posted by Verbal Kint

From what I understand, equity is not equality, it appears it is conflated as such

How would you say this relates to your MLK quote?

posted by geeblock

How would you say this relates to your MLK quote?

From my readings, appears that MLK was for equality, that all persons would be treated equally

 

Probably impossible, as some sectors of persons are judged on color of skin rather than ability

That is abhorrent 

posted by Verbal Kint

From my readings, appears that MLK was for equality, that all persons would be treated equally

 

Probably impossible, as some sectors of persons are judged on color of skin rather than ability

That is abhorrent 

Do you think that all people have always been treated fairly? If no when did they start getting treated fairly? Do you think all people are getting treated fairly now?

posted by geeblock

Do you think that all people have always been treated fairly? If no when did they start getting treated fairly? Do you think all people are getting treated fairly now?

no

posted by Verbal Kint

no

That's what usually happens lol

I am not in control of what has occurred in the past

I view persons on merits

Treatment based upon appearance (or background) is disgusting

posted by geeblock

Gotta be a pretty big scumbag to fight against DEI 

Not if your company's DEI program includes hiring quotas like Affirmative Action. Then its a great idea to fight against it.

If its seriously ONLY about not discriminating against minorities then yeah, obviously you would have to be a scumbag to fight against it.

However, many places include their hiring practices/quotas along in their DEI program and that's where the problems start to arise.

posted by geeblock

I hear people all the nowadays calling every reference from jackie robinson to ruby bridges...CRT.

Bull shit, not on here anyway, unless you are talking about morons on twitter that's bull shit.

posted by geeblock

Do you think that all people have always been treated fairly? If no when did they start getting treated fairly? Do you think all people are getting treated fairly now?

Institutionally people started being treated "fairly" in the 1960s.

Actually by real people in about the 80s/90s.

Nearly everyone in the 60s were racist, now actual racists are a VERY fringe part of society, to the point that statistically "everyone" is treated fairly based on their race/ethnicity/sex/orientation here in the USA. Of course there are some statistically small percentage of racists that would refuse to hire a person of color, but those are down to the anecdotal cases rather than statistically happening in the grand scheme of things.

And Verbal is right, equality is great, equity is abhorrent as a policy. Everyone should be given the same opportunity (equality), but equity means everyone should end up with the same result, which is a new word for communism/socialist/etc. 

posted by jmog

Not if your company's DEI program includes hiring quotas like Affirmative Action. Then its a great idea to fight against it.

If its seriously ONLY about not discriminating against minorities then yeah, obviously you would have to be a scumbag to fight against it.

However, many places include their hiring practices/quotas along in their DEI program and that's where the problems start to arise.

Do you think more people in a year get a job/promotion because of their race or lose out on job or aren’t given an opportunity because of their race?

(Not trying to have a gotcha moment) just want to know perspective. 

posted by geeblock

Do you think more people in a year get a job/promotion because of their race or lose out on job or aren’t given an opportunity because of their race?

(Not trying to have a gotcha moment) just want to know perspective. 

The problem with your question is that there is no way to ever know the answer to it.  Except in a rare exception, people don't state they made a hire/promotion or terminated someone because of race.  Even if they don't believe it factored in, it could have subconsciously.  You can never know what is in someone's thoughts.  But you can look at things from a macro level and see where problems may lie.  If it can be proven that there is systematic bias against a race, then there are mechanisms which should be used to deal with that.  That will never make he problem completely go away, but it dissuades all but the most dedicated racists from acting on their biases.  The problem today is we operate from a position of presumption of guilt and thus quotas, profiling on applications, forced diversity training, etc.  It is all  imposed with threat of loss of employment, expulsion, ostracized socially, whatever.  

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

The problem with your question is that there is no way to ever know the answer to it.  Except in a rare exception, people don't state they made a hire/promotion or terminated someone because of race.  Even if they don't believe it factored in, it could have subconsciously.  You can never know what is in someone's thoughts.  But you can look at things from a macro level and see where problems may lie.  If it can be proven that there is systematic bias against a race, then there are mechanisms which should be used to deal with that.  That will never make he problem completely go away, but it dissuades all but the most dedicated racists from acting on their biases.  The problem today is we operate from a position of presumption of guilt and thus quotas, profiling on applications, forced diversity training, etc.  It is all  imposed with threat of loss of employment, expulsion, ostracized socially, whatever.  

I was asking for an opinion. We give opinions all the time on tough questions. I also don’t think it has to be all that nefarious. Access to connections and networks for some groups do to family histories in many areas and companies can have the same effect. Doesn’t make someone racist or a bad person. Also I think the margin of error is much slimmer for a person of color than other groups. Could you imagine a person of color being the leading candidate for president while on trial for banging s porn star?  Many similar examples in coaching ect .. 

posted by geeblock

Do you think more people in a year get a job/promotion because of their race or lose out on job or aren’t given an opportunity because of their race?

(Not trying to have a gotcha moment) just want to know perspective. 

For the most part society has got to the point that its fairly close to a net 0. Sure some managers/ceos are racist and don't hire/promote based on a skin color but there are just as many people of color getting chances simply because of their skin color and programs like DEI/Affirmative Action. I don't know if we have completely "swung" to the point that the number of those that gain it "unfairly" because they just happen to be a POC are in greater numbers than those that miss out because the hiring manager happens to be a racist yet. 

posted by jmog

For the most part society has got to the point that its fairly close to a net 0. Sure some managers/ceos are racist and don't hire/promote based on a skin color but there are just as many people of color getting chances simply because of their skin color and programs like DEI/Affirmative Action. I don't know if we have completely "swung" to the point that the number of those that gain it "unfairly" because they just happen to be a POC are in greater numbers than those that miss out because the hiring manager happens to be a racist yet. 

I'd think the numbers would be unsymmetrical based upon the sector and region

posted by geeblock

I was asking for an opinion. We give opinions all the time on tough questions. I also don’t think it has to be all that nefarious. Access to connections and networks for some groups do to family histories in many areas and companies can have the same effect. Doesn’t make someone racist or a bad person. Also I think the margin of error is much slimmer for a person of color than other groups. Could you imagine a person of color being the leading candidate for president while on trial for banging s porn star?  Many similar examples in coaching ect .. 

It's all degrees.  I may not get a job because someone less competent who was friends with the hiring manager got it, or the CEO's kid.  Maybe it isn't fair, but that's life.  Do people of color have slimmer margins for error?  Perhaps in some cases they do.  And certainly in other cases they have much wider margins for error due to equality rules.  Rather than let people who chose on race ultimately lose out in the long run by having a less effective organization, our society has chosen to force everyone to make certain decisions that may not be for the best.  

We had a (white) friend with an ethnically ambiguous name that wouldn't check her race on job applications. She assumed they would think she is black and it would get her an interview at the very least.

posted by geeblock

Gotta be a pretty big scumbag to fight against DEI 

Why, exactly? Give me the reasons.

posted by CenterBHSFan

Why, exactly? Give me the reasons.

Diversity , equity, inclusion are all good things. 

The very idea of hiring people, using the Progressive Stack as your main guideline in the process, for the sole interest of parity is worthless buffoonery. 

Yes, "Let's replace bigotry and racism with bigotry and racism!" said the jackass in some fever dream.

Back to Trump - I think events today do more to jump start his campaign than anything else he could have possibly done.  If he gets elected again, he should appoint Bragg to top post.

posted by geeblock

Diversity , equity, inclusion are all good things. 

Equity is not a good ideology at all. Equality is, and there is a major difference.

Equity talks about equalizing outcomes rather than equality trying to equality opportunities.

Equity is a terrible idea.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

I think he’s obviously referring to the part of DEI that is completely out of control - shutting out free speech, ostracizing people who do not support certain beliefs or lifestyles, etc.  In many institutions, these things are happening with frequent regularity.  If you attend an elite Ivy League graduate school today, it is a fascist like environment if you don’t support what a DEI office espouses.

I think the fighting back is against this.

This is much of what she was talking about. I have listed another fraction of the problem in other posts. It's a suckass practice being dressed up as something pretty and meaningful.
Other reasons it sucks:

It's very costly with little to show for the added expense. So now not only do companies have an HR department, but also a DEI department. HR people are skilled enough to make these choices, but now there is an added sector that also needs to be paid. The DEI department gets paid to sit back and make their choices based on the Progressive Stack for the idea of parity. By necessity, it needs to use racism and bigotry to be carried out *properly*.
This is one of the major reasons that colleges, for example, are getting more and more expensive with their tuition fees. They have to support an added administrative class. This makes it harder for people from low income families to get higher learning. In simple terms, DEI uses muh pronouns! and muh looks! as cover to continue class warfare.

The activists class loves all of this. Keep in mind that issues that they activate for can never been seen as solved as that would put them right out of business, stop the money flow. And as the 80's, 90's and early 00's were getting further and further away from giving a shit about what people looked like or what they claimed they were, the activist class saw the writing on the wall and knew they had to come up with something better than what they had in order to keep the cash flow thriving and often political careers afloat. Hence, the Progressive Stack became a thing; and from there we now see things like DEI and ESG. 
We see the same thing happening with the Armageddon church. For the past 40 years they have been banging on the pulpit about how the end of days is nigh. It's good money and certainly advantageous political power.  

posted by jmog

Equity is not a good ideology at all. Equality is, and there is a major difference.

Equity talks about equalizing outcomes rather than equality trying to equality opportunities.

Equity is a terrible idea.

I agree

posted by CenterBHSFan

This is much of what she was talking about. I have listed another fraction of the problem in other posts. It's a suckass practice being dressed up as something pretty and meaningful.
Other reasons it sucks:

It's very costly with little to show for the added expense. So now not only do companies have an HR department, but also a DEI department. HR people are skilled enough to make these choices, but now there is an added sector that also needs to be paid. The DEI department gets paid to sit back and make their choices based on the Progressive Stack for the idea of parity. By necessity, it needs to use racism and bigotry to be carried out *properly*.
This is one of the major reasons that colleges, for example, are getting more and more expensive with their tuition fees. They have to support an added administrative class. This makes it harder for people from low income families to get higher learning. In simple terms, DEI uses muh pronouns! and muh looks! as cover to continue class warfare.

The activists class loves all of this. Keep in mind that issues that they activate for can never been seen as solved as that would put them right out of business, stop the money flow. And as the 80's, 90's and early 00's were getting further and further away from giving a shit about what people looked like or what they claimed they were, the activist class saw the writing on the wall and knew they had to come up with something better than what they had in order to keep the cash flow thriving and often political careers afloat. Hence, the Progressive Stack became a thing; and from there we now see things like DEI and ESG. 
We see the same thing happening with the Armageddon church. For the past 40 years they have been banging on the pulpit about how the end of days is nigh. It's good money and certainly advantageous political power.  

Man we could have used you out front fighting for racism the last 50 years lol 

I’m just glad to that everyone is finally on board with equality.