve understood it?
I can do the same for you.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:33pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Julia Allison That’s pretty much a synonym in this context.
Care to elaborate, why do you feel embarrassed for me?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:34pm
Manage
Julia Allison
Julia Allison Let’s put it this way, Max: on a day in which the president of the united states refused to disavow the racist neo-Nazis – yes, white men of privilege – who marched in Charlottesville, you chose to stridently write that you are “not ashamed of your white male privilege.” AT BEST, you are tone deaf. At worst, you are part of the problem.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 2:48pm
Manage
Dani Bicknell
Dani Bicknell If you have the guts to discuss this in person, I will gladly give you my feedback. You know how to find me 🙂
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 3:24pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Julia, “the left eating its own” is a growing problem. Additionally the way the left adjudicates identity politics was a major reason Trump was elected. Many people were “more against liberals” than they were “for trump”.
So today was as good a day as any to write this. I didn’t have time between when the memo was published and now, and later the memo would fade from public consciousness.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:05pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I have a few questions for the 3 of you on this sub-thread since I don’t know where you stand on these issues:
Do you believe Damore’s memo had any merit? Did you read the original source? Were the points worth debating? Should he have been fired?
(Julia, Kim-Mai, Dani)
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:08pm
Manage
Julia Allison
Julia Allison I don’t care to write any more to you, Max. But I would implore you – and any man who boasts about having no issue with his white male privilege – to watch this 20 minute Vice video of what happened this weekend, the epitome of sick White Male Privileg…See More
Watch the ‘VICE News Tonight’ Episode ‘Charlottesville: Race and…
VICE.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 22 hrs
——————
Max Marmer For people who were rubbed the wrong way by most post how would you answer these questions?
1. Do you believe Damore’s memo had any merit?
2. Did you read the original source?
3. Were the points in the memo worth debating?
4. Should he have been fired?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:14pm · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Becca and Caeli, since we’ve been actively conversing on this thread I would love to hear your answers.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 5:13pm
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La Max Marmer I was responding to your response to Becca’s question: “if you are not ashamed of your white male privilege, then how do you feel about it?” … the memo has nothing to do with your response to that question & my subsequent response to that….See More
The Actual Science of James Damore’s Google Memo
The science of sex differences is still very…
WIRED.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 1 · 21 hrs · Edited
Manage
Jocelyn Agloro
Jocelyn Agloro I think it would be beneficial to all of us to see studies that look into some of his ideas and conduct research at early levels of college to see why women drop out.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La Jocelyn Agloro the article I posted above from Wired talks about the studies behind his ideas.
Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I’m on mobile now so can’t pull in sources. But look up the david brooks article in nytimes he cited a number of people like Geoffrey Miller who backs up that all the science is factually accurate.
What you are describing about cherry picking studies and interpretations of data is actually a deep existential problem for the entire scientific enterprise as a cultural institution. This why this is not a simple issue and requires complex new languages to even discuss about what is “true”.
In my post I was trying not to even get into the details of the memo and the science because there are certain qualifications required to even be able to talk about it in an adequate manner.
One is philosophy science skills which most scientists don’t even have. The other is emotional maturity and some degree of awakening and perspective on self awareness.
I can post links about the existential problems w science if that’s desired.
But this is why I say these problems won’t be solved anytime soon at the end of my post. Most people aren’t capable or won’t invest the time to be capable.
To make matters worse the fact that there could be criteria required for people to possess to have an adequate discussion is deeply offensive to many liberals. None the less it is true.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco I’d like you to answer my other threads before I respond to what you would like me to respond to
Like · Reply · 21 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Certainly. I planned to. A lot of threads to keep track of.. 🙂 and I’ve been on the phone a fair amount on other matters since 2pm today.
Like · Reply · 20 hrs
—————
Sarah E. Kornfeld Dude, too late. It might be best if you own you offended some people, and education and intellect don’t always apply to lived experiences of others (whom I think you care for). I’m done for sure…and that’s sad, you seem like a sweet human who cares. You may need to look at ego a bit deeper, though you’ve hurt some people, and encouraged others who have a lot of pain and anger to rail against strangers. That’s probably not the leader you want to be. Peace.
Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 5:33pm
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I hear you Sarah. I don’t love that I offended people with this post. I feel bad about it.
And yet I deemed a certain level of provocative tone was required to start this conversation. Which measured by the numbers of comments I have successfully done.
Whether I could have had the same effect with a gentler post that had the same message. I don’t know. My experience is that it would be ignored.
Whether the post achieves my intentions for it depends on what happens next.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I don’t think you should write me off so quickly.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs
Manage
Jackie Howells
Jackie Howells I don’t think you should place yourself as the overarching mediator of discussions regarding pain, suffering and violence against others that you are not directly affected by, especially by using manipulative/provocative tones. It’s so incredibly arrog…See More
Like · Reply · 6 · 21 hrs
Manage
Jackie Howells
Jackie Howells Max Marmer I really hope you read that and consider it because I don’t think you remotely understand the damage you are doing by taking up people’s time and energy to demonstrate to those who are being hurt that we reject the opinions hurting them from…See More
Like · Reply · 3 · 21 hrs
———————-
I’m curious, can anyone who commented against a part of the message in this post agree with this statement?
The process by which contrarian claims like James Damore’s memo are discussed is more important than the content of the claim.
Or in other words, what James Damore said isn’t the essential issue here, there’s plenty of time to debate the nuanced science, what matters most is if we have a fair, open, and reasonable process for opposing views to be discussed, debated and deliberated.
You can confirm you agree with this statement with a simple ‘like’ or a ‘yes’.
Like · Reply · 12 hrs
Manage
Hide 18 Replies
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra You keep trying to hold on to some iota of moral high ground, and it’s still embarrassing. You don’t have it, nor do you even understand what matters most. What matters most here is you spent paragraph after paragraph spouting ignorance in your origina…See More
The e-mail Larry Page should have written to James Damore
Last week this paper said Alphabet’s boss…
ECONOMIST.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 1 · 12 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer What about if you and I could come to agreement on what is “fair, open and reasonable?”
Like · Reply · 12 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra This is not about you, or me. You need to find a way to be able to be “fair, open, and reasonable” across a diverse array of people. You clearly have no idea how to do that, so you should probably take a cue and shut up and start listening – actually listening – to other people.
Like · Reply · 1 · 11 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Yes, assuming the deliberation of what is “fair, open and reasonable” includes a diverse array of people’s perspectives, input and stamp of approval…. Can you agree with the original statement in this sub-thread?
Like · Reply · 11 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer cc Sarah E. Kornfeld Philipp Pfeiffenberger Becca Fresco Caeli La J Li Kim-Mai Cutler Dani Bicknell
…I would love to hear your answers to this question
Like · Reply · 11 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Christine Marie Mason Julia Allison Dale Hewey Samantha Atkins Anu Khosla Jackie Howells Megan Kerins
Like · Reply · 11 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Dude, what are you trying to do? Just stop, take a breath, and think about what you’re doing in this moment. Will your ego really be gratified if you get people who disagreed with you to agree to something obvious that we all clearly agree with and has nothing to do with the content of this thread?
Like · Reply · 11 hrs
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La I agree that what matters most is if we have a fair, open, and reasonable process for opposing views to be discussed, debated and deliberated – as long as those opposing views are based on actual facts. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, not to…See More
Like · Reply · 11 hrs · Edited
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La “Your memo was a great example of what’s called “motivated reasoning”—seeking out only the information that supports what you already believe. It was derogatory to women in our industry and elsewhere. Despite your stated support for diversity and fairness, it demonstrated profound prejudice. Your chain of reasoning had so many missing links that it hardly mattered what your argument was based on. We try to hire people who are willing to follow where the facts lead, whatever their preconceptions. In your case we clearly made a mistake.
Have you ever noticed how no one takes sentences that start “I’m not a racist, but…” at face value? Here’s why, in the words of Jon Snow in “Game of Thrones” (season 7, episode 1). When Sansa Stark tells him: “They respect you, they really do, but…,” Snow laughs and comes back with: “What did father used to say? Everything before the word ‘but’ is horseshit.”
I thought of that line when I read this section in your memo: “Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story. On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways…” All your comments about valuing diversity and fairness came before that giant “but”. What came after it was a description of a few gender differences, your argument that they explain why so many of our software engineers are men and your complaint that Google’s attempts to change that balance, far from being about fairness to women, amount to anti-male bias. You use the words “discriminate” or “discrimination” 17 times, exclusively to describe men as victims.” – The Economist – https://www.economist.com/…/21726276-last-week-paper…
The e-mail Larry Page should have written to James Damore
Last week this paper said Alphabet’s boss…
ECONOMIST.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 11 hrs
Manage
Caeli La
Caeli La I also really strongly feel that you should reflect on this statement: I am not ashamed of my White Male Privilege — and how it would feel to be a female or minority person reading a white male person saying that, on the day that Trump said “both sides” are to blame for Charlottesville and that some white nationalists are “very fine people.” You really picked an awfully insensitive time to broadcast that you’re not ashamed of your White Male Privilege, and as a white male, you actually cannot imagine, as a person who is not part of the dominant group, how it feels to read that someone who is part of the dominant group is not ashamed of having that privilege. If you don’t ever feel any shame, that’s scary. The fact that my privilege gives me opportunities in life that are so vastly out of proportion to most other people in the world feels massively unfair and shameful to me. It’s important for me to know that it is shameful, and to actively work to redistribute the opportunities / wealth, or else I would keep the elitist, hierarchical, separatist patterns of my forefathers in place.
Like · Reply · 10 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Hey Caeli — I’ll write a longer response soon. But on this last point of yours – have you read this post I wrote a little while ago which expounds my views on this topic? http://www.maxmarmer.com/…/why-i-really-dont-like-the…/
Why I Really Don’t Like The Postmodernist Concept of…
MAXMARMER.COM
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 10 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Caeli— you have to understand I’m a deep practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism which seeks to dissolve the Ordinary Mind and many of the negative emotions which are considered poisons.
With regard to Shame, the ordinary mind often works like this: 1. Person A takes an action. 2. Crowd believes action is morally wrong and shames the person in attempt to conform them to the consensus moral value. 3. Person A feels this shame and changes his behavior to adapt to this norm (usually Person A is changing not because their mind is changed through shame but because they’re afraid of the social consequences).
Here is how the extra-ordinary mind works:
– Person B takes action. 2. Crowd believes action is morally wrong and shames the person in attempt to conform them to the consensus moral value. 3. Person B listens to the argument on why their action was perceived as morally wrong and considers whether they need to change anything, such as adding or subtracting something, whether external words or internal beliefs or perspectives. There is no need for Person B to experience shame to change their behavior.
The essential process is Action -> Feedback -> Reflection (optional) -> Modification of Action.
I imagine you believe a person claiming they don’t experience shame is scary because you implicitly believe that then there is no path from Feedback to Modification Action, thus creating from your vantage point, entrenched immorality.
For people residing in the Ordinary Mind this is probably true. Their lack of shame is a defensive mechanism, where feedback is never truly let in and understood, and they simply reflexively rebuff any feedback that doesn’t conform with their existing beliefs.
But if one cultivates the extra-ordinary mind then experiencing shame is not a necessary nor desirable condition for Modification of Action to occur.
Does that make sense?
Like · Reply · 10 hrs
Manage
Jackie Howells
Jackie Howells Who doesn’t feel that fair open discussion is merited? My limit to that is when it inherently stokes violence and bigotry unto others. If your timing were only due to the google memo I would feel less inclined to be so harsh, but it feels deliberately timed to catch people in a time of incredible acts of violence and hatred from groups which have a much longer and bigoted history of genocide. So did I read that guys letter with an open mind? You bet I did, and I found a lot of logical pseudoscience coupled with shrouded disingenuous intentions of desires for equal opportunities for everyone. It’s kind of the same way you are going about expressing your opinion. It evokes a reaction and whether it be the reaction you want then you graciously say “thank you, I was hoping you’d see my subtlety” (the majority of these folks who apparently ‘got it’ are white dudes, color me shocked) and if you get the response you were not looking for you can say “hmmm this was basically a test to see if you’d say that and you did, gotchya!” So, im done wasting my time being tested by someone administering some psychological test I didn’t sign up for for their own amusement. But I will continue to refute the things you say that further harm the already hurt.
Like · Reply · 1 · 9 hrs
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco Well, I think it’s more complicated than that. what is fair open and reasonable? Is it still fair and open and reasonable to be debating the science and reality of climate change? Do we need to give air time to those who “don’t believe” in climate change? At this point I say, hell no.
Like · Reply · 1 · 8 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I agree. The science on climate change is far more settled than any of the points brought to bear in James Damore’s memo.
How to determine what is fair, open and reasonable would be the next step in the discussion.
I’m merely trying to find the most basic common ground on which to have a conversation…
Which is to see if it’s possible to find mutual agreement on the point of, “what matters most is if we have a fair, open, and reasonable process for opposing views to be discussed, debated and deliberated.”
But even there it’s worth pointing out, no one who disagreed with my post has been even willing to give a simple yes to that.
Perhaps I’ll hear a qualified yes from some of you. So far Caeli is the only one who has done this.
The problem I will contend is that those who initially opposed me are so invested in the perspective that I am wrong and must be educated, that they are unwilling to make nearly any energetic movements towards mutual understanding and productive discussion.
Like · Reply · 8 hrs
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco I guess, and I said this in a different thread on this post, I think you can take responsibility for that by intentionally (as you self describe) ratcheting up the provocational nature of your post.
Like · Reply · 8 hrs
Manage
Becca Fresco
Becca Fresco This is what I wrote before, in response to you saying you were intentionally being provocative to get more people to react/engage:
ok, Max Marmer, so as someone who took the bate to engage you here, and maybe even as your target audience, I still have…See More
Like · Reply · 8 hrs · Edited
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer I have admitted I intentionally ratcheted up the provocative tone of the post. What else are you looking for with regard to responsibility?
I don’t think ‘taking the bait’ is a completely fair characterization. As, for instance, I’ve heard from female (mutual) friends privately who weren’t triggered by post and understood the point I was making but didn’t feel safe in commenting.
So, it’s more like there were multiple doors to response to choose from, then taking the bait like a bear trap.
I’ll share a new summarized critique of the left shortly.
Regarding my provocativeness, here is a post I just wrote to Ravi, that applies here as well.
“Why did I write in such an intense tone?
Because sometimes people won’t hear you unless you yell, “Wake up!” at them.
I have considerably changed and dampened my tone in the comments once I got people’s attention.
But you, like so many others in the thread, can’t seem to get over the fact that me yelling “Wake up” startled you, and you’ve been reactive and defensive ever since.
I have demonstrated good faith and flexibility since, in my opinion, you have not.”
It’s also unfair I believe to characterize my provocativeness as motivated by attention seeking. This is a technique many are using to dismiss my point of view. “I don’t need to listen to his points, he’s just being narcissistic and attention-seeking, there’s no real substance there”.
Of course if you don’t understand ‘why’ the critique I’m making matters then I can understand how could feel that way. Hopefully my follow up comment on my summarized critique of the left and its implications, clears this up.
As for my commitment to Beauty. I have often been told by close friends that my writing on posts like these presents “The good and the true” in an “un-beautiful” manner. I agree and perhaps I’ll learn to be able to incorporate all 3 primordial strands. But my retort is from the perspective of systemic and tribal diversity. My role is to call out higher truth and morality in a strong manner and others can layer in the beauty.
Regarding your comment of being a great example —my post to Ravi applies as well. I stand by yelling “wake up” and then proceeding to be very respectful and artful in the comments, as a viable, if sub-optimal approach.
——————-
Denis Baranov The irony of the 200 comments here is that most of them criticize Max’s character & integrity and argue he has no right to express his thoughts on the issue and very few of the comments actually address the merits of his argument. Meanwhile, the whole point of Max’s post was to highlight the hypocrisy of the mob, which claims to fight for democracy and equality by employing authoritative, oppressive methods.
It saddens me greatly that people who call themselves intellectuals and humanitarians resort to such primitive ways of delivering their messages.
If nobody dissents, we’re left with faceless, agry mobs driven, like lemmings, by their narrow-minded groupthink.
Like · Reply · 6 · 10 hrs · Edited
Manage
Hide 12 Replies
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Thanks Denis. I was wondering how many people would catch that dynamic.
Like · Reply · 10 hrs
Manage
Daniel Barcay
Daniel Barcay I couldn’t agree more. I feel like I’m watching a collective inability to catch various balls that are being thrown. I’m amazed at Max’s persistence in trying to lob them repeatedly and as cleanly as possible despite continued tribal ad-hominem attacks…See More
Like · Reply · 1 · 10 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra This is great. Retreat your own little private bubble where you can feel good about yourselves…
When I read this, pretty much everyone has commented directly at the substance of Max’s comments and his continued inability to perceive how other people receive his viewpoints and his worldview, and how this memo can tangibly make it harder for women to be able to contribute and feel included in the workplace, given existing power dynamics.
I feel like I’m watching your inability to catch this basic point, over and over. Labeling these attacks “tribal” and “ad-hominem” is your subconscious’s way to have to avoid facing the reality that you and your presence and your worldview has been actively oppressive and harmful to other people. That’s not an attempt to shame you – because shame is always unhelpful and I in no way want you to feel shame – but if you feel shameful, maybe you should examine where that is coming from because it’s an extraordinarily powerful signaling mechanism that our bodies can give us.
If you believe that you can have your opinion and *not* be speaking from unaware privilege, you’re missing my point wholesale. Again, check out the economist article. It will help.
Like · Reply · 1 · 9 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Also, do you guys at all see that there are 0 women and very few people of color supporting your positions? Doesn’t that make you stop and think, “Maybe I’m missing something here?”
Like · Reply · 1 · 9 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Not to mention, don’t you see how Max’s initial comments were rooted in trying to shame everyone else?! “You are part of the problem!” and shit like that?
A totally different approach to this could have been, “Hey, I seem to think the google guy had a point, but since I don’t really fully understand the position of non white males, I’d be curious to hear the experiences of other people.”
Like · Reply · 2 · 9 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Ravi – I perceive your energy to be like that of a well-intentioned maniac who has spun out of control.
What do you need from me to return to some level of emotional placidity?
Like · Reply · 9 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra That was an absurd comment. Again, go ahead and read that economist article when you have the time
Like · Reply · 2 · 9 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra Also, notice that when you’ve been thoroughly answered and been shown to be a hypocrite, far from answering points on this subthread, you resort to personal attacks.
Like · Reply · 1 · 9 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Ok, admittedly there was enough barb in that comment, that it would be hard for you to understand what I’m saying. Sorry.
What would it take for you to change your tone, so that I feel like I want to converse with you?
Like · Reply · 9 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra What a great encapsulation of white male privilege. Your posts rants in all caps about this huge issue and how everyone else is the problem, and you’re asking what it would take for *me* to change my tone? Really? Do you get that white male privilege is that the world rearranges itself for you, and you’re simply replicating that behavior?
Like · Reply · 9 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Max Marmer Why did I write in such an intense tone?
Because sometimes people won’t hear you unless you yell, “Wake up!” at them.
I have considerably changed and dampened my tone in the comments once I got people’s attention.
But you, like so many others in the thread, can’t seem to get over the fact that me yelling “Wake up” startled you, and you’ve been reactive and defensive ever since.
I have demonstrated good faith and flexibility since, in my opinion, you have not.
Like · Reply · 8 hrs
Manage
Ravi Mishra
Ravi Mishra I can see you wanting to hold onto that truth. You’re clearly not hearing, reading, or responding to much of what I say, so this is pointless. I was over the startling the long time ago, and have composed these messages offering multiple lines of reasoning to help you “wake up”. You not receiving them is unfortunate.
————
J Li (Part 1: I wrote a comment and apparently it’s too long, so breaking it into 2 parts)
Max Marmer I appreciate your tagging me into the prior comment. I’m going to try to give a serious, reasoned answer here, so starting a new thread.
Your question: “Assuming the deliberation of what is “fair, open and reasonable” includes a diverse array of people’s perspectives, input and stamp of approval…. Can you agree with the [following statement]:
The process by which contrarian claims like James Damore’s memo are discussed is more important than the content of the claim.
Or in other words, what James Damore said isn’t the essential issue here, there’s plenty of time to debate the nuanced science, what matters most is if we have a fair, open, and reasonable process for opposing views to be discussed, debated and deliberated.”
—
The statement I can agree to lies one level higher up: The values by which we hold such conversations are more important than the content of the claim.
The place I disagree with you is that the most important values to apply in this situation are that the conversation should be “fair, open and reasonable” by the most common (masculine) definition of those terms.
This is why:
Talking, at heart, is not an objective, no-stakes interaction: It’s actually an *action* that moves the world around it. Words, conversation, these are social technologies / tools that affect the world around us the moment they come out. Kind of like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle– by the very fact of addressing a thing, you have an effect on it.
(I’m pretty sure that as a systems thinker, you actually agree with me on this point, so I’m going to move forward on that assumption. Stop me if you want to debate here.)
Thus, if we pull back, anything someone says primarily matters not because of the content, but because of what it *does*.
One awesome thing conversation can do is build commonality with those who disagree with us.
But is not the *only* thing that words do.
On the particular topic of gender equality and representation, some other prominent things words do include:
– Contribute to a societal narrative / belief system about what women at heart *are like*, a narrative that is currently in flux. It does this by throwing one more bucket into that river, adding that much more gravity.
– Validate other people thinking about throwing buckets into the river
– Create Stereotype Threat (which I’m going to assume you know about and believe exists) for women
The effects of which we measure the action of conversation, therefore, are complicated because consequences exist in a number of dimensions.
—
In other words:
As with any other action, we must fundamentally connect the act of speaking to the consequences of speaking.
I’m not talking about shouting fire in a crowded theater. Here’s a better example:
Let’s say you have a little kid. The kid has been insulted and belittled by their parents all their life. But the kid wants to be a great musician when they grow up, so they pick up a horn and start playing it. Even if, fairly and objectively, the kid is not that great, it’s not appropriate to tell the kid that their horn playing sucks and that because they come from a low-income family it is statistically unlikely that they will ever be able to become a great musician.
Of course, I’m not comparing women in tech to incompetent horn-playing children. But this is a situation in which VULNERABILITY OUTWEIGHS OBJECTIVITY as a value to be applied.
The problem with negging on women right now is similar:
The *social acceptance / public narrative of the competence of women* is a vulnerable entity. On the scale of history, our ability to believe that women are competent and count is a thing in its infancy.
Therefore, jostling it is has a disproportionately harmful effect.
—
You believe in metaphysical cyclicism, right? Check this out:
Entities in the world operate in cycles of seed, growth, maturity, decline, death/transformation. For each stage, the healthiest behaviors for that system transform.
So let’s look at the Narrative About Women here as the entity in question.
In maturity, the values/practices of analysis, debate, and scrutiny are essential to the health of any narrative. Otherwise, the narrative will get overgrown, oppressive, and cumbersome. Processing “objective debate” will cause the narrative to remain rigorous, lean, accurate, relevant, etc.
By contrast, in early growth stage, a narrative needs, well, sunshine and love. It needs to be shielded from the elements. Specifically, it needs solidarity, validation, and breathing space.
*This is what “Safe Space” actually is.* Safe Space is nurturance, windbreak, and breathing space for the story that women and minorities actually matter and count as people and are as good as white men.
We are not asking for this because we think that that these ideas should be guarded *forever*, that women should be put on pedestals and protected from all criticism as a counterweight to historical oppression. (Some feminists say this, but that’s a limitation of the linear expressive model– this is the systemic model translation of what we actually mean.)
We are asking for this *for now*, so that the shoot has room to grow into maturity. Once that happens, everything is fair game.
(Continued in next part)
Like · Reply · 4 · 4 hrs · Edited
Manage
Philippe Lewis
Philippe Lewis This is SO good! Can you possibly post it as a single post on your wall publicly so it can be shared?
Like · Reply · 7 hrs
Manage
Max Marmer
Write a reply…
Choose File
J Li
J Li (part 2 from above)
The most fundamental disagreement between “identity activists” and “free speech activists” on this front is actually factual: Which cyclic stage is the situation in?
(I want to use an unloaded term for the side that you’re on, so let’s call it FSWs (free speech warriors)?)
FSWs typically think the diversity representation conversation is in the Maturity stage for one or more 3 reasons:
1) They don’t actually think that “The Narrative” / “What Words Do” counts as an entity, and instead believe in a global universalness and objectiveness to language and ideas.
The entire reason I am putting so much care and thought into this conversation is because I don’t think you fall into this camp. We don’t know each other well, but from what I do know I think you actually agree that Words Do Stuff and Narratives Can Be Systemic Entities.
Otherwise, this is the hardest point to argue with.
2) They assume that women/minorities have similar internal realities as they do. Specifically, because they have never been told that they don’t matter the way / the degree that women and minorities do, and thus fundamentally don’t conceive of exactly *how* wounded women and minority identities are.
This is not even so much a lack of imagination, as that we strongly tend to assume that people’s human experiences are like us. Like the guy who didn’t realize he didn’t have a sense of smell until he was a teenager, or asexual people. (See http://bit.ly/2wQN6tS)
The reality is that if white men, with white men experiences, acted like women and minorities in clamping down on identity debates, this *actually would be unreasonable behavior*.
And this, fundamentally, is why everyone in this thread is asking you to listen: Because without long stretches of proactive listening, it’s actually just really hard to conceptualize *just how identity wounded we are*.
It’s not even that women think we might not be good at science and technology. It’s that most of us grow up never learning to identify the thoughts and feelings within us that might pertain to our preferences, and don’t realize there are words for them, and don’t learn how to act on them until we’re in our 30s.
And that’s why it matters that, when we just starting feeling out how to express them and explore the idea that we *might* belong, someone suggesting that we don’t actually matters tangibly beyond merely the exploration of ideas.
This is probably the toughest one, but again, I’m spending time on this post because it’s an act of reality-perspective shift I think you’d be good at if you pursue it.
3) They hear about it all the freaking time, so it must be mature. A massive fraction of our public conversations these days are about diversity and identity, so surely this topic must be mature by now.
Have you ever had the same personal or spiritual realization in half a dozen iteratively new ways over the course of a few years? Or you know the effect of discovering that you’re gay over and over again? (This also happens a lot with people realizing they were abused as children.)
It’s sort of like that. All these conversations are happening not because it’s the biggest thing in society around. They’re happening because more than half the population are coming out of the closet as people. So even though it’s ubiquitous, the maturity stage is still super early.
—
Okay, so, all of this was a super long answer to why I think having a “fair, open, and reasonable process for opposing views” is not what’s up right now.
Instead, I think it’s important for us to ask, what is the systemically healthiest way of using conversation for both men and women about this issue?
A solution must include the following components:
1) Women are shielded from Narrative Threat in public spaces. In terms of self-narrative, but more importantly in terms of what other people think of women and active/passive discrimination.
2) Men have safe spaces to grow into understanding the range of identity experiences people have (#2 above)
3) Men have safe spaces to grow into less oppressive versions of their own identity
4) Spaces exist where conversations about facts can be had without triggering Narrative Threat (because we still need debate and discussion to establish scientific foundations).
In other words, we’ve come full circle and the practical disagreement I have with you is actually quite small:
A “fair, open, and reasonable” conversation needs to be able to happen. *It’s just not the right use of public spaces based on our current stage of history right now*.
Instead, as the growing shoot, it’s critical debate that needs to be encapsulated in a shielded space, so that its effects can be carefully metered, designed, and executed.
In the meantime, all the women and minorities out there need a few generations of actual societal equality first before the global gender and identity system is healthy enough to optimally support the sorts of interactions that men have been used to having for centuries.
—————-
Max Marmer Here are some edited private conversations I’ve been having that are worth sharing. I may share more once I get permission to share others anonymously.
A: have your back brother, even if from VERY far away (that lynch mob effect…I literally can’t be anywhere near it)I see you could be more accurate/honoring how much actual fucked up shit women deal with, but also see ways you are so fucking spot on I just don’t want to be anywhere near the in-coming
M: Thanks. That’s good feedback. I see how addressing that upfront could have enabled me to be better heard. I don’t deny at all that women have to deal with lots of fucked up shit. My error was in thinking there was plenty of that view represented by my friend’s circle, and that I’ve expressed views supporting women many times before, and that I stated I was for women’s empowerment, that that would be enough to stop me from being lumped into the oppressive masculine category when calling out what I felt needed to be called out. Apparently the bar for establishing that is much higher than I thought.
A: yep. people are so beyond the whacked I thought we were dealing with…but at least you’re engaging it
B: I am one of those people. There’s no way I’m jumping in on that thread. Liking your posts is about as much social risk as I’m willing to take in that snake pit… Sheesh
Good on you for trying, but its just so toxic. I’m absolutely horrified at the inability for people to entertain these points, the automatic assumption of bad faith and ignorance as well as the jumping to shaming techniques. It’s so purely tribal. So purely “with us or against us”
I’m saddened that the end result will be that they simply will not hear any push back from anyone who seems moderate, and then will never understand the lack of support or counterpressure that is exerted on the worldview
C: Yup, we’re here. It’s the reason I can’t participate in most of the discussions anymore. People don’t seem to want to learn. Identity politics are killing honest discussion…Yea, you were the only one willing to get tarred and feathered. Just read the full text [of the memo], and holy shit why are people freaking out over this? It’s not even that well written or referenced properly. I 100% get where he is coming from but wtf this is small fish.
M: The problem isn’t the details it’s that debate isn’t even allowed
C: Exactly. It’s that we can’t talk about the merit of what he is saying because of the view it is coming from.
————
WHAT IS MY CRITIQUE OF THE LEFT?
Some people have expressed confusion about what my critique of the Left actually is, as they have been unable to determine this from my original post and follow on commentary.
Here’s a bullet point critique of the Left that may be easier to digest:
1) The Left is Eating its Own.
Bret Weinsten, someone who is in our social circle, is a professor at Evergreen who spoke out against counter-oppression from black students onto white students and faculty. He was outrageously attacked and pilloried for his views. a) https://www.nytimes.com/…/when-the-left-turns-on-its… // b) More on leftist Public Shamings and Lynchings https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/twitters-rage-mob…/…
2) The Left is Devolving into Authoritarianism
The Left is devolving into its own form of Authoritarianism even though it claims to be against oppression. There is a well trodden history of left leaning populists causing great societal harm and oppression.
https://www.dropbox.com/…/Screenshot%202017-08-15%2021…
The failed Russian communist experiment is probably the best example. Others who have studied this topic far more than I can cover this point better.
3) The Left is hypocritical with regard to tolerance.
One of the central purported aims of the Left is promote tolerance, especially of minorities and the oppressed, but the left is largely intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them.
4) Lack of willingness to engage in Nuanced Debate
The only way to make progress on complex issues is for nuanced debate to occur. But too many on the left immediately reject views not their own. Furthermore, they are encouraging the development of incredibly thin skin: see safe spaces, micro aggressions. These are important distinctions, but toughness and grit is just as important a skill to develop as sensitivity.
This thread as exemplified plenty of Leftist thin skin. A most common tune would be:
“*I’ll try maybe once or twice to get you change your perspective to mine, but if you don’t then you must be an arrogant, entitled, out of touch, white privileged asshole and I’m unfriending you* “
5) Nuanced Debate Requires Cognitive Skills Most Liberals Don’t Possess or at the least Express
There are cognitive and emotional skills necessary to have a productive conversation. These skillsets involve emotional maturity and control, self-awareness, recognition of biases and rhetorical violences and sleights of hand, as well stabilized spiritual states and experiences, and philosophical frameworks.
This may feel exclusionary, but it is also a necessity. Just like one has to study to be a respectable doctor or lawyer, one has to study to be respectable cultural critic and designer.
You may be wondering why this matters?
A) The Election of Donald Trump & the Return of Right Wing Populism
The way the left is engaging in identity politics is creating a cultural backlash. The comments on this thread from many are a good microcosm of this phenomena. This cultural backlash was one of the major drivers behind Trump’s election. The left leaning mainstream media tried to create the narrative that Hillary’s victory was inevitable. Often projecting a 99% chance of her winning. It may have seemed this way because too many voices have been silenced. Hence the ‘silent Trump voter’ that tipped the election.
B) Hyper-Polarization Leading to Societal Chaos and Destruction
Extremism is developing on the left and the right. Moderates are being silenced and pulled to the extremes by their own respective bases.
At this rate we are headed for civil war, economic collapse, world war, and a total societal reset. (http://www.newyorker.com/…/is-america-headed-for-a-new…)
