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

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 726
  • Views: 16K
  • Politics 
sringwal said:
You would hope?

But I’d that turns out not to be the case…

Then what?

Where is your line in the sand?
Click to expand...
Then, at some point in the future, we eventually return to a reasonable position.

To me, this is all apart of the normal pendulum swinging we often see with social topics. We had wokeness, cancel culture, DEI, etc as the pendulum swinging too far left and now we are swinging back, possibly too far, to the right.

At some point, we will swing back toward the middle and back toward a reasonable position.
 
farce© said:
Well that makes me feel better. 🫥
Click to expand...
Can't wait to see all of those monuments to Confederate "heroes" going back up. I'm sure that will cause large-scale protests, and I'm sure that the Trump Administration will take full advantage of said protests. They're probably hoping to stir up protests so they can use force to shut them down.
 
Last edited:
Fwiw, I never had much objection to the war time and immediate postwar monuments. However, I have entirely different feelings about those set in place around the 50th anniversary. They weren't just memorializing the war but the Lost Cause. That was wrong then and now.
 
ZenMode said:
I've heard of Jasmine Crockett, but apparently had no idea "who" she is.

Yes, Jasmine....the key to preventing this inexcusable mistake is more melanin, a vagina and boobs.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what race and gender are about. None. The idea that black people and white people make decisions in the same way -- it's bunk. People are shaped by their experiences. Black people and white people have different experiences. Do you really think that Barack Obama would have been exactly who he was had he white skin and a white name?

And women versus men is an even easier case. There's a small library worth of research on differences in gender roles, behavior among people of different genders, etc. Some of that is about a nature/nurture debate. Some of it takes a more social psych approach. Some of it merely documents the different styles.

To take one example: minority and women directors of companies manage those companies differently than white men (and not identically to each other). There's loads of evidence that companies do better when they have diverse boards -- which is one reason that the attacks on "DEI" fall flat in corporate America. It is literally the case that a company forced to abandon DEI for the board of directors can be expected to perform worse, on average, than with DEI.

It's just mind-boggling that a person able to write coherent sentences would not realize that there is far more to being a woman than tits and ass. That's your theory, literally. Women are different from men because of tits and ass. This is the way you go through life?
 

Trump administration reportedly warns European companies to comply with anti-DEI order​



“… The letters, distributed by the American embassies in Paris and across the E.U. also included a questionnaire ordering the companies to certify their compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws. The existence of the letter was first reported Friday by the French business daily Les Echos.

U.S. diplomats in eastern E.U. states and Belgium also sent out the letter, the Financial Times reported.

… The French finance ministry expressed concerns about the approach by the U.S. government, saying its values don’t reflect that of France. The development underscores growing tensions between the U.S. and Europe, particularly as the U.S. threatens tariffs on European goods including cars and wine, and challenges European policies, such as the invasion of Ukraine.”
 
superrific said:
You have no idea what race and gender are about. None. The idea that black people and white people make decisions in the same way -- it's bunk. People are shaped by their experiences. Black people and white people have different experiences. Do you really think that Barack Obama would have been exactly who he was had he white skin and a white name?

And women versus men is an even easier case. There's a small library worth of research on differences in gender roles, behavior among people of different genders, etc. Some of that is about a nature/nurture debate. Some of it takes a more social psych approach. Some of it merely documents the different styles.

To take one example: minority and women directors of companies manage those companies differently than white men (and not identically to each other). There's loads of evidence that companies do better when they have diverse boards -- which is one reason that the attacks on "DEI" fall flat in corporate America. It is literally the case that a company forced to abandon DEI for the board of directors can be expected to perform worse, on average, than with DEI.

It's just mind-boggling that a person able to write coherent sentences would not realize that there is far more to being a woman than tits and ass. That's your theory, literally. Women are different from men because of tits and ass. This is the way you go through life?
Click to expand...
It is a ridiculous thing for her to say. The fact that you think that boobs, a vagina and extra melanin is going to somehow prevent the mistake that made is as ridiculous as her comment.

She, like Boebert, makes AOC look like Neil deGrasse Tyson.
 
Last edited:
I read my South Carolina statehouse representative's "progress report" in the local newspaper this morning. He went on and on about how he and his brethren were going after DEI to end preferences and to restore "a fair merit driven system". YET, in the same article, he mentions preserving "veteran preferences".

If the goal is a merit-driven system with no preferences, how do veteran preferences factor into that system?
 
UNCMSinLS said:
I read my South Carolina statehouse representative's "progress report" in the local newspaper this morning. He went on and on about how he and his brethren were going after DEI to end preferences and to restore "a fair merit driven system". YET, in the same article, he mentions preserving "veteran preferences".

If the goal is a merit-driven system with no preferences, how do veteran preferences factor into that system?
Click to expand...
Looked at as an earned benefit, I'd guess. I don't have a real problem with that.
 
finesse said:
Looked at as an earned benefit, I'd guess. I don't have a real problem with that.
Click to expand...
I suppose race, gender, and economic status are earned drawbacks? If the object is to develop a "merit-driven system", it seems to me that no one would get a "benefit" over another based on a potentially irrelevant set of skills.
 
The federal government has a policy that , I believe, 10% of purchases have to be done from a veteran owned company. That might only apply to technology, I don't remember exactly.

Anyway, recognizing the fact that the federal government was "picking winners" again, some former co-workers of mine started a company and picked some random veteran to be the so-called owner, that way they would qualify.

It was a very small company to start and the person that they picked to run their entire order fulfillment was a barely functioning alcoholic that had made a very good name for herself at the company where we both worked. Upon checking online, it looks like that company is no longer around.

Anyway.. I wouldn't really label this as DEI. This, as I mentioned above, is the government picking winners.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
Correct, based on ridiculous and superficial physical characteristics. I don't put military service in the category of DEI.
Click to expand...
1. Military service is no more relevant for most jobs than those "ridiculous" characteristics;
2. If military service makes people more qualified, then there would be no need for set-asides;
3. So you are interfering with the labor market, putting less qualified people in place over more qualified, all in the name of a "qualification" that has nothing to do with the job in question.

The reason that you don't think it's DEI is entirely personal preference: you like veterans more than you like minorities and women.
 
superrific said:
1. Military service is no more relevant for most jobs than those "ridiculous" characteristics;
2. If military service makes people more qualified, then there would be no need for set-asides;
3. So you are interfering with the labor market, putting less qualified people in place over more qualified, all in the name of a "qualification" that has nothing to do with the job in question.

The reason that you don't think it's DEI is entirely personal preference: you like veterans more than you like minorities and women.
Click to expand...
Right. We agree. It's all the government picking winners. The only difference is that the veteran policy doesn't fall under DEI, so I can't call it DEI.
 
ZenMode said:
The only difference is that the veteran policy doesn't fall under DEI, so I can't call it DEI.
Click to expand...
Most DEI programs include veterans. There are likely hundreds of links. Here are three ChatGPT gave me.

thediversitymovement.com

This Veterans Day, Invest in Veterans - The Diversity Movement

Whether you already hire veterans or are looking to recruit and retain more veteran candidates, in this blog you’ll find 10 tips you can follow to create a more veteran-inclusive work environment.
thediversitymovement.com thediversitymovement.com

www.massbio.org

Including Veterans in your DEI Hiring and Retention Initiatives - MassBio

According to the US Department of Veteran Affairs, there are more than 300,000 veterans just in the state of Massachusetts. When it comes to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace, campaigns for hiring veterans are an absolute must-have. As companies focus on industry...
www.massbio.org www.massbio.org

www.higheredmilitary.com

When Diversity Hiring Initiatives Acknowledge the Veteran Population

Some institutions have recognized the importance of recruiting from a more diverse pool of applicants and have introduced targeted recruitin
www.higheredmilitary.com www.higheredmilitary.com
 
superrific said:
Most DEI programs include veterans. There are likely hundreds of links. Here are three ChatGPT gave me.

thediversitymovement.com

This Veterans Day, Invest in Veterans - The Diversity Movement

Whether you already hire veterans or are looking to recruit and retain more veteran candidates, in this blog you’ll find 10 tips you can follow to create a more veteran-inclusive work environment.
thediversitymovement.com thediversitymovement.com

www.massbio.org

Including Veterans in your DEI Hiring and Retention Initiatives - MassBio

According to the US Department of Veteran Affairs, there are more than 300,000 veterans just in the state of Massachusetts. When it comes to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace, campaigns for hiring veterans are an absolute must-have. As companies focus on industry...
www.massbio.org www.massbio.org

www.higheredmilitary.com

When Diversity Hiring Initiatives Acknowledge the Veteran Population

Some institutions have recognized the importance of recruiting from a more diverse pool of applicants and have introduced targeted recruitin
www.higheredmilitary.com www.higheredmilitary.com
Click to expand...
Ok. I don't agree with it, but the fact that veterans actually DID something for the country makes it less offensive than my original view of DEI.
 
ZenMode said:
Ok. I don't agree with it, but the fact that veterans actually DID something for the country makes it less offensive than my original view of DEI.
Click to expand...
lololololol.

most of what the vast, vast majority of veterans did was collect a paycheck.

only @ 10% of the military ever sees combat. about half of them are never even deployed to a combat zone.

there are TONS of jobs that our country/society depends on that are significantly more dangerous on average and get none of the benefits or hero worship.
 
ZenMode said:
Ok. I don't agree with it, but the fact that veterans actually DID something for the country makes it less offensive than my original view of DEI.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, people sign up for the military knowing the risks -- not just the risk of death in combat, but the risk of having difficulty with employment after service for a number of possible reasons. So unlike people who were merely born with darker skin, veterans made their choices. Why not let them lie in the bed they made?

Or we could just be empathetic to everyone and try to make the best America we can.
 
4thgenheel said:
lololololol.

most of what the vast, vast majority of veterans did was collect a paycheck.

only @ 10% of the military ever sees combat. about half of them are never even deployed to a combat zone.

there are TONS of jobs that our country/society depends on that are significantly more dangerous on average and get none of the benefits or hero worship.
Click to expand...
Just volunteering to put their lives on the line, if needed, is still doing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top