i mean fucking spiders, wolfs, etc, its just bad NPC design

Pretty much

I see it as a engineering sim more than a survival

https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/10/31/racist-skinheads-beat-mulugeta-seraw-to-death-on-a-portland-street-thirty-years-later-the-crime-still-echoes/

Funny how they don't mention that the "anti-racist" are mostly white and violent and the other side is more diverse and responding to white violence.

very nice article, white supremacy is alive and well, continuing to cause mass killings every month

not sure why it's in here instead of <#398858182455459853>

this guy's death is definitely worth remembering, it sheds light on the deadly culture of white supremacy that pervades the US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulugeta_Seraw

So Forbes published this amazing article, concluding that **"The solution: companies need to do more to educate white men."** . (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ruthieackerman/2018/10/23/year-of-the-woman-not-so-fast-1/#272751ce7f94)
They don't seem to link their sources for their statistics anywhere, but I'm pretty sure that I found them: https://www.reachire.com/wp-content/uploads/Women_in_the_Workplace_2018.pdf
It has all the numbers and even some of the same phrasing.

They bring up **5 statistics** in that article, arguing that companies need to do more to educate white men.

1. 50% of all employees think that their company prioritizes gender diversity.
**2. 66% of women have dealt with micro aggressions.**
3. 20% of women "identify" as the only woman at their workplace.
4. <50% of companies set diversity targets.
5. Women are **twice as likely** as men to say that it would be risky or pointless to report an incident.

Now I don't see how educating your white male employees is going to help with 1, 3 or 4, since these are mostly a result of company policy and hiring.
**It's also funny how the 50% from 1. matches the <50% from 4. .... About 40% of companies set diversity targets and about half of employees feel like their company is prioritizing gender diversity. Sounds to me like the employees are pretty spot on in their assumption.** 😂

.
**This leaves micro aggressions and the number 5.**

As for the microagressions. **This does seem to be the one valid point they are making,** though I do want to point out:
**Men that don't have other men coworkers also experience more microagressions than men that do. But admitedly at a lower rate than women.**
This seems to imply that micro agressions do go both ways, though not at equal rates. Wouldn't the right approach be to educate all employees on microagressions, since that's the one statistic that actually holds up?

"Women are **twice as likely** as men to say that it would be risky or pointless to report an incident."
They conveniently don't state any numbers here, but as it turns out it's about 8% of all women and about 3% of all men that make that statement.
Now in my opinion we've come really far, if only 3% of women see it as risky (5% see it as pointless) to come forward with alligations.
I'm not saying that's good, but generalizing that to "better educate white men" seems to be jumping the gun, especially since 1% (2%) of men also hold that same believe.

So apparently I can't post pictures here, the statistic regarding micro aggressions is on 14th page of that source article.

why do we need to do anything about microagressions given that 80% of the time, its "i don't like what they did/who they are, and since they are a man, it **must** be because i am a women", rather than a more likely scenario: they are treating the person like an equal, and since there is more people of a certain gender, there are chances things will be done or said which might be considered offensive but are not meant to be offensive.

why are we insisting that it is someone else's job to deal with interpersonal problems?

Why is the first response of people these days not to go tell the person to their face "hey, that shit wasn't cool, here is why" and if they keep being a dick ignore them or find some other way of dealing with it like an adult. Why instead do we tell people "go tell the teacher" and then the person in question is getting scolded for shit they had no clue was offensive and have no idea who was offended by it. Leaving them to worry 24/7 if they are allowed to say anything, because they know longer know what is or is not offensive, and no one will tell them to their face that it was?

I actually agree with you on that, it's just that that's the one statistic that wasn't dishonest or unrelated. So starting from a position where microaggressions are a bad thing, one could make an argument.
Now the issue is that 1. they are all self reported, so there might be some bias there and 2. their definition of a microaggression is questionable:

"Needing to provide more evidence of your competence than others do"
OR "Having your judgment questioned in your area of expertise"
OR "Being addressed in a less-than-professional way"
OR "Being mistaken for someone at a much lower level"
OR "Hearing demeaning remarks about you or people like you"

Just to point out one example of correlation != causation: If diversity targets are a more recent thing (as they say themselves) you would expect women to be younger on average than their men coworkers.
I do also think that that point is backed by statistics, but I'd have to look it up.
Now is it really surprising that someone is "mistaken for someone at a much lower level" more often when they are younger?

teams are made of individuals. Every group of individuals has their own set of stuff that is not offensive and what is. And each individual of any group, belongs to multiple different groups (usually). Each with their own sets of rules. You know how these rules are made and found out? Through people crossing lines unknowingly and someone in the group going "thats not cool". Then the people involved talk it out and reach an agreement on either why it is offensive and should be avoided in the future, or why it is not really that offensive because of the context and you should lighten up.

That's actually a very good point ^

also no (to the younger thing), although it is a bit narcissistic. I know people way way younger than me who would kick my ass playing drums despite me having been playing drums longer than they've been able to walk.

its exactly the same thing as what happened with those nutjobs pushing for steam not to sell "offensive"games like aids simulator : "hey big man gouvernment that we all hate please look out for us and tell people what they can and cant do (so when you do so we can agree with you which we won't)"

but if you treat groups of individuals by what they are, not who they are, you are just drawing dividing lines in the group, which does nothing to help cohesion. Take the diversity aspect: treating people by who they are, not what they are. Now you have a problem, because now a group of individuals has to look at each member and go "do they belong here? Are they here for who they are or what they are?" and each member who's "what they are" is the target of a diversity initiative, they too have to ask themselves "am i here because i belong? am i here for who i am, or what i am?"

it might be a bit harsh to say so but this is (like the whole steam thing) just a cry for other people doing shit for them, thinking you are priviliged to have something, not wanting to take responsibility

You can't tell me that the way to treating people equality is by intentionally focusing on what they are, rather than who they are, and then treat them differently based on what they are, rather than who they are.

i sometimes wonder if these people actually believe what they say and with shit like this is think they really do as they have gotten themselves in a stickey situation where anything you say will be deemed racist so they want gouvernments or companies to dictate then rules for them as then they arent risking offending their coworkers again

that is literally prejudice based on immutable attributes (race, sex, sexual orientation, disability, etc). Which used to be the definition of bigotry, racism or sexism until the left realized this might be a problem

isnt that just discrimination?

all those things combined that is

I mean both your messages were perfectly correct, but I don't see how that contradicts my statement about age.
I'm not saying that younger people are less competent (not even in general or on average), but simply that they tend to hold lower positions within companies and climb up over time.
Now if there's any statistic contradicting that, I'm happy to agree, but I doubt it.

And I'm not saying that people should judge you based on your age either. I'm simply assuming that that is a possible conscious or unconscious bias that could account for some of the statistics.
To generalize that. I am a very individualist person, but we still need to talk about groups when we are looking at statistics, because that's what statistics are .... information about groups of people, not individuals.

its intended to be positive discrimination to the left but yes, it is discrimination

@Lars it doesn't, just saying people shouldn't.

Yes, I'm absolutely with you on that

well its fairly obvious why younger people tend to have lower positions right? because they also tend to have been working for less time or not yet having finished their school

Generally yes and that's why I was using it as an assumption. But I don't think anyone here disagrees, so that's fine 😄

thats why i said no, its not a surprise when someone younger is treated as inexperienced and less skilled than someone older.

its also more likely to be the case usually

Oh, ok, I misunderstood that. Sorry about that

np

I actually have to head off now, just wanted to drop that link and some comments in here

You guys have a great day 😃

i mean, its not often a kid right out of school is gonna be better than a seasoned professional.

you too, later.

this world runs entirely by action and reaction blacks in america are more likely to commit violent crimes so they are more likely to end up in prison, younger people are less likely to have alot of experience so they are less likely to have higher job positions, leftists call everyone rasist so they start fearing the mob will come after them so they want laws that prevent that from happening