How media is covering the google manifesto story

>>136580211

https://archive.is/X34x9

>The struggles of women, people of colour and LGBT people have secured great advances – though they are continually imperilled, and are still far from achieving genuine equality and liberation. But the last two years, in particular, have underlined that gains are never won without a backlash. Damore is the latest martyr of these angry men. But the truth is they are so angry because they know, in the end, they are going to lose.

>Damore’s manifesto is insightful, just unintentionally so. It offers an insight into the male backlash that was one contributory factor – among many – to the rise of Donald Trump (ironically, it’s hard to think of a more neurotic, irrational, “emotional” public figure).

>Damore’s assertions about gender are, frankly, guff dressed up with pseudo-scientific jargon: not just belittling women, but reducing men to the status of unemotional individualistic robots.

File: Captura de Tela 2017-08-08 às 11.10.49.png (307KB, 881x606px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 881x606px

In the image, other articles by this faggot.

>Today, men are more able to talk about their feelings and emotional problems, to take more of a role in family life, to have women as friends, and so on: though there is still so far to go in every department. The biggest killer of British men under 50, after all, is suicide: partly because of an authoritarian brand of masculinity which makes it hard to talk about feelings. The systemically suppressed talents of women and minorities are being unleashed – to the benefit of us all.

How the fuck is this any different from Global Times, the "news" from China?

It's pathetic.

>“Political correctness gone mad”, “you can’t say what you think any more”: these cliches underpin Damore’s manifesto, even though he refers to them fancily as Google’s “ideological echo chamber”. But he’s wrong. These movements have been liberating, not repressive. Literature was once censored for supposed “obscenity”. Questioning official religion could lead to being ostracised, even jailed in many western nations. You could be arrested as a man for winking at someone of the same gender in the street. The lived experiences of millions of people were erased from culture.


It's like they are trying to make us remember what the struggle for *diversity* is for, and that we must press on for the total *liberation*. This is insane. INSANE.

>Today, men are more able to talk about their feelings and emotional problems, to take more of a role in family life, to have women as friends, and so on: though there is still so far to go in every department. The biggest killer of British men under 50, after all, is suicide: partly because of an authoritarian brand of masculinity which makes it hard to talk about feelings. The systemically suppressed talents of women and minorities are being unleashed – to the benefit of us all.


The benefits of the talents of women and minorities, come to us all.

What the fuck. I can't wait for this shitty era of faggotry to die.

I miss when brevity and clarity was a staple of journalism.

Nowadays reading their armchair psychology word salads in every article about politics makes me think of black people who just learned English at a liberal college.

>>136581018
Literature today is censored, questioning the intellectual hegemony is explicitly illegal and often leads to sentencing, and you can now get jailed for winking at the opposite sex in the street.

These writers aren't self aware.