It's an interesting thought experiment, if the original poster had qualified every statement in a different way...

"you just start working with a white person, giving the white person basic isolated tasks, and as the white person successfully progresses with their work, task are getting more and more complicated (salary, permissions as well). After few months of such freelance-ish work you can know for sure that this white person is compatible with the team, able to solve problems, able to learn. And only then the white person becomes an employee with offer, benefits and SO."

Now, I'd like to declare right up front I don't think the original poster was trying to exclude women. I think the original poster just wasn't thinking about their writing at all.

I think that's all the parent post was getting at--people should think more when they write, and make sure they think about what they're saying.

> people should think more when they write, and make sure they think about what they're saying

Maybe you should just stop overthinking what they wrote.

How is this overthinking?

They used heavily gendered language, someone pushed back, and I backed the person who pushed back.

You're probably a dude, too, huh, so reading he/his/him all the time doesn't phase you. Oh well. Keep goin', bro.

I feel sorry for your illness, really. "Bad english - fine, controversial hiring practices - fine, but he's using 'heavily gendered language' - alarm, take your pitchforks!"

Today's International Women's Day, so here's my gift for you: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unbias-the-interne...

> How is this overthinking?

Because it's based on the assumption that gendered language is unwelcome in the first place.

But continue if you like, the more normal people that see how ridiculous modern feminism has become the better, they'll take it less seriously.

What's it like, always needing people to know how much you like guns?