• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

Brainster said:
This one's pretty good:

36. In the three years prior to applying to this job, the number of formal suggestions I have submitted to my employer(s) is:

A Not employed: +10 points
B 0 +8 points
C 1 +6 points
D 2 +4 points
E 3 or more: +2 points.

We are looking for people who will shut up and do what we tell them, not waste precious management time with their idiotic ideas on how to improve things.
Click to expand...
Even better - we're looking for people who never had a job to give suggestions to at all!
 
bruto said:
Do you really believe that ignoring race completely erases the social, economic and political history of previous centuries? Even if you are right about issues of DEI, and how or whether it should occur that sounds pretty clueless.
Click to expand...
It seems like a much better approach than "Oh, you're white? Well that means your ancestors unfairly benefitted from society and it's now appropriate that you get fewer opportunities and become handicapped in recompense for your ancestor's sins" and "Oh, you're black? Well obviously you're far less capable and intelligent than your white counterparts, but don't worry, we've made this easier for you so you can get some benefits now to make up for what your grandparents didn't have."
 
bruto said:
He did actually state the position. There may well be arguments about how and when dei is appropriate, but ignoring the structural effect of histtory is not one.
Click to expand...
One of my ancestors was press-ganged onto a ship against their will, forced to work as a sailor during a transatlantic crossing, then sold into indentured servitude for 10 years to "pay back" the investment made by the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ that kidnapped them.

What kind of compensation do you think I'm due, as a result of the structural effect of history that has affected my life?
 
theprestige said:
In Portland, OR? Kind of, yes.

We recently passed a new tax in this county, to fund "Preschool for All". The stated purpose was to ensure that every child in the county who wanted preschool could get preschool.

What ended up happening was that the program was not fully funded, and families that had already secured a spot for their child in a functioning preschool, were forced to give up their spot so that some other more disadvantaged family could have it.
Click to expand...
I don't miss the pacific northwest. Well, okay, I kind of miss the trees and the green... but I really don't miss having to deal with the people in charge of it all.

ETA: The world is becoming dumber. My autocorrect just flagged the grammatically correct "kind of" and suggested I change it to "kinda".
 
Ziggurat said:
Even if? That's rather the main question here. Is DEI legal? Is it good policy? Seems like you're trying to avoid it. And you're doing so by assuming a position he didn't actually state.
Click to expand...
Is it diversity, equity or inclusion that is a problem for you?

Don't hide behind the TLA. Say it out loud: Diversity is neither legal nor good policy. Equity is neither legal nor good policy. Inclusion is neither legal nor good policy. Don't be a coward.

The biggest lie here is that diversity, equity and inclusion are the same as reverse discrimination against white heterosexual cisgender men. The lie is racist, homophobic and transphobic all rolled into one convenient Three Letter Acronym.

And you all have the absolute gall to claim you're the ones who favour meritocracy? You should be ashamed.
 
arthwollipot said:
Don't hide behind the TLA. Say it out loud: Diversity is neither legal nor good policy. Equity is neither legal nor good policy. Inclusion is neither legal nor good policy. Don't be a coward.
Click to expand...
DEI is not what the name plate advertises. It is racial discrimination. Explicitly so. And yes, racial discrimination is not legal or good policy.
arthwollipot said:
The biggest lie here is that diversity, equity and inclusion are the same as reverse discrimination against white heterosexual cisgender men.
Click to expand...
That's not a lie, that's a fact. And it's not just against whites. Racial discrimination against Asians in admissions to Harvard was more than against any other racial group. Scholarships and seminars for only select racial groups is racism. You can pretend that these things aren't real, but they are.
arthwollipot said:
You should be ashamed.
Click to expand...
Of what? Your lies? No, I'm not ashamed of how you lie about me. Why would I be?
 
Ziggurat said:
DEI is not what the name plate advertises.
Click to expand...
Except that it is. You might think you are banning racial discrimination but what you're actually banning is racial diversity. It's right there in the frickin name. And you might be all "oh, but it doesn't mean what it says it means" but it does. The opposite of inclusion is exclusion, and that's exactly how the DEI bans are being weaponised.

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to remove material better suited to the dedicated thread.

DEI is a dogwhistle for white cis hetero male supremacy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Emily's Cat said:
One of my ancestors was press-ganged onto a ship against their will, forced to work as a sailor during a transatlantic crossing, then sold into indentured servitude for 10 years to "pay back" the investment made by the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ that kidnapped them.

What kind of compensation do you think I'm due, as a result of the structural effect of history that has affected my life?
Click to expand...
Please excuse bad typing and spotty responses as I am killing time in an airport using phone. But I did not mention compensation, and my response was explicitly to the simplistic remark that implies the evils of racism will just go away if we just stop doing it.
 
bruto said:
Do you really believe that ignoring race completely erases the social, economic and political history of previous centuries?
Click to expand...
No. But here's the thing about history: it's in the past.
bruto said:
Even if you are right about issues of DEI, and how or whether it should occur that sounds pretty clueless.
Click to expand...
Yes. It was a pretty clueless thing for you to say.
 
Early 1900s: All the White boys have all the jobs and power, the KKK rides unfettered across the land.

1960s: Let's do something about all this slavery in all but name only, all this vile and racist whitewashing.

Odd moments in history: "Let's write a real history book. Say, one about factual events in the Americas, 1600-today." Canceled, books banned, burnings scheduled. "Whaddaya mean, 'moral spine'? I gots me gym muscles to hold me up instead, so there!"

Today: Any and all measures intended to dismantle, diminish or reduce the effects of rampant and systemic White boy privilege are "racist". And, hey, let's burn more books!

The only way to get from "all White" to "representative of the general population" is via mechanisms designed to counteract systemic bias, which in practice will obviously mean proportionally fewer White male "wins" over decades. Notice the word "fewer"; it does not mean "zero". (Zero is the IQ score of those who find this all too confusing.)

Oh... did you wish to say the genpop is in itself incapable of a producing a level playing field if merit alone is taken into account, because, well, White boys are in fact smarter and superior? Problem is, if you really level the playing field and allow companies to contract the best and the brightest on merit alone, you get special visa programs and a lot more women in the work force... along with lesser-skilled White male bitching and moaning. Outed!
 
Besides, word was back in the early 1970s that Black players could never be good quarterbacks in the NFL; not smart enough. Last Superbowl buried White QB privilege 6 feet under, then stomped on it. Oops.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
Today: Any and all measures intended to dismantle, diminish or reduce the effects of rampant and systemic White boy privilege are "racist".
Click to expand...
Nope. But discriminating on the basis of race is racist, even if you're doing it in favor of blacks. Once you concede that racial discrimination is OK, then it's just a fight for which racial group you're favoring, and you might not win that fight. You can't actually oppose racial discrimination as bad in and of itself if you're engaging in it.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
Besides, word was back in the early 1970s that Black players could never be good quarterbacks in the NFL; not smart enough. Last Superbowl buried White QB privilege 6 feet under, then stomped on it. Oops.
Click to expand...
What do you mean, oops? This example doesn't prove your point, it proves you wrong. The NFL didn't have to discriminate against white quarterbacks in order for a black quarterback to come out on top. He did it on his own merits.
 
Ziggurat said:
DEI is not what the name plate advertises. It is racial discrimination. Explicitly so. And yes, racial discrimination is not legal or good policy.

That's not a lie, that's a fact. And it's not just against whites. Racial discrimination against Asians in admissions to Harvard was more than against any other racial group. Scholarships and seminars for only select racial groups is racism. You can pretend that these things aren't real, but they are.

Of what? Your lies? No, I'm not ashamed of how you lie about me. Why would I be?
Click to expand...
What is wrong with helping out historically marginalized and persecuted groups? Its called Justice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom