why is DEI "bad"

[funhusker]

do you have any examples of more qualified people being passed over for unqualified people?   as widespread as the damage is according to the right it should be no problem to come up with some specific cases

Didn't you hear?  There are thousands of qualified straight, white, Christian air traffic controllers sitting in the unemployment line while all the DEI hires are out crashing planes....

 

[commando]

Didn't you hear?  There are thousands of qualified straight, white, Christian air traffic controllers sitting in the unemployment line while all the DEI hires are out crashing planes....

fwiw...there shouldn't be any unemployed air traffic controllers of any color the way the staffing shortage is said to be.    instead manyair controllers received letters demanding them to resign.   :shrug: 

 

[BigRedBuster]

My thoughts on DEI have always been conflicted. I respect/appreciate what it tries to accomplish because opportunities have historically been denied and/or inaccessible to various minority groups and less fortunate individuals. However, I never felt like I should be put at a disadvantage for something that was out of my control (like where I was born, the situation I was born into, and the opportunities that were presented to me) which is also how many of those people feel. In a perfect world, success and opportunities should be merit-based, but we know that's not how it always works. And so DEI in some cases made a lot of sense historically and was a good idea.

In other cases, the sensibility and execution of it has come into question, such as at Harvard... where more than half of their most recent freshman class identified as non-white. And of those non-whites, more than 70% came from families in the top 10% of income-earning homes. And so while diversity can and should be considered a good thing, race has become heavily influential, more-so than class, causing people to ask fair questions about whether or DEI is actually (again, in some cases) enabling the racism it is supposedly trying to push back against.

I agree with your comments.  However, then fix it instead of making the entire concept illegal.  

Here's my problem with the anti-DEI crowd.  COSTCO is under a lot of public pressure to get rid of everything DEI.  Something like 19 attorneys general have sent them a letter claiming they are going to prosecute them if they don't get rid of it.  Really?  So, a private company can't decide this is good for them?

I thought Republicans were all about keeping government out of private businesses and regulations.  As it turns out, they like regulations....just THEIR regulations.

 

[commando]

Yes I do.  Someone very very close to me.   Education setting related 

iwas meaning businesses where the stakeholders are held back by DEI like you claimed.  but would like to hear the specifics of the case of your friend.   how does he know that the "DEI" hire was less qualified?  

 

[Enhance]

I agree with your comments.  However, then fix it instead of making the entire concept illegal.  

I agree I think the focus should be on “what can we do to make it better” not just throw it in the waste bin.

I would also argue more attention/resources should be devoted to improving education and opportunities for minority groups and at-risk youth at a younger age. Building up communities. That’s where the problems really live and DEI is trying to right inequities later. Unfortunately, one thing I’ve noticed about Republicans specifically over the years  is that they’re quick to want to gut efforts (like DEI) but then scoff at the idea of spending money to help fix some of the root causes of the problems.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Diversity…..great.  Diversity of thought, background, experience etc. all make for a growing atmosphere. 
Equity……not so great.   We are a Merit based society

Inclusion…..great.  People should feel included in the system, place of work, school that he or she goes to.  However, that doesn’t mean those areas have to cater to everyone and all their unique “quirks” for the sake of inclusion.  

I'm a libtard, but this explanation works for me.

Here's one example of how it's not working in the generic DEI backlash: an East Bay company just canceled a popular Lunar New Year celebration that catered to its local Asian population because the event had been part of its DEI initiative and the company was following what it believed was a scorched earth mandate.

 

[Lorewarn]

In fairness, a lot of corporations jumped into DEI programs, hiring self-appointed DEI specialists, and promoting their DEI initiatives in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion actually make a lot of sense for these companies, especially those facing a lot of hiring and recruitment competition. but a lot of it was also performative. DEI could be a chapter in every Human Resources handbook and companies should do an internal DEI audit every year to see how they're meeting their goals, but entire DEI departments and DEI-specific personnel and self-congratulatory DEI publicity probably aren't necessary. 

A small amount of the pushback is due to this.

A bigger part of the pushback is that some well-intentioned folks on the right believe racism is no longer an issue, combined with some ill-intentioned folks on the right who are straight up racists, having a lark with the old standby that colored people are coming for your jobs and culture. 

Good thoughts all around. There is plenty of DEI in corporate America, and in, let's say, the entertainment industries, that is tokenizing and performative and silly, with most everyone but the silliest among us in agreement. 

If what we're saying when we talk about DEI being bad or stupid is that we think Oceans 8 and the 2016 Ghostbusters movies are silly wastes of time, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees. 

But caught in that crossfire are some, imo, thoughtful and sober-minded infrastructures that have learned from the last decade plus the ways in which a lot of people in our country, despite merit and competency, still get looked over for a whole host of reasons.

Equity……not so great.   We are a Merit based society

I've got my own problems with equity as a state goal, but since when are we a merit based society?

 

[Enhance]

I've got my own problems with equity as a state goal, but since when are we a merit based society?

Speaking personally, I do think America is a meritocracy in a very board sense (or, at least, we like to think of ourselves that way) but the reality is that we've been transitioning for some time further and further into a society dominated by inherited wealth and power.

 

[Archy1221]

iwas meaning businesses where the stakeholders are held back by DEI like you claimed.  but would like to hear the specifics of the case of your friend.   how does he know that the "DEI" hire was less qualified?  

It wasn’t a hire, it was an admission. 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Make no mistake, corporations, businesses and organizations have been taking performative stances forever, whether it's promising to lower their carbon footprint or celebrating a female executive or offering placating workforce incentives. These aren't necessarily government mandates, but perceived free market pressures from consumers, employees and stakeholders. Companies are protecting their bottom line much more than they're sacrificing for the common good. 

But here's the deal. We can question their motives and roll our eyes at the silliest excess, but at some point you look back and realize affirmative action and performative horses#!t kinda worked. With a little prodding there is now more minority representation in more positions with no drop off in merit, leading us to take the decades-long process for granted. All those companies scrambling to prove how "green" they are are indeed wasting a bit less and finding that resource management and efficiency isn't a tree-hugging thing, it's a smart business thing. Companies that went all-in on environmentalism are developing the proprietary technologies that will not only help the Earth, but make their benefactors a s#!t ton of money. 

So to the original question, DEI is occasionally silly. But not bad. Some people are being helped. No one is getting hurt. You could say that the anti-DEI forces simply want to get rid of the silliness, but if you listen to the President of the United States like they do, it's revenge against people who didn't vote for him. 

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Speaking personally, I do think America is a meritocracy in a very board sense (or, at least, we like to think of ourselves that way) but the reality is that we've been transitioning for some time further and further into a society dominated by inherited wealth and power.

True that. For every ghetto kid given a fighting change, there's a clueless Harvard grad handed the keys to dad's company. 

They made a documentary about this. I think it's called "Trading Places." 

 

[teachercd]

True that. For every ghetto kid given a fighting change, there's a clueless Harvard grad handed the keys to dad's company. 

They made a documentary about this. I think it's called "Trading Places." 

Oh man, you used my documentary bit!  NICE!

And, you used it really well, that was funny!

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

If what we're saying when we talk about DEI being bad or stupid is that we think Oceans 8 and the 2016 Ghostbusters movies are silly wastes of time, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees. 

fwiw....while Hollywood might seem the most susceptible to DEI correctness, they aren't going to agree to anything that will lose them money. Those all female remakes were considered pretty safe box office bets, and Kirsten Wiig and Melissa McCarthy had better comedy track records than most male actors at the time. 

Oceans 8 and Ghostbusters weren't entirely awful and weren't exactly failures, just mediocre big budget reboots, not unlike the majority of big budget reboots. 

But holy s#!t.....the hate those women got from online incels was relentless. 

 

[Archy1221]

No one is getting hurt

Yeah that’s not entirely true 

 

[teachercd]

fwiw....while Hollywood might seem the most susceptible to DEI correctness, they aren't going to agree to anything that will lose them money. Those all female remakes were considered pretty safe box office bets, and Kirsten Wiig and Melissa McCarthy had better comedy track records than most male actors at the time. 

Oceans 8 and Ghostbusters weren't entirely awful and weren't exactly failures, just mediocre big budget reboots, not unlike the majority of big budget reboots. 

But holy s#!t.....the hate those women got from online incels was relentless. 

incels are mad for one reason...we all know why...they don't f#&%