Split Thread DEI in the US

[Opcode]

Now do his statements about how an airline pilot who is black is less qualified and/or capable than a white pilot.

Tell me that you don't care how DEI works, but you hate anybody who opposes it.

Split from
This thread about the Charlie Kirk shooting

Posted By: jimbob

 

[wareyin]

Tell me that you don't care how DEI works, but you hate anybody who opposes it.

Tell me that you don't know how DEI works (or even what it is), but you hate it anyway.

 

[Opcode]

Tell me that you don't know how DEI works (or even what it is), but you hate it anyway.

Oh, I know what DEI is. It is a program that claims it wants to achieve a fair society through promoting "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion." It attempts to do this by giving people who share a superficial characteristic with a group, such as ethnicity, an advantage over those who don't, on the theory that because some other people of the group have historically been disadvantaged, all the members of the group should be given advantages over those who don't. This means, for example, that even wealthy black people who had only recently immigrated to the US would be granted economic advantages and preferred hiring, on the grounds that some black people were slaves in the US 150 years ago, or suffered prejudice sixty years ago.

 

[wareyin]

Oh, I know what DEI is. It is a program that claims it wants to achieve a fair society through promoting "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion." It attempts to do this by giving people who share a superficial characteristic with a group, such as ethnicity, an advantage over those who don't, on the theory that because some other people of the group have historically been disadvantaged, all the members of the group should be given advantages over those who don't. This means, for example, that even wealthy black people who had only recently immigrated to the US would be granted economic advantages and preferred hiring, on the grounds that some black people were slaves in the US 150 years ago, or suffered prejudice sixty years ago.

No, you are not correct. And I say this as someone who actually hires people, you have no idea what you are talking about.
DEI removes the preferential treatment that white people have, it does not add preferential treatment for others.


edited for persnickety-ness: DEI attempts to remove the preferential treatment that white people have. We recognize that all humans carry unconscious biases. To counteract these and ensure fairness, we list job openings widely across diverse sources, including Indeed, local newspapers, and college job boards. Candidates are selected for an interview based on their claimed skills, schooling, and experience, disregarding irrelevant factors like name or gender. To assess actual skills, we pre-write standard questions and ask the same ones of every candidate. Interviews are never one-on-one; they are conducted by a diverse panel of four to six people, including long-time American staff and colleagues born in places like China, Pakistan, France, Britain, or Scotland. We also reach out to professional references and use those results to further assess candidates, taking structured notes on all answers and using a spreadsheet to collectively compare ratings and reach an objective decision.

 

[Opcode]

Look up the things he said about Biden.

I would have expected you to make a different reference. I'm not surprised that you didn't actually provide an example, though.

Mine is the only one that matters. I don't give a ◊◊◊◊ what people think about me. Ask around here, everyone will tell you.

Self-perception is so difficult to achieve.

Educate you on what? You won't think the things Kirk said were bigoted because you agree with him. That's the stark difference between you and I.

Why do you disagree with him?

Just like with the DEI comment. The fact is Kirk automatically assumed that the black pilot wouldn't be qualified, right?

If you knew that an automaker was able to bypass all inspections and sell substandard cars (maybe because some dealerships had suffered discrimination in other states), would you be concerned that they might be selling you junk?

Or else why would he have to be concerned?

Because DEI is the opposite of merit.

He didn't make any comments about how white men tend to get jobs over people of color just because, right?

White people don't get to be airline pilots just because they are white. They have to prove they are skilled as pilots, with hundreds or even thousands of hours of successful flights in that type of aircraft even to be considered for hire.

We know that happens because of blind resume submissions, etc. It's been documented, but he immediately had to assume that a black pilot might not be qualified because DEI.

DEI is the enemy of merit. The point of DEI is hiring somebody because they belong to a group that is under-represented in a category that somebody thinks should be more represented, based entirely on criteria that have nothing to do with ability or merit.

 

[Opcode]

No, you are not correct. And I say this as someone who actually hires people, you have no idea what you are talking about.
DEI removes the preferential treatment that white people have, it does not add preferential treatment for others.

DEI goes far beyond just hiring, but regarding the hiring process, I'm willing to assume that in your role, your implementation of DEI is removing all language from job applications that might hint at a person's group. I'm not willing to assume that a person can make it all the way through the hiring process without bias being added at some point, such as recruiting or interviewing. I'm definitely not going to assume that your workplace has absolutely nothing promoting favored minorities.

 

[wareyin]

If you knew that an automaker was able to bypass all inspections and sell substandard cars (maybe because some dealerships had suffered discrimination in other states), would you be concerned that they might be selling you junk?

Your automatic assumption of substandard is what's tripping you up here.

Because DEI is the opposite of merit.

Incorrect.

White people don't get to be airline pilots just because they are white. They have to prove they are skilled as pilots, with hundreds or even thousands of hours of successful flights in that type of aircraft even to be considered for hire.

So do the people you are assuming are substandard.

DEI is the enemy of merit. The point of DEI is hiring somebody because they belong to a group that is under-represented in a category that somebody thinks should be more represented, based entirely on criteria that have nothing to do with ability or merit.

Wrong.

 

[wareyin]

DEI goes far beyond just hiring, but regarding the hiring process, I'm willing to assume that in your role, your implementation of DEI is removing all language from job applications that might hint at a person's group. I'm not willing to assume that a person can make it all the way through the hiring process without bias being added at some point, such as recruiting or interviewing. I'm definitely not going to assume that your workplace has absolutely nothing promoting favored minorities.

Good. The fewer assumptions you make the better, as you are so very clearly out of your depth here.

 

[plague311]

I would have expected you to make a different reference. I'm not surprised that you didn't actually provide an example, though.

Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ Christ. It's in this thread. You can't read the thread? Good to know. I now realize I have to hold your hand through everything due to either incompetence or ignorance. Duly noted.

I was talking about how he said Biden should be imprisoned and killed for absolutely no reason at all. Does that help?

Self-perception is so difficult to achieve.

Cool story. I give a ◊◊◊◊. I really do.

Why do you disagree with him?

Did you read my post?

If you knew that an automaker was able to bypass all inspections and sell substandard cars (maybe because some dealerships had suffered discrimination in other states), would you be concerned that they might be selling you junk?

Sorry, I don't ◊◊◊◊ around with stupid analogies or bull ◊◊◊◊ comparisons. All of the pilots are required to pass the same testing. I know this as two cousins and an uncle are pilots, and I literally asked them when he got shot and I became aware of this statement. Save your insufferable nonsense for someone else.

Because DEI is the opposite of merit.

Logical failure, -1 DKP. Even in Kirk's own dumb ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ scenario he made up he had no idea if the individual was hired because of DEI or if he had a purely established background. He questioned the man's qualifications because he was 1) black. 2)...just kidding, #1 was the only reason. He never once questioned the qualifications of any white pilot.

So far you suck at this. You sure you're in the right place?

White people don't get to be airline pilots just because they are white.

You know this how? What are you basing this off of?

They have to prove they are skilled as pilots,

How do they do that? Do people of color not have to take any testing? Evidence?

with hundreds or even thousands of hours of successful flights in that type of aircraft even to be considered for hire.

Again, you obviously have some form of evidence or indisputable proof that PoC don't have to go through this stuff right? Show your work, kiddo. This isn't Thanksgiving dinner with your in-laws. We require proof around here.

DEI is the enemy of merit.

Lol

The point of DEI is hiring somebody because they belong to a group that is under-represented in a category that somebody thinks should be more represented, based entirely on criteria that have nothing to do with ability or merit.

Yeah, you already said this dumb ◊◊◊◊ once before. It's no more true this time than it was last time. If you have proof, specifically to the claims you've made in this post, provide it or admit you're just making ◊◊◊◊ up because you have no ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ clue what you're talking about.

 

[Opcode]

Your automatic assumption of substandard is what's tripping you up here.

DEI doesn't have an inherent mechanism to filter it out. Its focus is on increasing diversity and inclusion, not merit. Nothing in DEI says anything about merit being a criteria.

DEI is not actually about increasing fairness or equality. It's about pushing a Leftist social and political agenda under the guise of benevolence.

So do the people you are assuming are substandard.

We don't know that.

White people don't get to be airline pilots just because they are white. They have to prove they are skilled as pilots, with hundreds or even thousands of hours of successful flights in that type of aircraft even to be considered for hire.

So do the people you are assuming are substandard.

I'm not assuming that someone is substandard, and neither did Mr. Kirk. The point is that DEI opens the door to it.

DEI is the enemy of merit. The point of DEI is hiring somebody because they belong to a group that is under-represented in a category that somebody thinks should be more represented, based entirely on criteria that have nothing to do with ability or merit.

Wrong.

Until you provide me with a plausible alternative reason for doing it, I will have to assume that I am correct.

 

[arthwollipot]

Oh, I know what DEI is. It is a program that claims it wants to achieve a fair society through promoting "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion." It attempts to do this by giving people who share a superficial characteristic with a group, such as ethnicity, an advantage over those who don't, on the theory that because some other people of the group have historically been disadvantaged, all the members of the group should be given advantages over those who don't. This means, for example, that even wealthy black people who had only recently immigrated to the US would be granted economic advantages and preferred hiring, on the grounds that some black people were slaves in the US 150 years ago, or suffered prejudice sixty years ago.

That's certainly what the Rightist culture warriors want you to think, sure. But they're lying to you. That should make you mad.

 

[Opcode]

Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ Christ. It's in this thread. You can't read the thread?

I'm not going to read 68 pages of backstory.

I was talking about how he said Biden should be imprisoned and killed for absolutely no reason at all.

Wow, you're right, nobody had ever suggested any reason for prosecuting the Biden's until Charlie Kirk made that comment on his show! I have to hand it to Joe Biden; forty years in politics and not a whiff of scandal! Of course, now that Mr. Kirk spilled the beans, the floodgates are open.

"Biden repeatedly lied about the influence peddling. He long denied knowing about his son’s foreign clients or business. He denied ever meeting Hunter’s clients. Later, photos and emails showed that Biden had clearly met these clients and knew about the business deals. He was fully aware that his family was cashing in on his name and various offices."

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/5096041-biden-pardons-family-corruption/

There is also the $8 million from China, the $3.5 million from Russia, the million dollars a year from Ukraine, $3 million from Romania and $142k from Kazakhstan, the use of the office of the Presidency to shield Hunter Biden and other family members from prosecution from admitted felonies.

You can pretend that Biden was squeaky clean, but nobody believes you.

Sorry, I don't ◊◊◊◊ around with stupid analogies or bull ◊◊◊◊ comparisons. All of the pilots are required to pass the same testing. I know this as two cousins and an uncle are pilots, and I literally asked them when he got shot and I became aware of this statement. Save your insufferable nonsense for someone else.

Then, the companies that hired them aren't implementing DEI.

Logical failure, -1 DKP. Even in Kirk's own dumb ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ scenario he made up he had no idea if the individual was hired because of DEI or if he had a purely established background.

It's called a hypothetical. It's fairly common to use hypotheticals, even in high school, so I might wonder why this trips you up.

He questioned the man's qualifications because he was 1) black. 2)...just kidding, #1 was the only reason. He never once questioned the qualifications of any white pilot.

Perhaps you get this wrong because you see everything through the lens of assumed racism.

Again, you obviously have some form of evidence or indisputable proof that PoC don't have to go through this stuff right?

If PoC are held to the same standards of performance as whites, it isn't because of DEI.

 

[jt512]

DEI attempts to remove the preferential treatment that white people have. We recognize that all humans carry unconscious biases.

You believe that white people get preferential treatment and that all humans carry unconscious biases that affect hiring decisions. These supposed unconscious biases were supposedly revealed by the implicit bias test (IBT). However, results of the IBT have been shown to not correlate with hiring decisions.

To counteract these and ensure fairness, we list job openings widely across diverse sources, including Indeed, local newspapers, and college job boards. Candidates are selected for an interview based on their claimed skills, schooling, and experience, disregarding irrelevant factors like name or gender. To assess actual skills, we pre-write standard questions and ask the same ones of every candidate. Interviews are never one-on-one; they are conducted by a diverse panel of four to six people, including long-time American staff and colleagues born in places like China, Pakistan, France, Britain, or Scotland. We also reach out to professional references and use those results to further assess candidates, taking structured notes on all answers and using a spreadsheet to collectively compare ratings and reach an objective decision.

While I am glad that your organization takes such steps to insure that hiring is based on merit without regard to candidates' immutable physical characteristics, what your company is doing is exactly the opposite of DEI. As has been well documented in the peer review literature and elsewhere, DEI is affirmative action driven by "progressive" ideology. In both theory and practice, candidates belonging to preferred identity groups are given preference in hiring or promotion over white males. Why your organization is calling objective, meritorious hiring "DEI" is unclear. I would guess they want to get on the DEI bandwagon, but don't actually believe in the destructive progressive ideology that drives it. It is a shame, though, that they don't feel they can just come out and say "We proudly hire strictly on the basis of merit without regard to a candidate's race, gender, or sexual orientation."

 

[Opcode]

That's certainly what the Rightist culture warriors want you to think, sure. But they're lying to you. That should make you mad.

I haven't seen even a suggestion of an alternative explanation. Oh, sure, politics being what it is, the people who advocate it will rationalize it, but I haven't anybody give another explanation for DEI.

 

[dirtywick]

lol who gives a ◊◊◊◊ about dei

 

[arthwollipot]

I haven't seen even a suggestion of an alternative explanation. Oh, sure, politics being what it is, the people who advocate it will rationalize it, but I haven't anybody give another explanation for DEI.

Have you looked for one?

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

Have you looked for one?

I'll take "Things with 1000 to 1 odds", Alex.

 

[wareyin]

DEI doesn't have an inherent mechanism to filter it out. Its focus is on increasing diversity and inclusion, not merit. Nothing in DEI says anything about merit being a criteria.

Yes it does, and no, that is not the only focus. And you're still making the assumption that black=substandard, just like Charlie Kirk. There's a term for that kind of thinking.

DEI is not actually about increasing fairness or equality.

Yes, it is.

It's about pushing a Leftist social and political agenda under the guise of benevolence.

No, that's a pretty stupid take, but understandable from someone who only gets his DEI understanding from the far-right news bubble.

We don't know that.

Yes, we do.

I'm not assuming that someone is substandard, and neither did Mr. Kirk.

Yes you are, and yes he is.

The point is that DEI opens the door to it.

Again, this is simply false.

Until you provide me with a plausible alternative reason for doing it, I will have to assume that I am correct.

Well, if you don't have any idea what you are talking about, why are you going to assume you are correct?

 

[wareyin]

You believe that white people get preferential treatment

They do. See: the Trump administration

and that all humans carry unconscious biases that affect hiring decisions. These supposed unconscious biases were supposedly revealed by the implicit bias test (IBT). However, results of the IBT have been shown to not correlate with hiring decisions.

Holy crap, you actually don't believe people have unconscious biases? Or that unconscious biases affect our decisions? You are aware of the 2003 study "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination", right? Or 2021's "Systemic Discrimination Among Large U.S. Employers."

While I am glad that your organization takes such steps to insure that hiring is based on merit without regard to candidates' immutable physical characteristics, what your company is doing is exactly the opposite of DEI. As has been well documented in the peer review literature and elsewhere, DEI is affirmative action driven by "progressive" ideology. In both theory and practice, candidates belonging to preferred identity groups are given preference in hiring or promotion over white males. Why your organization is calling objective, meritorious hiring "DEI" is unclear. I would guess they want to get on the DEI bandwagon, but don't actually believe in the destructive progressive ideology that drives it. It is a shame, though, that they don't feel they can just come out and say "We proudly hire strictly on the basis of merit without regard to a candidate's race, gender, or sexual orientation."

Nonsense. DEI is not affirmative action. You simply have no idea what you are talking about. There is no preferential treatment for "preferred identity groups". There are no hiring quotas. It is simply that you, as an angry white guy, are upset that you no longer get the preferential treatment that you have always gotten.

 

[plague311]

I'm not going to read 68 pages of backstory.

Yet you have no issues commenting without knowing the basic background of the thread. Cool, that's pretty standard for right-wingers.

Wow, you're right, nobody had ever suggested any reason for prosecuting the Biden's until Charlie Kirk made that comment on his show! I have to hand it to Joe Biden; forty years in politics and not a whiff of scandal! Of course, now that Mr. Kirk spilled the beans, the floodgates are open.

What in the actual ◊◊◊◊ are you talking about? I'm talking about him calling for Biden to be killed for crimes Kirk imagined up.

"Biden repeatedly lied about the influence peddling. He long denied knowing about his son’s foreign clients or business. He denied ever meeting Hunter’s clients. Later, photos and emails showed that Biden had clearly met these clients and knew about the business deals. He was fully aware that his family was cashing in on his name and various offices."

https://thehill.com/[HILITE]opinion[/HILITE]/white-house/5096041-biden-pardons-family-corruption/

If you're going to quote sources as if they're fact let me give you a little protip, don't do it from the opinion section. Don't get me wrong, but quoting Jonothan Turley is not going to get you too far lol. The man is an absolute moron and there's a reason you don't have sources with those claims. It's because Turley doesn't have any evidence to support his claims. He knows saps like you will soak them up, no matter if they're sourced or not.

There is also the $8 million from China,

Evidence?

the $3.5 million from Russia, the million dollars a year from Ukraine,

Evidence?

$3 million from Romania and $142k from Kazakhstan,

Evidence?

the use of the office of the Presidency to shield Hunter Biden and other family members from prosecution from admitted felonies.

Kind of an empty promise given you're a Trump supporter, isn't it? So NOW it's a problem but as Trump is pardoning his friends and family you don't seem to have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ thing to say. At least I don't see you bitching about it in any other threads, and he's doing it right now, in real-time. Care you address your blatant hypocrisy? No?

You can pretend that Biden was squeaky clean, but nobody believes you.

I don't have to pretend a damn thing and, again, I don't give a ◊◊◊◊ if someone like you believes me. Get me? Zero ◊◊◊◊◊.

Check this out. This is how much of a grown up I am, and how much I'm not in a cult. If Biden broke the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ law, put him in jail. Try him and put him in jail. He never pardoned himself and your man in the White House is all about law and order. Why aren't you crying to Trump to do something? Tell them to get to work. You just listed off a bunch of clearly illegal bribes, right? You guys apparently have the evidence? Why isn't Trump doing his job?

Then, the companies that hired them aren't implementing DEI.

Or, and hear me out, you have no ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ clue in the slightest what "DEI" is, how it's applied, or what it means. Also, since you obviously have no idea how the aviation world works, individual companies don't do the testing. They involve physical, and mental evaluations plus written exams and hours of flight.

It's called a hypothetical. It's fairly common to use hypotheticals, even in high school, so I might wonder why this trips you up.

Right, it's a racist hypothetical attempting to call out a black pilot. It's built on no evidence, no proof and no research. It trips me up because we're on a skeptics forum, not at a bar. Up your game.

Perhaps you get this wrong because you see everything through the lens of assumed racism.

If I'm seeing everything through racism then why does Kirk's particular "hypothetical" revolve around the race the pilot? Why is he saying that the pilot, of a specific shade of skin, would be the unqualified one? Again, you don't seem to be very good at this.

If PoC are held to the same standards of performance as whites, it isn't because of DEI.

Ah yes, once you again you drive home the fact that you have no ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ clue what DEI is and so your arguments are nonsensical.