[MrLemon]

I was again reading Linkedin and found this awesome piece by a CEO (obviously using a fake account, but I believe the guy)

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/congratul...-jan-turn/

Quote:

As a corporate CEO I now have a fiducial duty to avoid hiring women

I was having lunch the other day with my group of fellow CEOs...some current and some former. I asked the question: "Well, who has gotten that visit from the corporate lawyer, advising you to avoid hiring women executives". Every one in the group groaned and looked away. The message was clear. They had ALL gotten that visit.

Quote:

As a CEO I have a legal obligation to avoid risk. Because of #Mettoo, women walk in the door with the metaphorical equivalent of a suicide bomb strapped to their back. The slightest wrong move, the slightest insult, and BANG. Everybody is dead.

In the past it was just a few women who had this tendency to use lawsuits to destroy. Now in the era of #Metoo, it has become fashionable. Even the not-so-bright receptionist I hire as a temp is on the lookout for her moment of perceived fame.

Read the rest. Note that almost nobody is covering this on LinkedIn or anywhere. Yet, as this guy says, I have no doubt whatsoever that hiring managers are in fact very quietly backing off on woman hires.


PS. I would like to merge this with my other Linkedin thread, but don't know how to do it. Help a bro out?

[Bill Brasky]

It's the immoveable object vs the unstoppable force concept. These large firms are under so much legal, cultural pressure to hire women, get their women numbers up. At the same time, these CEOs, boards, shareholders, and management all know that these women are, as the CEO stated, walking around with C4 strapped to them and could detonate at any moment. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in these industries, especially entertainment.

[Tactician]

They Left really doesn't understand unintended consequences, do they?

I wonder if it's from hubris that they think people will just go along with their stupid plans without questioning or reacting to anything. As an example, in some ways the reaction to Feminism created the Manosphere.

[blck]

Utopia:
Firm going back men only, women not getting hired have to find a "suitable" way to make as much money as men...

Things getting back at their rightful place:

[Abelard Lindsey]

I was going to comment on LinkedIn about the left not grasping the concept of unintended consequences. But LinkedIn seems to have removed the article.

[Buck Wild]

delete

[MrLemon]

(06-25-2018 04:13 PM)Abelard Lindsey Wrote:  

I was going to comment on LinkedIn about the left not grasping the concept of unintended consequences. But LinkedIn seems to have removed the article.

OOPS! Bad link.

Here's the correct link: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/congratul...-jan-turn/

[Buck Wild]

(06-25-2018 04:40 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 04:13 PM)Abelard Lindsey Wrote:  

I was going to comment on LinkedIn about the left not grasping the concept of unintended consequences. But LinkedIn seems to have removed the article.

OOPS! Bad link.

Here's the correct link: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/congratul...-jan-turn/

Doesn't work. They took down the article--no way they could let that stand.

Can you just quote the thing in this thread? Thanks.

[MrLemon]

(06-25-2018 04:41 PM)Buck Wild Wrote:  

Doesn't work. They took down the article--no way they could let that stand.

Can you just quote the thing in this thread? Thanks.

Yeah I can't access it any more. It's amazing to see Censorship in action...kind of stunning actually.

Quote:

Congratulations #Metoo...You've Made Women Employees Radioactive
Published on June 10, 2018

As a corporate CEO I now have a fiducial duty to avoid hiring women

I was having lunch the other day with my group of fellow CEOs...some current and some former. I asked the question: "Well, who has gotten that visit from the corporate lawyer, advising you to avoid hiring women executives". Every one in the group groaned and looked away. The message was clear. They had ALL gotten that visit.

As a corporate CEO, I have an fiduciary and moral obligation to my employees, NOT to do something stupid that will destroy the company and throw them out into a very hard and dangerous world. The streets of Silicon Valley are full of RVs and campers with homeless former engineers and former managers, many with no health insurance. I am obligated by law and by custom not to add my people to that list.

That's why I can't hire women.

Even before #Metoo, hiring women came with a significant risk. I've seen several small companies wiped out by some angry ex-employee claiming some sort of sexual harassment. In each and every case, the company leaders honestly tried to prevent the problem, but were wiped out anyway. "$150K just to walk in the front door" says any law firm. That's enough to destroy most startups.

As a CEO I have a legal obligation to avoid risk. Because of #Mettoo, women walk in the door with the metaphorical equivalent of a suicide bomb strapped to their back. The slightest wrong move, the slightest insult, and BANG. Everybody is dead.

In the past it was just a few women who had this tendency to use lawsuits to destroy. Now in the era of #Metoo, it has become fashionable. Even the not-so-bright receptionist I hire as a temp is on the lookout for her moment of perceived fame.

As a CEO there is absolutely nothing I can do to prevent a clash, when women are so eager to take offense. Human sexuality is wired into every man and women. Even if I install webcams and watch every single second of every interaction, having training classes, and instill fear in my male employees, there will inevitably be some action that some man will take, maybe on purpose, maybe accidentally, that will cause some woman to take offense and sue. I am unable to prevent it, just as I can't prevent someone from passing gas after lunch.

Litigation is the business equivalent of nuclear war. It only destroys. Now every woman walking into my HR department is carrying a nuclear launch button on her sleeve, and is being goaded by their friends to USE IT! Every other employee in that company -- male and female -- has a mortgage and family expenses, and is looking with fear at that new female hire.

This is what generals call an "asymmetric threat". I have zero control, almost no preventative measures, and huge, deadly risk.

That leaves me and other smart CEOs with only one solution: stop hiring women. And that is what's happening, quickly or slowly, at every small startup all over the country. Will we be sued for not hiring women? Nope. Hard to prove. Penalties actually quite unlikely.

To my granddaughters who are just entering the workforce, and to the many wonderful women who long ago learned to ignore male clumsiness and just get the job done -- I can only say how sorry and sad I am to see this. Unfortunately, you women have been betrayed by a group of radical women who are, to put it bluntly, fools. They are dragging you into a conflict which will leave you burned and the men in your lives burned. Everyone will get burned except the lawyers and the activists who will, as always, sit back and profit from the war they created.

Maybe there will be comments from women telling me "I don't get it" or "You'll get sued." Um, no. I get it just fine. I'm just speaking a harsh truth, that people don't like. Listen.

[BlueResolute]

People on LinkedIn are surprisingly not too liberal. Only the HR and creative people comment with a left leaning view most of the time. I've seen some pretty civil people who instantly decredit stuff like the wage gap, ironically cause a lot of high ranked women are also on there and think it's BS. It's BS specifically because if the wage gap was enforced as a real thing, the real women in business will lose money simply due to economics. #MeToo was clearly a short sighted trend that went down the path we all expected it to. Just not as great as we thought it would turn out. We got some good entertainment from it.

[Belgrano]

(06-25-2018 03:32 PM)Tactician Wrote:  

They Left really doesn't understand unintended consequences, do they?

(06-25-2018 04:13 PM)Abelard Lindsey Wrote:  

I was going to comment on LinkedIn about the left not grasping the concept of unintended consequences.

Here's what you don't realize: It's abso-fucking-lutely intended consequences.

Employers don't trust their employees anymore and become paranoid.
Employees don't trust their employers anymore and are constantly looking for ways to screw them over.
Another artificial "us vs. them" fault line right across society appears, another conflict zone, another divide.

Work becomes a highly stressful, repressed and uncomfortable place.
Innovation and creativity will be stifled, productivity will sink.

The process is called subversion and it's no coincidence.
Six main battle grounds:

- Religion
- Education
- Social life
- Power structure
- Labor relations
- Law and order

Rewatch Yuri Bezmenov.
It's just another piece of the puzzle.

[Abelard Lindsey]

The takedown of the article, likely by a liberal employee of LinkedIn, is in and of itself indicative of the inability of liberals to understand consequences. The trend discussed in the article is clearly occuring quietly. It will continue as long as women, in general, are perceived as legal liability to start-up companies. Attempting to silence discussion of it will not slow down this trend one bit because CEO's and their lawyers are already discussing amongst themselves and taking appropriate action. The only thing LinkedIn censorship accomplishes is to prevent discussion of this phenomenon OUTSIDE the class of CEO's and assorted lawyers.

Talk about shooting oneself in the foot!

This signifies that liberals, in general, have become so unhinged, so personality disordered, that they are no longer capable of discussing any issue in question on the basis of reason and logic. They are only capable of emoting, and believe that emotional appeals are a legitimate basis of debate. I've run into this on my facebook stream where I've argued with open borders advocates that doing so would require massive increases in utility and transportation infrastructure as well as free-market economic growth, all necessary to accommodate the increased population due to open borders. They literally have no response to this other than to emote about the suffering of children in detention centers and how anyone should be allowed into the U.S.

This is, quite frankly, mental illness.

[christpuncher]

I'd call fake news on this gaining any traction at all. So what if a few small company CEOs, who might actually make hiring decisions, realize that their Fiduciary responsibly" is to not hire women..

Small companies are dying anyways in favor of fortune 500s with CEO's that (((get it))).

I can't see any company with over 25 people where the CEO directs their hiring managers (that's not the actual CEO's personal job, right) to "avoid hiring women" or any such thing.

And besides, women don't want, apply for, get or are encouraged by society to seek jobs at small companies. You actually have to work hard at small companies..

Women want jobs at huge corporations, in sections where the entire department exists to be in compliance with some government mandate... Where they can work for 5 out of 40 hours per week, gossip the other 35, and take home an above average paycheque with full health benefits to their downtown luxury apartment. Its downtown because that's where her department's office resides. Other departments, where more men work, are out in inconvenient locations that are closer to where the actual business needs of the company are. Then the men there have the privilege of getting paid less because they "aren't in the city".

[MrLemon]

(06-25-2018 05:53 PM)christpuncher Wrote:  

I'd call fake news on this gaining any traction at all. So what if a few small company CEOs, who might actually make hiring decisions, realize that their Fiduciary responsibly" is to not hire women..

Small companies are dying anyways in favor of fortune 500s with CEO's that (((get it))).

I can't see any company with over 25 people where the CEO directs their hiring managers (that's not the actual CEO's personal job, right) to "avoid hiring women" or any such thing.

And besides, women don't want, apply for, get or are encouraged by society to seek jobs at small companies. You actually have to work hard at small companies..

Women want jobs at huge corporations, in sections where the entire department exists to be in compliance with some government mandate... Where they can work for 5 out of 40 hours per week, gossip the other 35, and take home an above average paycheque with full health benefits to their downtown luxury apartment. Its downtown because that's where her department's office resides. Other departments, where more men work, are out in inconvenient locations that are closer to where the actual business needs of the company are. Then the men there have the privilege of getting paid less because they "aren't in the city".

Good points, but 95% of the businesses in the US are small companies. Law firms, doctors, plumbers. All of them hire women in mass quantities, to do the bookkeeping and assist. Retail stores, etc. Here in So Cal there are tech startups and manufacturing of all kinds. They all hire gals as marketing hr, sales, bookkeeping.

CEOs would not "tell" their hiring departments to stop hiring women. That's not how it's done. They simply stop approving hires that are women. It's simple and unstoppable. Easily deniable. CEOs do this sort of thing every day, it's part of running a biz. All CEOs think about sex harassment lawsuits constantly because, as the article says, they're a risk factor. If you're a ceo an your company is sued, you can end up losing your life savings.

[bgbusiness]

(06-25-2018 05:02 PM)BlueResolute Wrote:  

People on LinkedIn are surprisingly not too liberal.

(06-25-2018 05:02 PM)BlueResolute Wrote:  

I've seen some pretty civil people who instantly decredit stuff like the wage gap, ironically cause a lot of high ranked women are also on there and think it's BS.

That's because when people enter the workforce and start to live a "real world" and not just some college BS, people realize how the world actually works.

They mature, grow up, and develop real sense of the reality. They are too naive and innocent.

Many female feminists don't really have life experience and are rationalizing their beliefs. Once they graduate, they will start to debunk their own philosophies.

[Penta Sahi]

It is actually really easy to mask your true intentions when choosing to not hire someone. I see it all the time.

"Just not the right fit", "another candidate was a better fit", "we've decided to revise the role and are seeking candidates for that," etc.

The article author said it best.

Quote:

Will we be sued for not hiring women? Nope. Hard to prove. Penalties actually quite unlikely.

[Steve McQueen]

Quotas are being rolled out across many industries, for a lot of us in the corporate world me too is going to have zero effect on hiring.

HR departments are female dominated to boot, l think they would begin to notice and whistleblow, no medium to large company would risk that kind of bad PR.

I'm afraid we are stuck with them so long as we have manginas and blue pill beta cucks running things. Which means more anti creepy training being rolled out turning all of us into walki g targets, fk this gay earth.

[The Father]

(06-25-2018 05:02 PM)BlueResolute Wrote:  

People on LinkedIn are surprisingly not too liberal. Only the HR and creative people comment with a left leaning view most of the time. I've seen some pretty civil people who instantly decredit stuff like the wage gap, ironically cause a lot of high ranked women are also on there and think it's BS. It's BS specifically because if the wage gap was enforced as a real thing, the real women in business will lose money simply due to economics. #MeToo was clearly a short sighted trend that went down the path we all expected it to. Just not as great as we thought it would turn out. We got some good entertainment from it.

What pisses me off about LinkedIn is the "you go girl"ism of many of my female connections...anytime there is a story that says "Sally Lou Boo-Hoo has just become the FIRST CxO of XYZ Corp!", my female connections all instinctively hit "like", like they were flicking their bean in the bath. None of them know Sally Lou. None of them have ever worked, or know anyone who worked, at XYZ Corp. None of them even know what a CxO really does. But they all cheer, like lemmings. Or children.

[jeffreyjerpp]

(06-25-2018 06:28 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

Good points, but 95% of the businesses in the US are small companies. Law firms, doctors, plumbers. All of them hire women in mass quantities, to do the bookkeeping and assist. Retail stores, etc. Here in So Cal there are tech startups and manufacturing of all kinds. They all hire gals as marketing hr, sales, bookkeeping.

CEOs would not "tell" their hiring departments to stop hiring women. That's not how it's done. They simply stop approving hires that are women. It's simple and unstoppable. Easily deniable. CEOs do this sort of thing every day, it's part of running a biz. All CEOs think about sex harassment lawsuits constantly because, as the article says, they're a risk factor. If you're a ceo an your company is sued, you can end up losing your life savings.

Women have literally fucked themselves here, and bigly. CEOs will protect their companies by avoiding dangerous and risky female hires. Women will collectively realize, after a while, that it is increasingly difficult/impossible to get jobs at small and medium sized companies because the #MeToo suicide vest approach to employment made them impossible to work with.

Women ruining companies and careers with unprovable allegations was the problem to begin with. Therefore, to become employable again, they will have to either renounce the ability to make allegations altogether, or more realistically, provide hard proof of any allegation, and if it is insufficient, find themselves unemployed and branded as feminist troublemakers.

In other words, whatever flimsy barriers stood between women and the Harvey Weinsteins of the world before, will have to be destroyed, simply to make them safe to employee.

Chalk up another epic win for feminism.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

Something else is happening too: #metoo took away what little fun there is in office work.

Most jobs are drudgery. The way people make their work hours more bearable is by befriending others or flirting with their co-workers.

Now, thanks to #metoo, that's gone. Socializing will be kept to a minimum. Conversations will have to be to the point. Oh, and all the stuff we did at the office back in the 1990s and 2000s can't happen anymore: Going out drinking, dating someone you work with, crude inside jokes, etc.

The office has become like Winston Smith's in "1984," where you don't dare speak to anyone for fear of saying the wrong thing and being booted out.

Women are more social than men, so they're the ones who will suffer more in the new sterile office environment. So they really shot themselves in the foot with #metoo, in more ways than one.

[MrLemon]

(06-25-2018 11:49 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

Something else is happening too: #metoo took away what little fun there is in office work.

Most jobs are drudgery. The way people make their work hours more bearable is by befriending others or flirting with their co-workers.

Now, thanks to #metoo, that's gone. Socializing will be kept to a minimum. Conversations will have to be to the point. Oh, and all the stuff we did at the office back in the 1990s and 2000s can't happen anymore: Going out drinking, dating someone you work with, crude inside jokes, etc.

The office has become like Winston Smith's in "1984," where you don't dare speak to anyone for fear of saying the wrong thing and being booted out.

Women are more social than men, so they're the ones who will suffer more in the new sterile office environment. So they really shot themselves in the foot with #metoo, in more ways than one.

I keep reading comments by women, complaining about "no top executives are willing to mentor me". Right next to that complaint is a rah-rah for #Metoo destroying another high end male executive.

These women are *literally* insane. Or their brains have endured so many spins of the hamster wheel that there is only lumpy oatmeal left in their skull.

[Beyond Borders]

All I can say is goddam glad I don't work in offices.

[CleanSlate]

If I still worked in an office, I would be worrying about whether to even say "good morning" in passing by a woman and how to say it in a neutral tone with a poker face. I wouldn't even want to risk a smile in case that might be misinterpreted as leering. I probably would not even smile or say anything at all.

Yeah. Just like being a robot devoid of any humanity whatsoever. This is what they wanted!

[Richard Turpin]

These posts are spot-on about the toxicity of modern offices. I've worked for the same organisation for many, many years and have seen the atmosphere deteriorate via the introduction of quotas. Our last CEO made it his goal to 'get more women in the workplace', it became his mantra. His Twitter feed is full of female first propaganda. Interestingly, he slipped up once and liked a couple of femdom porn sites so that might give you an insight into his motivations here!

As a result, we've gone from a relaxed (but efficient) high-trust team, with minimal meetings and quick and decisive decision making to a nervous, time-wasting, back-stabbing mess of bureaucracy and diversity propaganda.

If I had my time again I wouldn't work in an office, but the pay, terms and conditions, pension etc are so good that I've trapped myself. I'm trying to work on a side hustle to get some options to get out.

[Winston Wolfe]

(06-26-2018 12:35 AM)CleanSlate Wrote:  

If I still worked in an office, I would be worrying about whether to even say "good morning" in passing by a woman and how to say it in a neutral tone with a poker face. I wouldn't even want to risk a smile in case that might be misinterpreted as leering. I probably would not even smile or say anything at all.

Yeah. Just like being a robot devoid of any humanity whatsoever. This is what they wanted!