Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

Ziggurat said:
Of course they are. Because DEI is full of ◊◊◊◊.

Again, DEI is not, and has never been, anti discrimination. It is and has always been an effort to produce discrimination intended to correct perceived historical injustices. You can’t no true Scotsman your way around that.
Click to expand...
"Perceived"? LMAO
 
arthwollipot said:
Your "DEI" is all those things. And your insistence that your ridiculous definition is all that there can be.
Click to expand...
OK. Between this forum and SGU, I've backed up "my" definition of DEI with two Biden executive orders instituting DEI throughout the federal government, a peer-reviewed paper, and several online articles. You havre yet to provide any evidence that there is something called DEI that does what you say it does anywhere other than in your mind.
 
acbytesla said:
"Perceived"? LMAO
Click to expand...
Yes, perceived. Whether that perception is correct or not is a separate matter. I'm not disputing any particular perception (and certainly some perceptions of oppression are correct), but it is still perception that this is based on. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
 
jt512 said:
Are you ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ serious? If you don't know, how can you disagree with me? And how can you not know, when I've explained it over and over again, including just a few posts up.
Click to expand...
You're becoming incoherent. In fact, I've already said what I think DEI does, and you summarily dismissed it. You appear to think I think DEI does something different from that. The link you posted does not explain what you think I say it does, it explains what you say it does, which, yes, you have indeed explained over and over again. Because I think it does something different from that, I disagree with you.
 
arthwollipot said:
You're becoming incoherent. In fact, I've already said what I think DEI does, and you summarily dismissed it. You appear to think I think DEI does something different from that. The link you posted does not explain what you think I say it does, it explains what you say it does, which, yes, you have indeed explained over and over again. Because I think it does something different from that, I disagree with you.
Click to expand...
Relax. Obviously I misread your question. I understand what you think the kind of DEI that you believe exists somewhere does, or is, or tries to do. There is no reason for me to reiterate it. It is just an attempt at misdirection to hopefully avoid having to defend your position.
 
Trausti said:
Can we just be done with "businesses are more succesful with DEI" nonsense. Nonreplicable flimflam.
Click to expand...

You simply not liking something doesn't make it wrong. So far, your choice of arguments against have demonstrated that your words don't rely much on understanding or reality so much as grasping at straws to reinforce preferred narratives. There certainly are fair criticisms that can be raised about DEI programs and arguments related to them, some of which have and are being raised. I haven't seen much of value in what you've chosen to write, though, including when it comes to the relevance of DEI programs on efforts to attract and retain employees. For yet another easy example of why I'm not seeing much value -

Trausti said:
Yeah. When it uses an alphabet soup to promote inclusivity, though it is actually excluding those not mentioned in the soup, it's not anti-discrimination.
Click to expand...
The operative thing actually in question had been "perceived historical injustices" there. Your response was entirely irrelevant to that. Ziggurat's response, on the other hand, was entirely relevant.

Ziggurat said:
Yes, perceived. Whether that perception is correct or not is a separate matter. I'm not disputing any particular perception (and certainly some perceptions of oppression are correct), but it is still perception that this is based on. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
Click to expand...

To poke at that - what would likely be the root of the controversy there is a perception that significant and well documented wrongs are being downplayed by that choice of terminology. There's likely also an additional perception that it's being done by those who have benefited in some way from those wrongs and have been pointedly opposing actions intended to undo the damage done. Whether that perception is correct or not, an emotional reaction is unsurprising under the circumstances, I think.
 
jt512 said:
Relax. Obviously I misread your question. I understand what you think the kind of DEI that you believe exists somewhere does, or is, or tries to do. There is no reason for me to reiterate it. It is just an attempt at misdirection to hopefully avoid having to defend your position.
Click to expand...
What is there to defend? My position is literally the dictionary definitions of those words.
 
arthwollipot said:
Again, for the umpteenth time, the people who are doing that and calling it "DEI" are full of ◊◊◊◊. What are we arguing about again?
Click to expand...
Okay, I'll bite.

What is actual DEI? Please explain it so that we can all understand where you're coming from, and why that doesn't apply to the "◊◊◊◊ implementations" that you insist are not DEI.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Okay, I'll bite.

What is actual DEI? Please explain it so that we can all understand where you're coming from, and why that doesn't apply to the "◊◊◊◊ implementations" that you insist are not DEI.
Click to expand...
*rolleyes*
arthwollipot said:
I haven't claimed that it makes money. That's the capitalist wet dream. I'm interested in making people and society a better place for everybody. Diversity means that nobody is excluded from opportunity. Equity means that everybody has access to the same opportunity. Inclusion means that everybody is represented, regardless of their circumstances and who they are.

Some people and organisations do not believe in these ideals.
Click to expand...
 
arthwollipot said:
*rolleyes*
Click to expand...
So... DEI training would consist of... "don't exclude anyone from consideration for any opportunity" and "consider everyone equally for every opportunity" and "make sure you have at one of every possible kind of person from every walk of life represented in every job"?

I'm going to push back on your very, very wishes-and-fairies representation.

Diversity means that nobody is excluded from opportunity.
Click to expand...
Therefore overweight males should be given the opportunity to work as runway models for female clothing designers. And Danny Devito should be given the opportunity to plan the role of Ms. Congeniality. And a 5'0", 95lb female should be given the opportunity to be a firefighter. Seems totally reasonable.

Equity means that everybody has access to the same opportunity.
Click to expand...
Therefore the person who just graduated high school should have access the the same opportunity to perform neurosurgery as the person who has an MD in that specialty. And the person with a degree in fine art and no math beyond high school algebra should have access to the same opportunity to do your taxes.

Inclusion means that everybody is represented, regardless of their circumstances and who they are.
Click to expand...
Therefore con-artists should be represented in the running of charitable endeavors, and child sex offenders should be represented in daycare centers, and meth-heads should be represented in pharmacy management...

Okay, I've poked fun at you enough. My point is that your clever little bit of condescension is devoid of meaning. You didn't actually explain what DEI is in any meaningful way. All you did was tell us what the letters stand for - something that we already know. So how about you try again? You've been quite insistent that the various policies and practices that have been presented as being counterproductive aren't "real DEI". But you seem rather silent on presenting policies that you think qualify as "real DEI".
 
arthwollipot said:
*rolleyes*
Click to expand...
You're making the mistake of assuming that a compound word or phrase in English is a concatenation of the meanings of its constituent words when taken separately.

You're also making the mistake of assuming that people always choose nice names because they're doing nice things, rather than because they want to be perceived as doing nice things when they're not.

DEI programs in the US are largely comprised of progressive sociopolitical woo. As people have been trying to tell you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom