You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[–]Tacometropolis0 points
3 points
3 points
(+3|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
It was because essentially a woman fired her, one that was perceived as automatically being correct in her gender discrimination lawsuit, and the people who still supported her after don't care about the verdict. They just see it as more confirmatory evidence that the system is rigged against women, and completely neglect the fact that her lawsuit was baseless.It's one of the reasons an echo chamber is so dangerous
[+]Voateodo0 points0 points0 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Voateodo0 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
Maybe you can explain this. I read article after article about her saying she lost a discrimination lawsuit... but thw lawsuit highlighted discrimination in SV. I don't get... I mean, she lost, doesn't that mean there wasn't discrimination?
Just because she lost the case that doesn't mean there wasn't discrimination. It just means she failed to prove to the court that there was enough of a discriminatory pattern there.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Tacometropolis 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
It was because essentially a woman fired her, one that was perceived as automatically being correct in her gender discrimination lawsuit, and the people who still supported her after don't care about the verdict. They just see it as more confirmatory evidence that the system is rigged against women, and completely neglect the fact that her lawsuit was baseless.It's one of the reasons an echo chamber is so dangerous
[–] Voateodo ago (edited ago)
Maybe you can explain this. I read article after article about her saying she lost a discrimination lawsuit... but thw lawsuit highlighted discrimination in SV. I don't get... I mean, she lost, doesn't that mean there wasn't discrimination?
[–] trebach ago
Just because she lost the case that doesn't mean there wasn't discrimination. It just means she failed to prove to the court that there was enough of a discriminatory pattern there.