So-called Anti-Woke, Anti-DEI policy catch-all

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 291
  • Views: 4K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
One is primarily focused on race. The other is focused on race, gender, sex, etc. I will take to my grave that continuing to make superficial characteristics, like skin color, important is contrary to what we should want. if we considered hair color in hiring, you would recognize the silliness of such actions.

I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. I'm also not saying that human nature doesn't mean we are naturally inclined to surrounding ourselves with people who are "like" ourselves. I'm just saying that continuing to make the irrelevant relevant, even with good intentions, isn't helping.
Click to expand...
It isn't helping for racists and those that don't understand what DEI is all about.
 
ZenMode said:
One is primarily focused on race. The other is focused on race, gender, sex, etc. I will take to my grave that continuing to make superficial characteristics, like skin color, important is contrary to what we should want. if we considered hair color in hiring, you would recognize the silliness of such actions.

I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. I'm also not saying that human nature doesn't mean we are naturally inclined to surrounding ourselves with people who are "like" ourselves. I'm just saying that continuing to make the irrelevant relevant, even with good intentions, isn't helping.
Click to expand...
@superrific

Not to belabor the point about hair color, but imagine a world where it was noticed how few gingers are in CEO positions. To fix the issue, universities collectively decided to modify admissions requirements to admit more students with red hair into their schools of business.

Seems reasonable, right? There's an issue and, by God, we aren't going to tolerate anti-ginger sentiment in this country!
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
imagine a world where it was noticed how few gingers are in CEO positions. To fix the issue, universities collectively decided to modify admissions requirements to admit more students with red hair into their schools of business.
Click to expand...

You're not being serious here, are you?
 
ZenMode said:
@superrific

Not to belabor the point about hair color, but imagine a world where it was noticed how few gingers are in CEO positions. To fix the issue, universities collectively decided to modify admissions requirements to admit more students with red hair into their schools of business.

Seems reasonable, right? There's an issue and, by God, we aren't going to tolerate anti-ginger sentiment in this country!
Click to expand...
Of course, bias against red hair is ancient and generally connected to racism. One claim is Judas Iscariot was redheaded. Another blames it on the brutality of Thracian warriors. An acquaintance of mine had red hair as the mark of Cain (Kane, in his spelling) in a sword and sorcery series. There are still manifestations of it in the modern world and laws have been considered.

Didn't have a particular point other than to point out your record of obfuscation is intact.
 
ZenMode said:
Here's where the divide seems to exist between Democrats and Republicans, even including MAGA....

Being not only tolerant, but accepting of all races/nationalities, religions, sexes, etc is not the same as having policies that are actively discriminatory by prioritizing non-white, non-male, non-cis, non-straight people.
Click to expand...
We discussed this before. You insisted DEI cannot exist without this type of discrimination in hiring.
Are you saying now it can exist without discrimination in hiring?
 
TarSpiel said:
You're not being serious here, are you?
Click to expand...
Sure. Why not. If we are going to consider melanin in skin for college admissions, job hiring and SCOTUS appointments, why not consider melanin in hair for college admissions, job hiring and SCOTUS appointments?

I mean, @finesse just laid out historical justification for it.
 
ZenMode said:
Sure. Why not. If we are going to consider melanin in skin for college admissions, job hiring and SCOTUS appointments, why not consider melanin in hair for college admissions, job hiring and SCOTUS appointments?

I mean, @finesse just laid out historical justification for it.
Click to expand...

You think gingers were subject to something equivalent to Jim Crow constraints, and are in disproportionately impoverished neighborhoods and underrepresented in colleges, universities, and white collar jobs right now?
 
ZenMode said:
Not to belabor the point about hair color, but imagine a world where it was noticed how few gingers are in CEO positions. To fix the issue, universities collectively decided to modify admissions requirements to admit more students with red hair into their schools of business.

Seems reasonable, right? There's an issue and, by God, we aren't going to tolerate anti-ginger sentiment in this country!
Click to expand...
It's probably best for you not to pursue this line of thinking. Trivializing the very real pain, the very real oppression visited upon black people in this country by comparing it to a nothing is blatantly offensive. You aren't making a good point-- you're just showing a willingness not just to compare apples to oranges, but apples to bits of molds on crusty bread. Analogies have to be apt to be effective, and this isn't apt at all.

Also, there is such a thing as hair discrimination, so there's that.
 
TarSpiel said:
You think gingers were subject to something equivalent to Jim Crow constraints, and are in disproportionately impoverished neighborhoods and underrepresented in colleges, universities, and white collar jobs right now?
Click to expand...
Of course not, but DEI isn't just about skin melanin. That's just one aspect that I referenced because it fit easily with hair melanin.

DEI is also about, among other things, whether you want your naughty parts touched by someone with the same genitals as you or different genitals than you and whether you believe, in your mind, you should have a penis or vagina.
 
superrific said:
It's probably best for you not to pursue this line of thinking. Trivializing the very real pain, the very real oppression visited upon black people in this country by comparing it to a nothing is blatantly offensive. You aren't making a good point-- you're just showing a willingness not just to compare apples to oranges, but apples to bits of molds on crusty bread. Analogies have to be apt to be effective, and this isn't apt at all.

Also, there is such a thing as hair discrimination, so there's that.
Click to expand...
I'm not trivializing the mistreatment of any given group, including black people. I'm disputing the belief that the best course of action to resolve discrimination is a different type of discrimination.

BTW @finesse already laid out details of "red hair" discrimination, so don't trivialize the experience of gingers.
 
ZenMode said:
I'm not trivializing the mistreatment of any given group, including black people.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are. Surely you can see that. If not, I can't help you. Either way, I'm not going to engage with this bullshit. It is deeply offensive and it makes me upset. Next time a gunman walks into a church to shoot and kill as many red-haired people as possible, maybe we can talk.
 
ZenMode said:
Does DEI take things like race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, etc into account when making decisions?
Click to expand...
What decisions do you think they are making?

Never mind. I'm stopping here. I know that you and the rest of the maga cult believe that DEI is affirmative action and that someone is going to replace your lilly white ass with a brown person. Is there a marginalized group that you don't hate? It seems that ever post I read of yours you're explaining how trans people shouldn't have equal rights or how non white people can only have equal rights if white people don't feel offended. God please just go fuck yourself.
 
ZenMode said:
I'm disputing the belief that the best course of action to resolve discrimination is a different type of discrimination.
Click to expand...
Everyone would prefer to "resolve discrimination" by simply ending it in all forms. But it is exceedingly difficult to change hearts and minds. In the meantime, maybe the best we can do is help those that have historically been disadvantaged as a result of discrimination, including discrimination sanctioned and perpetrated by the federal and state governments. That doesn't require changing hearts, it just requires having one.
 
superrific said:
Yes, you are. Surely you can see that. If not, I can't help you. Either way, I'm not going to engage with this bullshit. It is deeply offensive and it makes me upset. Next time a gunman walks into a church to shoot and kill as many red-haired people as possible, maybe we can talk.
Click to expand...
No, he, like other maga cultist, cannot see it.

They don't understand that it isn't a zero-sum game and that elevating marginalized people doesn't require bringing down white people.

He clearly shows in his post that he believes any effort to treat marginalized groups equally is wrong.
 
TarSpiel said:
You're not being serious here, are you?
Click to expand...
Yes he is.

We should all know zen's MO by now and just ignore him.

He has some warped opinion that DEI racist toward white people and that all non-cis gendered people want more than they have ever asked for.

I can't figure out if it's ignorance or jealousy or he just gets some kind of enjoyment out of talking about this shit all the time.
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
Everyone would prefer to "resolve discrimination" by simply ending it in all forms. But it is exceedingly difficult to change hearts and minds. In the meantime, maybe the best we can do is help those that have historically been disadvantaged as a result of discrimination, including discrimination sanctioned and perpetrated by the federal and state governments. That doesn't require changing hearts, it just requires having one.
Click to expand...
"But it is exceedingly difficult to change hearts and minds."

I think it has been, at one time in our past, difficult to change hearts and minds, but hearts and minds have been changed and there is objective evidence of that. A two term black president being a big one. Not only a 2 term black president, but a two term black president with a Muslim-sounding name who won soon after 9/11. We also have a more and more diverse Congress.

I grew up with a dad who regularly used the n-word in an angry, hateful way. I now have two kids who would be absolutely horrified if I ever used that word. I mean absoluuuuuuuutely horrified. That's how I want it to be. Just that fast transformation happens.

I view our current "changing of hearts" as a domino pyramid. One knocks over two, knocks over 4, knocks over 8, etc. We are on the downside of a bell curve. The climb was difficult, but we're over the apex and are on the downside but the approach that some/much of the Democratic party is taking, I believe, is doing more harm than good. We don't need to fight discrimination with discrimination. We need to fight like hell to STOP focusing on irrelevant characteristics like skin color and nationality and sexual orientation. IMO Dems are getting greedy....over zealous. In their rush to fix every injustice, they're actually creating resentment and resistance.
 
ZenMode said:
DEI is also about, among other things, whether you want your naughty parts touched by someone with the same genitals as you or different genitals than you and whether you believe, in your mind, you should have a penis or vagina.
Click to expand...

Yea, I don't know what your direct experience is with DEI, but I've had a lot, and none of it is remotely close to what you've written here.

Let me ask you something. 45.5/46 of our presidents have been white men. Do you think that's because white men are superior to white women, and to men and women of every other race?

If not, what factors do you think led to the situation we have now, 45.5/46 white presidents?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top