Pro-family organizations are apparently “hate groups”

Some people believe that the technology sector would provide a refuge from the leftist libshit mainstream, but that is not necessarily the case. Tech loves their “diversity”, which normally means that every woman who knows how to use a mouse will be hired as an “agile coach” or “scrum master” or “change agent” and whatnot, where she can boss nerds around and tell them how they should work on product innovations.

In particular in the US, the leftist shitlib bias is rather strong, though. For instance, news aggregator Hacker News is full of retards who get their panties in a twist when they hear a word like meritocracy, and who believe that the reason there are so few Latinos and blacks in tech is because of collusion of the whiteys, and not because they are on average a lot less intelligent. In a marvelous display of double think, they can’t seem to acknowledge that the strong presence of Asians, due to their inherently higher IQ, undermines the “all men are equal” nonsense those feeble minds love to spout. “If the Asians could do it, then why not the Blacks!”, those who’ve been educated so much they ended up getting stupider mutter.

It’s no surprise that those lefties who think they are at the forefront of technology because they watch HD porn on their iPhones and donated to Bernie Sanders with a click on a website get a bit uncomfortable when facing views that contradict their own. It’s even worse if you’re a shitlib leftie who’s out of work and has to put food on his table, and the only offer is from a company that promotes the traditional family unit. This is what happened to some hapless shitlib who bought into the bootcamp hype and paid an eye-watering $21k for 24 weeks of instruction in web development instead of teaching himself what he needed to know. As he thought he was in quite a quagmire, he posted on tech-shitlib watering hole r/cscareerquestions, wondering whether working at a “polarizing” company will hurt his future career, despite not having a career yet.

The job was at “Focus on the Family”, who love the core family but, unsurprisingly, aren’t too fond of gays raising kids and all that. I’d say it’s a laudable cause, but what did the fellow shitlibs on that forum think? It was quite something:

– “hate group”
– “regressive world view”
– “rancid organization”

More shocking comments included:

I used to be a tech recruiter at a few large companies in NYC. Myself and 90% of my peers would’ve thrown your resume in the trash immediately. I wouldn’t want to bring in someone who could potentially make other devs feel uncomfortable, even open us up to lawsuits.

Or this one:

In my [huge software corp], being suspected of any conservative leaning or even lack of hatred towards conservatives is immediate cause for ostracizing, including people threatening to treat people differently in a professional setting.
(…) It seems to be widely accepted under the “it’s not just a political opinion, it is a direct threat to our coworkers because conservatives are anti-LGBTQ, anti-women, anti-muslims, etc.”. (…) If desperate, find work at wholesome organizations such as P0rnTube.

From this post we learn how lefties in tech view their industry:

If you ever want to get a job on either coast you should steer clear IMO. Most companies shouldn’t cause too much trouble on your resume — drugs, porn, gambling are probably all fine. But FOTF is basically a hate group and would get your resume thrown out anywhere I’ve ever worked…

Yeah, drugs, porn, whoring, single moms, life on welfare are all fine, but if you want to get a job that indirectly contributes to strengthening society, you’ll get into trouble.

A practical example: my current team has a gay dude married to a dude. I’m not a hiring manager, but let’s imagine I am. I see a resume from someone who had worked for FOTF. How am I supposed to determine if the candidate is a homophobe who sincerely supported his employer’s promotion of discrimination and hate speech and will have problems working with gays, or just a “money does not smell” type?

So, let’s say you hire a deranged feminist — how would you know that she doesn’t cause trouble at work and make life hell for her white male peers? Right, that’s different!

The thread starter pointed out that that non-profit doesn’t engage in lying and deception. That’s apparently not good either:

Yes, I would be employed directly by Focus on the Family. It seems it would be difficult to obfuscate the name as it would go against the nature of the organization to assist me with that. Any phone number I provided would lead directly to someone who would identify that I worked for Focus on the Family.

Better get a job at a shady porn site, then!

It’s not a secret that a lot of Bay Area IT people are liberal or at least pro gay rights. I can imagine them not liking a candidate who had worked for rabid religious zealot douchebags. I can also imagine employers in other places caring less about that but still caring.

So, working for “religious zealots” is bad, but working for libshit zealots is not, right?

So, if you’re conservative, you better put up a front, at least if you work in the Bay Area or on the East Coast. Based on my experience in corporate Europe in a male-dominated field, people relatively freely express conservative views. I even experienced and entire group ganging up on some leftist PhD student who claimed that we needed large-scale immigration from Third World shitholes in order to “rejuvenate society” and “give society a creative boost”. I have a hard time seeing this happen at some “progressive” tech office in the US.

7 thoughts on “Pro-family organizations are apparently “hate groups”

  1. Companies nowadays switched their focus of being profitable to being political correct. The reason this has happened, they did go well in the past and have now enough resources to establish these bullshit criteria. But one day they’ll ask (this happens right now in the company I work for) what are the products the costumer pays for and who plays a part here to develop them? First step then is to throw out the ppl who are not useful – and it doesn’t matter if they’re left, right, conservative, hetero, gay or whatever.

    1. The company is huge and works among other things as a supplier in the car industry. Some areas have been really successfull – and still are, some others dont and have been sold to competetitive companies from china.

      Before the diesel scandal begun in 2015 no one cared where money went: The whole work climate focused on “diversity is our strength” – which in my mind is not a bad thing, if work performance is not indifferent (for example, as a team leader i dont care if a constructor is from india and not from europe, as long as he does his job. But i have problems keeping projects on track if collegues dont even know software or dont follow job instructions).
      Thousands of euros have been burned for workshops and seminars to teach “a respectful work climate”, “how to dress well”, “to be rebellious”, “how to make a good powerpoint” and so on. Every week there where workshops…and at the end of the week, only few ppl worked on the products that our costumers wanted. It even went that far, that – due to the reason we all sit in a open space office and collegues sit face to face – they spent a lot of money for interior walls. The reason was, if a women wants to raise up her desk and a man sits towards her, he can take a look at her legs. Stupid enough to not think about the fact, that everyone can take a look at her if she walks to her desk.

      After the diesel scandal gathered pace in 2016 and the company had to conserve money for possible future lawsuits, to stay profitable and to realign business…no one cared about diversity, how you’re dressed and so one, anymore.
      Overall steps have been on being competitive again: tasks and performance. Downsizing with restructuring. There was – and still is – a good work atmosphere, but more focused on goals and being efficient. Colleagues are not being controlled, but their tasks are now managed with excel sheets to have an overview if they have capacity and to use synergies.

      Other areas – as i mentioned above – have not been so lucky: Over the yrs they created so many (unproductive) positions that they had no chance anymore of being competitive. In one case 120 ppl worked for the department that produced fuels pumps, but only 6 ppl have been involved in developing and producing. To this day no one really knows what the other 114 ppl did. The only solution was to sell the whole section.

      So overall: Focussing only on being political correct works, if you got too much money to burn. To be competitive and profitable, your focus has to 1st be on the market and your customer and 2nd gathering the right ppl around you to achieve that.

    2. Thanks for sharing! This sounds ludicrous. Your experience is a great illustration of how diversity bullshit wrecks companies. Let’s hope your employer manages to turn the ship around.

    3. “Thanks for sharing! This sounds ludicrous. Your experience is a great illustration of how diversity bullshit wrecks companies. Let’s hope your employer manages to turn the ship around.”
      If I’m guessing correctly about the company they should be alright. They went overboard with diversity and shit like that. Even as an outsider I noticed that.

      As by the way did the car manufacturers. Seems a near monopoly, a (probably) cartell and unhealthy ties between politics and business doesn’t only get you boatloads of money, it makes you arrogant and cocky.

  2. I have mostly worked in financial services, so I cannot speak for business as a whole, but I would not be too optimistic about anyone’s long term prospects if they stated their focus was not on the bottom line. Everybody pays lip service to political correctness because it is good marketing.

    “Focus on the Family” is a political advocacy group for fundamentalist Christians, who certainly have a lot of influence in US politics at least. Its founder is, among other things, a strong advocate for the creation of a theocracy in the US. Assuming your workplace is not a hotbed of religious fundamentalism, it would be understandable to wonder about any job seeker that had that organization on his or her resume.

    1. Hi Clarke
      What are your experiences with regards to efforts of promoting diversity finance industry wise?
      I have seen women go from semi-solid product management position or legal/compliance to total BS like “Head of Diversity & Inclusion”.

      Otherwise, I don’t see much fuzz about diversity in finance
      UBS did reference a study once, that somehow companies with more women employed perform better (the “women take less risk” explanation), but I guess it’s the usual correlation-vs.-causality trap.
      Anyway, after that study came out, one of my female colleagues asked a investment fund product manager, when a fund playing that them will be launched, to which he just replied: “Gender diversity? – Can you short that?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.