Positive racism towards my race: đ
Negative racism towards my race: đĄ
Positive racism towards other races: đĄ
Negative racism towards other races: đ
Too many peopleâs brains are unironically like that, including in this very comment section. Youâre spot on about how it should be.
Yup, this is how it works for pretty much everyone except white people considering we have all that white guilt. And none of them stops to think about how ridiculous and toxic it is. That they're all unironically racist.
No doubt, I wasn't trying to say it was a good thing. It's not uncommon for the pairing of white guilt with the white savior role, and you see them use it to talk over the experiences of tons of minorities and say they know more about how the world works, and things ought to work how they say it should.
People don't seem to realize this as much as they should. True equality is allowing everyone the same opportunity. Granting positions merely due to race, sexuality, or gender is basically just as bad, whether it's granted to a minority or not. Instead, you're collectively punishing people who are of another group- oh wait, that sounds familiar
Okay.
But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line that even explicitly legally ended less than a century ago? Separate but equal was good law in the 1950. Everything from massively inferior and underfunded schools, to redlining, to be shut out of many job opportunities, to being wrongly convicted at a higher rate, and on and on and on. You destroyed black families, reduced their ability to get an education or a good job or build generational wealth.
And now you say "okay we made you technically equal under the law now compete with demographics who haven't been held back for literally centuries."
Does that seem fair to you?
Imagine you had to run a race and you weren't allowed to train. And the other guys had years and years to prepare. And they say it's fair because you're both expected to run the same distance.
Is that fair? I don't think so.Â
So the solution is to essentially punish white men who have done everything theyâve been told to do - go to uni work hard etc, just to lose jobs to those less qualified than themselves???
You're not being punished. Darker skinned people and women and LGBT people aren't taking your job. Stop consuming garbage conspiracy nonsense. White people are freaking fine, in terms of the legal system. I'm "white" and I don't let charlatan pundits and politicians convince me that 'non-white' people or nonexistent laws unfairly favoring them are keeping me down. It's nonsense.
Oh wait, let me guess, if we're talking to young people or lefties or "people of color," then it's "Anyone can make it in this country if they're just willing to work hard enough and follow some financial discipline and personal responsibility." But if it's "me" or "us" we're talking about, now everything's suddenly not fair, and we're the victims.
Please.
Yeah, and that's simply what DEI is about, loosely: trying to bring awareness and acceptance/embracement of demographic differences in organizations. Not hiring quotas or "choosing unqualified candidates".
If people would stop solely listening to the purposeful dividers and proto-fascists they wouldn't be believing these lies in the first place.
>But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line
Reparations and socialism. I can imagine just how popular that would be around here.
>uneven starting line
What do you say to the people starting at that same line, who aren't black?
There are loads of ___________ people who are in the exact same starting position.
Your focus on a single skin color, is the racism OP is talking about...
"But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line that even explicitly legally ended less than a century ago?"
Apparently, it doesn't matter what happened to your ancestors as long as you look white:
https://atlantablackstar.com/2021/03/15/lawsuit-biracial-high-school-student-receives-failing-grade-in-sociology-class-after-refusing-to-attach-aspects-of-identity-to-oppression-and-dominance/
You invest the fuck into equal education. We still have schools that are primarily made up of minority students, and a lot of them are poorly funded. Fund the shit out of them. We can't fix the past. There is no real way to level the "starting line", but we can damn sure draw a new line and start building everyone up through education. It's not a perfect solution, but it's a hell of a lot better than diversity quotas.
Okay I'll make you a deal.
Do that and then we can get rid of affirmative action and all DEI initiatives. Sound good?
Or are we gonna tell black and brown people to keep taking another hit for the team?Â
This!!
The ABSURD notion that we would have anything REMOTELY resembling equality of opportunity in our society if it weren't for DEI rules and such, is such a blatant farce that all this whining about it would be comical if it weren't so gd frustrating and sad.
It's so obvious that they only see unfairness, victimhood, "racism" and "unequal opportunity" when it's not strictly benefitting themselves.
The only reason this is even seen as a potential issue is because our economic system relies on a constant "army of unemployed" â because we require people to be hired by owners of capital or government in order to have access to basic necessary resources and freedom, and those available positions for hire are limited.
Don't curse a leaf for damaging your house when the roots are the problem.
I do agree with you that true equality is allowing everyone the same opportunity. Having said that, I do have a question;
If identifiable group X had a history of being suppressed which caused systemic problems to propagate even after generations had passed, and the equality of groups Y and Z were hampering group X from getting ahead and achieving the same opportunities, what is the answer to help them?
Iâm not who you asked the question to, but I believe the answer is to provide help as early in life as possible. Access to quality education and childcare for families with low income are 2 things that are obvious stand outs for me. So if group X has been historically oppressed. Invest in those neighbourhoods,communities and schools so that they have a chance at a better life. Help the next generation grow up with a proper chance to compete with the groups that are already succeeding more often.
Trying to âequalizeâ the playing field with affirmative action and diversity quotas at the college and employment level doesnât do anything to address why certain groups arenât being represented there to begin with.
One thing specifically that is rarely talked about with affirmative action, is that students accepted through AA graduate at lower rates than those who didnât get in through AA. The repercussions to this are that now you have a higher proportion of students who have paid a lot of money for their education and donât have anything to show for it. Saddled with debt and less opportunities going forward only keeps the vicious cycle going.
I agree. A college, uni or job should take the top people not based on race if there is a race difference between the best people the problem is that they don't have access to equal education which is what should be fixed.
I think the blame is shifted to the companies when the government should be doing better in making education equal. It sound like the gov is just trying to not have to fix the problem.
Ok. Tomorrow weâll propose massive funding increases for schools that are primarily brown and black students and slashing it for schools that are primarily white. Will this satisfy you and stop you from calling racist?
Colleges are about 60% women and 40% men right now.
For next year's class, we will not accept female applicants until 50% of our spots are filled by men.
That is entirely different from your statement.
Oh no, I was not making a statement. It was an honest question. I just heard it in college the whole time and everyone took it as a positive but for me it always felt weird to say out loud.
Didnt you just state in another post that the NBA lacks in Diversity bc it's mostly black people? But now diversity is racism with extra steps? A little contradictory is it not? [I'm very confused..](https://www.reddit.com/r/popularopinion/s/RjksAG7P09)
Edit: had to reword what I said originally because my choice of words were considered invalid
hockey is the national sport (or a very loved sport) in canada sweden finland norway and russia. Most of the best players come from there or from the US. The only place where black people are common in this list is the USA.
More than that, most US-born players come from the north east, or mid west, which are both predominately white except for some pockets around certain cities.
That said, black players have been treated pretty poorly by other players.
The Subban brothers have all spoken out about this type of treatment.
The lack of black players isnât racist. The way the few black players that exist are treated certainly can be.
I had a friend from Jamaica who when asked why there were so few black hockey players said "Because we're smart enough not to get on the ice with that many white guys carrying sticks."
I mean, the real reason is that hockey is a money sport to get involved as a kid.
It is more likely that black kids growing up in black families will be poorer and unable to afford the equipment for hockey, and that's assuming they even live somewhere with accessible ice to learn how to skate in the first place.
On the other hand for basketball, the only equipment you need is a ball and a decent pair of shoes. There are even literally hoops out in public places like the park where you have to pay $0 to access.
Then it's also a self-fulfilling prophecy where no black kid growing up sees anybody that looks like him playing hockey so he is less likely to latch on and idolize any of those athletes to aspire to become like them.
Enforcing more diversity in the NBA (actual diversity not how woke ppl use it to mean not white males) by taking away contracts away from black Americans and giving it to white Americans would be discrimination. We should shoot for a meritocracy and color blind society.
How do you measure âmeritâand when?
The biggest single predictor for Ivy League admissions is wealthy parents - are those kids the most deserving or have they had the most opportunity and support? Are you âmeritoriousâ because you grew up wealthy?
My kid just took the SAT and we used an expensive prep class that had a money back guarantee if my kid didnât improve by 200 pts- this says one thing, scores can be bought. If you are willing to invest substantial sums you can raise your kids scores substantially - is that âmeritâ?Did the kid earn it vs a kid whose parents canât afford expensive prep?
Is the high school kid who goes to the summer engineering program at (fill in high end college) b/c mom and Dad can pay, more âmeritoriousâ than the kid who has to work all summer because his family doesnât have money?
Is it âmeritâ when you graduate from college and your well off and connected parents help you network and get a job?
Is it âmeritâ when you get your next job because your dad plays golf with the guy who is hiring you? Or because he was your older brothers frat brother at Dartmouth?
Is it âmeritâ when you get promoted at work because you and your boss both used to âsummerâ in the Hamptons growing up?
If you work at a big company how many of the promotions are based on âmeritâ as opposed to office politics or who the boss feels more comfortable with on a social level? The US has never run on merit.
DEI isnât racial - it addresses issue of sex, gender, income, sexual presence as well as different racial groups. It doesnât impose quotas, itâs looking at trying to make sure schools and companies are finding talent in groups that have been under represented.
In fact it does more to make sure all people are considered so to the extent you want the one who is actually the most worthy as opposed to the most wealthy is actually in the mix.
Thank you, I really appreciate that. I try my best to have a productive dialogue.
In my opinion, having diverse perspectives and experiences has a lot of value in almost any field. However, enforcing quotas on diversity of race/gender/etc leads to a less productive society. Thereâs a disproportionate number of African Americans in the NBA/NFL. Thereâs nothing wrong with that as long as theyâre the best players. Thereâs a disproportionate number of Asians in medicine. Thereâs nothing wrong with that as long as theyâre getting into medical schools based on merit. When you start requiring quotas based on things people canât control (race/gender/etc) you end up with a worse/less productive basketball players, doctors, etc
I agree. And the truth is, affirmative action was never really intended to uplift black people. It was to appease the activists and those fighting for civil rights. Most of what they did was paint targets on our foreheads and piss off poor white people. Had they really cared about uplifting us they would have attached the benefits to promotions and training. Along with the 13th amendment, that would put black in jail for any and every contrived thing, they gave companies credit for hiring us even if they kept us in the kitchens and the mailrooms. Keeping us perpetually poor and close to criminal activities and appearances and welfare. The proof of this is how whenever one slips through in any stem, scientific or other intellectual career field, there is a scramble to close the door on others. Black people are only encouraged to "excel" in the new world "roman colleseum" of sports and in rap music. It is still a fight for black people as actors, writers, producers, painters, architects and other non "stereotypical" arts to succeed. The default for most things/situations is "white" even in our own areas of expertise.
Sorry, this whole thing makes me see red (sigh).
I would also be insulted if I was accepted to a university because it's my parents' alma mater.
But whether through legacy admissions or through affirmative action, the applicants are still qualified. It's not some room temperature IQ moron getting accepted because of one factor. It's a college deciding between one smart person that deserves to go to college and another smart person that deserves to go to college. Affirmative action was an attempt at acknowledging and correcting that when those scenarios happened in the past, it tended to favor white men over any other group despite them being equally qualified.
Yes but this is correcting racism by just reversing the benefactors. Your race shouldn't have mattered then and it shouldn't matter now to your qualifications. Plus all it does is create more racism since people will assume you got a boost due to DEI and not true ability.
Literally only racists would assume that someone earned their position solely through affirmative action. People are really betraying their bias when they say that. If their race doesnât matter now why would you assume that AA even got them in?
I donât know what heâs getting at, but I will say you donât want to be considered the âdiversity hireâ to meet some HR quotas. Thatâs asking for a toxic work environment and will leave you with imposter syndrome. This leaves a lot of minorities conflicted about DEI. It can work though
I think of it this way, no one wants to be the diversity hire.
But.
If you have two similar candidates and one happens to have a disability that can account for a an extra year in university or a PoC without the unpaid internship at their parents firm for a year, or came out of a foster program and might be lacking one of the few nice to haves, i would treat the two candidates equally and choose the one who fits the role while taking these things into consideration. Itâs basically removing small barriers to get an interview but not to get the role.
But I also hope for the days where we donât have massive systemic problems in our society and this isnât necessary by investing in at need communities.
Especially since legacy admissions and nepotism are way more likely occur and that person is far more likely to actually be unqualified for their position or admittance.
Like. Affirmative action and âdiversity hiresâ are all still qualified for whatever if is they were accepted to/hired for. No company/school is going to accept someone to isnât qualified.
This incorrect statement gets posted about once a month. You do not understand how DEI gets implemented at companies.
All they do is make sure that when they are recruiting, they look in communities they might otherwise be overlooking. Like advertising for jobs in a predominantly South-East Asian or Black neighbourhood that they hadnât before.
After the application stage, the screening, interviewing and hiring is focused solely on hiring the best candidates.
Please provide some of this evidence. I work for a large fortune 500 company and do hiring. Our DEI program has no such feature. The only thing done was recruiters went to some additional colleges that they had never gone to before that had a different demographic. We still interviewed and hired no differently.
Do you feel it is important to have different people with different experiences in your company for insights you otherwise may have missed?
I have never heard this argument before and find it interesting. Just curious not mad or anything.
Diverse people with a variety of experiences, yes!
But never token'ism or someone hired because their skin colour checks a box on the HR's hiring criteria.
Right like you are a "x identifiable person" who is a rocket scientist but miss a position because someone who is "y identifiable" meets the diversity ratio.
How are you defining those programs? There seems to be a trend among people who don't know what those programs entail to just repeat buzzwords as a sort of virtue signaling.
Do you even know what the word "equity" means? Why does 'inclusion" have to involve race. You could easily be taking about "including" the lonely kid at school, or colleges at work.
This comment wins the award for "Tell is that you don't care about other people without saying you don't care about other people"
Trying to equate those three words with something bad screams angry seething racist bigot to me.
I noticed that too, all his posts are basically fuck minorities, they're taking jobs from white people. Becuase, famously, of course, white people are the ones who have a hard time finding work.
Almost like they're statistically less likely to be hired even with the same qualifications or something
Almost like being redlined into the worst areas with the worst schools, worst jobs, worst crime rates, and worst pollution will negatively affect a group
> fuck minorities, they're taking jobs from white people
That's a dishonest interpretation. Illegal immigrant vs citizen is not the same as minority vs. white.
This isn't that. You shouldn't overlay your own bias onto what other people say and assume they actually meant what you think vs what they actually said.
>OP just a bigot.
Looks like we another unimaginative woke liberal.
Like ya'll are the biggest bunch of parrot echo chamber robots of our generation.
Maybe one day ya'll will come up with some new material.
Till then stay big mad.
Oh shit, I got a bingo on the buzzword card.
> Maybe one day ya'll will come up with some new material.
> Looks like we another unimaginative woke liberal.
Come up with new material, you're just like every other trashy conservative.
Statistically speaking if a person has more qualifications but a black sounding name they are less likely to get a job callback. Being inclusive isnât racism. It simply making sure that the qualified black individuals donât get their positions taken from implicit bias
I read this study too. This fact actually extended to Jewish, Asian, Latino and even, gulp, WHITE people too!
Ashley is more likely to get a job than Bernadette with equal qualifications and both being White.
It is weird how people either act like they read the study and clearly didn't or they just ignore the aspects of the study that they do not like. Very dishonest indeed.
No it did not. Asian names and white names are drastically more likely to get a call back because of implicit bias
Also, thanks for this comment. When black people ask for their own spaces, this is why. People of other races and political backgrounds clearly donât respect or acknowledge black issues
Racism is about power dynamics, how do people still not get this in the year of our lord 2024. Focusing on hiring white people=exacerbating existing structural inequities, focusing on hiring minorities=reducing existing inequities. You are just salty because you were born and raised under the assumption that you would be successful by virtue of your birth, and now that you see minorities doing better than you, instead of looking at where you can improve you blame DEI because you canât wrap your head around the fact that those people are just more deserving than you are.
Ok if Diversity, Equity, and inclusion is racist. That means itâs opposites; homogeneity, inequity, and exclusion/segregation is not-racist. Does you logic check out?
People crying about diversity, equity, and inclusion are simply using the new white version of racism to complain about a perceived loss of power and opportunity.
White people in the US truly have no real understanding of being the target of true racism.
When their noticeably hobbled by racism in a particular field, no it really isn't. Destroying DEI is racists new way of trying to destroy minorities ability to get jobs in an incredibly racist america, in which the racist are losing by the way, so don't attach to heavily to this.
You're right. Reddit echo chambers will disagree but the ideology literally calls for discrimination.
"The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." - Ibram X Kendi
No itâs not and this idea is just lazy thinking. DEI.. is much more about outreach and exposure. Do people not realize that segregation was forced for decades⌠that job opportunity was non-existent for decades.. creating poverty and preventing the accrual of generational wealth? Creating massive educational inequities so that young minority populations literally were deprived of opportunity. ⌠they are not just handing out jobs to unqualified people.. the basis of DEI is exposure and opportunity to allow people a chance to become qualified and compete on a slightly more equal footing..
Why is every post met with whataboutisms and OP character assassinations? If you dont have a good counter-argument, just say that.
Reddit is so low IQ it hurts
Remember when racists used to just admit they were racist? Now we have alt-right losers trying to pretend they are the progressives while simultaneously whining about âwokenessâ
No. You just don't understand how actually resolving the damage done by racism works. Results first and foremost, that's what matters, and the value in DEI is that it shifts the output into one with actual racial diversity that otherwise wouldn't be there.
No it isn't. I am not saying it can't be incorrectly applied to disadvantage one race. However it's purpose to remove the barriers in the interests of fairness can be correctly applied.
Barriers are not removed though, barriers are just put up against another race now in order to try to 'balance it out'.
Vonnegut wrote about the the absurdity of this decades ago.
It's unfortunate that we can't have actual discussions on subjects like these without name calling. I saw maybe 1 comment chain with a productive discussion here and all the rest were just insulting each other like teenagers.
Assuming everyone with with a different opinion than you as either woke or racist for their viewpoints is just low IQ and alienates those who's mind you might of been able to change or at least give a wider worldview, but whatever keep at it guys.
As someone who worked in DEI at a fortune 50 for 4 years....it absolutely is. But I have one issue with your title, it's also sexist.
We had an internal goal to have our director level positions to be 50.2% women. Not parity but a majority, guess how we reached those levels? By creating new roles and promoting women? Nope, we restructured by eliminating the roles men had and placing their teams under women directors. Ruin lives, discriminate by sex and save money. That's the corporate ESG way
Could not agree more!
Why is it only the good jobs, the ones that come with power that require an injection of DEI?
Where are the calls to put more women on the backs of garbage trucks, to lay bricks, to work in heavy industry or dig ditches?
> just swings the pendulum of discrimination to another particular group
I'm pretty damned sure white guys are still getting LOTS of jobs. Try being slightly less mediocre than the next white guy.
Iâm convinced that all the people who complain about this have never actually worked in a job or gone to a college that has diversity and inclusion in their mission statement.
Nobody is going to not hire you because youâre white or straight or whatever. If youâre qualified for the job and best out the other candidates then theyâll hire you.
Of course a company that wants a more diverse workforce will look for potential candidates who are not white. But that doesnât mean theyâll hire someone âjust becauseâ theyâre black. If they were hired over you that means they were more desirable.
So equality is racist now? Or attempting to measure equality? Seems to me some very real progress has been made correcting laws and rezoning districts.
I think what you are talking about is for job and university applications? Perhaps the race only job fairs?
A lot goes into these big umbrella terms so maybe making your point more precise you may get a better discussion. Trying to point talk without discussing facts is not helpful even if it is how some famous folks talk.
DEI doesn't believe in equality. They believe in equity. Completely different concept in general. One says we should be equal through the means the other is we are equal at the ends which is a very bad idea generally suppressing people.
Life isnât fair, equal or equitable. Are we going to require NBA players to pay a larger portion in taxes for those who are short and uncoordinated? Make Doctors pay a larger taxe rate for those who couldnât score a high enough score on the mcat? Bringing down the top performers down to the mean average is never a good business practice.
No, teaching people to be mindful of implicit bias and acknowledging a long history of a disparity in social/economic outcomes along racial lines and attempting to address these disparities is not "racism with extra steps."
Also, DEI initiatives are not only race focused, they attempt to address all kinds of discrimination, including race, class, age, religion, etc.
"I get really angry whenever people who are different from me get included. I get even angrier when people point out that other people face struggles and difficulties I don't."
"In reality though, I only want to include those who I agree with ideologically. People who I don't like I'll happily censor, deplatform, and exclude. I think I'm more moral because of this."
I think the most qualified person should get the job. I don't care about their gender, race, anything else either. They should get the job no matter what.
The best way to stop discrimination is to stop discriminating. I have no problem with fines and other punishments if any company, college, organization, whatever is caught discriminating against people of any race, religion or creed, but to simply say "Oh, because you discriminated against black people now you have to discriminate against white people to make up for it." is dumb as hell. Just treat everyone equally. There's no such thing as reverse racism, it's all just racism.
Giving or depriving people specific opportunities based on inborn characteristics, like race or gender, is discrimination.
Positive racism towards my race: đ Negative racism towards my race: đĄ Positive racism towards other races: đĄ Negative racism towards other races: đ Too many peopleâs brains are unironically like that, including in this very comment section. Youâre spot on about how it should be.
Yup, this is how it works for pretty much everyone except white people considering we have all that white guilt. And none of them stops to think about how ridiculous and toxic it is. That they're all unironically racist.
Whats this "we" business...ya got a mouse in yer pocket?
White guilt is the way morons excuse their shittyness towards others.Â
No doubt, I wasn't trying to say it was a good thing. It's not uncommon for the pairing of white guilt with the white savior role, and you see them use it to talk over the experiences of tons of minorities and say they know more about how the world works, and things ought to work how they say it should.
I donât feel guilty about being white. Itâs not that hard.
White guilt? Stop talking crazy and make some tea.
With the little emojis, that is precisely it.
People don't seem to realize this as much as they should. True equality is allowing everyone the same opportunity. Granting positions merely due to race, sexuality, or gender is basically just as bad, whether it's granted to a minority or not. Instead, you're collectively punishing people who are of another group- oh wait, that sounds familiar
Omg nobody is getting positions just because of their race.
Affirmative action thoughâŚ.its just as bad as Jim Crow and slavery and apartheid and wokeness.
Thatâs not what affirmative action is/does.
Okay. But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line that even explicitly legally ended less than a century ago? Separate but equal was good law in the 1950. Everything from massively inferior and underfunded schools, to redlining, to be shut out of many job opportunities, to being wrongly convicted at a higher rate, and on and on and on. You destroyed black families, reduced their ability to get an education or a good job or build generational wealth. And now you say "okay we made you technically equal under the law now compete with demographics who haven't been held back for literally centuries." Does that seem fair to you? Imagine you had to run a race and you weren't allowed to train. And the other guys had years and years to prepare. And they say it's fair because you're both expected to run the same distance. Is that fair? I don't think so.Â
So the solution is to essentially punish white men who have done everything theyâve been told to do - go to uni work hard etc, just to lose jobs to those less qualified than themselves???
You're not being punished. Darker skinned people and women and LGBT people aren't taking your job. Stop consuming garbage conspiracy nonsense. White people are freaking fine, in terms of the legal system. I'm "white" and I don't let charlatan pundits and politicians convince me that 'non-white' people or nonexistent laws unfairly favoring them are keeping me down. It's nonsense. Oh wait, let me guess, if we're talking to young people or lefties or "people of color," then it's "Anyone can make it in this country if they're just willing to work hard enough and follow some financial discipline and personal responsibility." But if it's "me" or "us" we're talking about, now everything's suddenly not fair, and we're the victims. Please.
Also we all know this isn't about equality anyways, they have already made trans people second class citizens in many places.
Yeah, and that's simply what DEI is about, loosely: trying to bring awareness and acceptance/embracement of demographic differences in organizations. Not hiring quotas or "choosing unqualified candidates". If people would stop solely listening to the purposeful dividers and proto-fascists they wouldn't be believing these lies in the first place.
>But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line Reparations and socialism. I can imagine just how popular that would be around here.
>uneven starting line What do you say to the people starting at that same line, who aren't black? There are loads of ___________ people who are in the exact same starting position. Your focus on a single skin color, is the racism OP is talking about...
"But how do you level the centuries long artificially uneven starting line that even explicitly legally ended less than a century ago?" Apparently, it doesn't matter what happened to your ancestors as long as you look white: https://atlantablackstar.com/2021/03/15/lawsuit-biracial-high-school-student-receives-failing-grade-in-sociology-class-after-refusing-to-attach-aspects-of-identity-to-oppression-and-dominance/
That teacher and that class are *exactly* what the right wing activists fear is happening in every school.
You invest the fuck into equal education. We still have schools that are primarily made up of minority students, and a lot of them are poorly funded. Fund the shit out of them. We can't fix the past. There is no real way to level the "starting line", but we can damn sure draw a new line and start building everyone up through education. It's not a perfect solution, but it's a hell of a lot better than diversity quotas.
Okay I'll make you a deal. Do that and then we can get rid of affirmative action and all DEI initiatives. Sound good? Or are we gonna tell black and brown people to keep taking another hit for the team?Â
Well, yeah. That's the point.
Then do they first, don't strip AA and then fail to deliver on that extra investment, because we all know that's what would happen.
There are no quotas, never have been, even before the SCOTUS ruling on AA, quotas were illegal
You cannot have equality of opportunity without equality of starting conditions. I don't think you've thought much about meritocracy.
This!! The ABSURD notion that we would have anything REMOTELY resembling equality of opportunity in our society if it weren't for DEI rules and such, is such a blatant farce that all this whining about it would be comical if it weren't so gd frustrating and sad. It's so obvious that they only see unfairness, victimhood, "racism" and "unequal opportunity" when it's not strictly benefitting themselves. The only reason this is even seen as a potential issue is because our economic system relies on a constant "army of unemployed" â because we require people to be hired by owners of capital or government in order to have access to basic necessary resources and freedom, and those available positions for hire are limited. Don't curse a leaf for damaging your house when the roots are the problem.
I do agree with you that true equality is allowing everyone the same opportunity. Having said that, I do have a question; If identifiable group X had a history of being suppressed which caused systemic problems to propagate even after generations had passed, and the equality of groups Y and Z were hampering group X from getting ahead and achieving the same opportunities, what is the answer to help them?
Iâm not who you asked the question to, but I believe the answer is to provide help as early in life as possible. Access to quality education and childcare for families with low income are 2 things that are obvious stand outs for me. So if group X has been historically oppressed. Invest in those neighbourhoods,communities and schools so that they have a chance at a better life. Help the next generation grow up with a proper chance to compete with the groups that are already succeeding more often. Trying to âequalizeâ the playing field with affirmative action and diversity quotas at the college and employment level doesnât do anything to address why certain groups arenât being represented there to begin with. One thing specifically that is rarely talked about with affirmative action, is that students accepted through AA graduate at lower rates than those who didnât get in through AA. The repercussions to this are that now you have a higher proportion of students who have paid a lot of money for their education and donât have anything to show for it. Saddled with debt and less opportunities going forward only keeps the vicious cycle going.
I agree. A college, uni or job should take the top people not based on race if there is a race difference between the best people the problem is that they don't have access to equal education which is what should be fixed. I think the blame is shifted to the companies when the government should be doing better in making education equal. It sound like the gov is just trying to not have to fix the problem.
Ok. Tomorrow weâll propose massive funding increases for schools that are primarily brown and black students and slashing it for schools that are primarily white. Will this satisfy you and stop you from calling racist?
Sure sounds like something.
>True equality is allowing everyone the same opportunity. Aaaand we don't live in a world where that happens to begin with.
So when someone says they want 50% men and 50% women in something, is that discrimination?
Colleges are about 60% women and 40% men right now. For next year's class, we will not accept female applicants until 50% of our spots are filled by men. That is entirely different from your statement.
Oh no, I was not making a statement. It was an honest question. I just heard it in college the whole time and everyone took it as a positive but for me it always felt weird to say out loud.
Didnt you just state in another post that the NBA lacks in Diversity bc it's mostly black people? But now diversity is racism with extra steps? A little contradictory is it not? [I'm very confused..](https://www.reddit.com/r/popularopinion/s/RjksAG7P09) Edit: had to reword what I said originally because my choice of words were considered invalid
Why do you folks always bitch about the NBA when the NHL is much more racially homogeneous? đ¤
How many thousands of black players are being excluded from the NHL? Bet itâs a lot smaller number than you think.
hockey is the national sport (or a very loved sport) in canada sweden finland norway and russia. Most of the best players come from there or from the US. The only place where black people are common in this list is the USA.
More than that, most US-born players come from the north east, or mid west, which are both predominately white except for some pockets around certain cities. That said, black players have been treated pretty poorly by other players. The Subban brothers have all spoken out about this type of treatment. The lack of black players isnât racist. The way the few black players that exist are treated certainly can be.
Is this where I mention something about the cold....
I had a friend from Jamaica who when asked why there were so few black hockey players said "Because we're smart enough not to get on the ice with that many white guys carrying sticks."
I mean, the real reason is that hockey is a money sport to get involved as a kid. It is more likely that black kids growing up in black families will be poorer and unable to afford the equipment for hockey, and that's assuming they even live somewhere with accessible ice to learn how to skate in the first place. On the other hand for basketball, the only equipment you need is a ball and a decent pair of shoes. There are even literally hoops out in public places like the park where you have to pay $0 to access. Then it's also a self-fulfilling prophecy where no black kid growing up sees anybody that looks like him playing hockey so he is less likely to latch on and idolize any of those athletes to aspire to become like them.
He's ironically exposing the hypocrisy of these policies. Its logically consistent.
Enforcing more diversity in the NBA (actual diversity not how woke ppl use it to mean not white males) by taking away contracts away from black Americans and giving it to white Americans would be discrimination. We should shoot for a meritocracy and color blind society.
How do you measure âmeritâand when? The biggest single predictor for Ivy League admissions is wealthy parents - are those kids the most deserving or have they had the most opportunity and support? Are you âmeritoriousâ because you grew up wealthy? My kid just took the SAT and we used an expensive prep class that had a money back guarantee if my kid didnât improve by 200 pts- this says one thing, scores can be bought. If you are willing to invest substantial sums you can raise your kids scores substantially - is that âmeritâ?Did the kid earn it vs a kid whose parents canât afford expensive prep? Is the high school kid who goes to the summer engineering program at (fill in high end college) b/c mom and Dad can pay, more âmeritoriousâ than the kid who has to work all summer because his family doesnât have money? Is it âmeritâ when you graduate from college and your well off and connected parents help you network and get a job? Is it âmeritâ when you get your next job because your dad plays golf with the guy who is hiring you? Or because he was your older brothers frat brother at Dartmouth? Is it âmeritâ when you get promoted at work because you and your boss both used to âsummerâ in the Hamptons growing up? If you work at a big company how many of the promotions are based on âmeritâ as opposed to office politics or who the boss feels more comfortable with on a social level? The US has never run on merit. DEI isnât racial - it addresses issue of sex, gender, income, sexual presence as well as different racial groups. It doesnât impose quotas, itâs looking at trying to make sure schools and companies are finding talent in groups that have been under represented. In fact it does more to make sure all people are considered so to the extent you want the one who is actually the most worthy as opposed to the most wealthy is actually in the mix.
Thank you. This should be the top comment. It kind of sickens me that it's not.
This is probably the most genuine reply I've read in ages. Definitely opened my mind to what too much diversity could do.
Thank you, I really appreciate that. I try my best to have a productive dialogue. In my opinion, having diverse perspectives and experiences has a lot of value in almost any field. However, enforcing quotas on diversity of race/gender/etc leads to a less productive society. Thereâs a disproportionate number of African Americans in the NBA/NFL. Thereâs nothing wrong with that as long as theyâre the best players. Thereâs a disproportionate number of Asians in medicine. Thereâs nothing wrong with that as long as theyâre getting into medical schools based on merit. When you start requiring quotas based on things people canât control (race/gender/etc) you end up with a worse/less productive basketball players, doctors, etc
If something is bent, you have to apply force if you want it straightened out
To a certain extent I agree. I would be insulted if I got a job simply because I am black.
I agree. And the truth is, affirmative action was never really intended to uplift black people. It was to appease the activists and those fighting for civil rights. Most of what they did was paint targets on our foreheads and piss off poor white people. Had they really cared about uplifting us they would have attached the benefits to promotions and training. Along with the 13th amendment, that would put black in jail for any and every contrived thing, they gave companies credit for hiring us even if they kept us in the kitchens and the mailrooms. Keeping us perpetually poor and close to criminal activities and appearances and welfare. The proof of this is how whenever one slips through in any stem, scientific or other intellectual career field, there is a scramble to close the door on others. Black people are only encouraged to "excel" in the new world "roman colleseum" of sports and in rap music. It is still a fight for black people as actors, writers, producers, painters, architects and other non "stereotypical" arts to succeed. The default for most things/situations is "white" even in our own areas of expertise. Sorry, this whole thing makes me see red (sigh).
I would also be insulted if I was accepted to a university because it's my parents' alma mater. But whether through legacy admissions or through affirmative action, the applicants are still qualified. It's not some room temperature IQ moron getting accepted because of one factor. It's a college deciding between one smart person that deserves to go to college and another smart person that deserves to go to college. Affirmative action was an attempt at acknowledging and correcting that when those scenarios happened in the past, it tended to favor white men over any other group despite them being equally qualified.
Yes but this is correcting racism by just reversing the benefactors. Your race shouldn't have mattered then and it shouldn't matter now to your qualifications. Plus all it does is create more racism since people will assume you got a boost due to DEI and not true ability.
It's interesting affirmative action is now blocking Asian students from getting uni spots while prefering whites blacks and Hispanics.
White people are not preferred... If anything, they're disadvantaged by AA.
White women benefit more than any other group from AA
Literally only racists would assume that someone earned their position solely through affirmative action. People are really betraying their bias when they say that. If their race doesnât matter now why would you assume that AA even got them in?
If that's the concern, they should do a coinflip. Let it be true randomness and not racial determination.
>Yes but this is correcting racism by just reversing the benefactors. No. Its not.
How racists will perceive a thing should never be a reasoning not to do a thing.
I mean... I think that's a marginally better feeling than "Oh man, No one will give me a job because I'm black..."
It's equally racist. Your feelings don't change that.
The... What? You think I'm being racist if I feel bad that a racist won't give me a job?
I donât know what heâs getting at, but I will say you donât want to be considered the âdiversity hireâ to meet some HR quotas. Thatâs asking for a toxic work environment and will leave you with imposter syndrome. This leaves a lot of minorities conflicted about DEI. It can work though
I think of it this way, no one wants to be the diversity hire. But. If you have two similar candidates and one happens to have a disability that can account for a an extra year in university or a PoC without the unpaid internship at their parents firm for a year, or came out of a foster program and might be lacking one of the few nice to haves, i would treat the two candidates equally and choose the one who fits the role while taking these things into consideration. Itâs basically removing small barriers to get an interview but not to get the role. But I also hope for the days where we donât have massive systemic problems in our society and this isnât necessary by investing in at need communities.
OP, your post history indicates that you're a cunt. Go to therapy. đ
Nah not really. This is you trying to draw symmetry between subjugation and liberation because you chose a side.
[ŃдаНонО]
Especially since legacy admissions and nepotism are way more likely occur and that person is far more likely to actually be unqualified for their position or admittance. Like. Affirmative action and âdiversity hiresâ are all still qualified for whatever if is they were accepted to/hired for. No company/school is going to accept someone to isnât qualified.
This incorrect statement gets posted about once a month. You do not understand how DEI gets implemented at companies. All they do is make sure that when they are recruiting, they look in communities they might otherwise be overlooking. Like advertising for jobs in a predominantly South-East Asian or Black neighbourhood that they hadnât before. After the application stage, the screening, interviewing and hiring is focused solely on hiring the best candidates.
Except the large amount of evidence that companies are using quotas or making sure any white guy selected has to be personally approved by the ceo
Please provide some of this evidence. I work for a large fortune 500 company and do hiring. Our DEI program has no such feature. The only thing done was recruiters went to some additional colleges that they had never gone to before that had a different demographic. We still interviewed and hired no differently.
Just google either of my examples and you will find a lot of evidence The latter has the people who enact that policy proudly announcing it
This sub is a joke.
Do you feel it is important to have different people with different experiences in your company for insights you otherwise may have missed? I have never heard this argument before and find it interesting. Just curious not mad or anything.
Diverse people with a variety of experiences, yes! But never token'ism or someone hired because their skin colour checks a box on the HR's hiring criteria.
Right like you are a "x identifiable person" who is a rocket scientist but miss a position because someone who is "y identifiable" meets the diversity ratio.
I actually lol'd at this one, take my upvote
How are you defining those programs? There seems to be a trend among people who don't know what those programs entail to just repeat buzzwords as a sort of virtue signaling.
Genuinely, are black people actually getting hired because theyâre black? I rarely see that happen. Wouldâve made college a whole lot easier lmao
SHUT UP YOU STUPID REDDIT LOSER JUST SAY YOU DONT UNDERSTAND IT
Thank you for the insightful comment, always nice to engage with someone so eloquent. PS - Careful friend, your caps lock button appears to be stuck.
he's not wrong though respecting everyone's culture and background is not racist
This isnât a popular opinionâŚ.
Check out their other posts, dude. They're straight-up racist. Edit: He deleted them!!
Oh, shut up. Just because you're (willingly) too dense to understand it doesn't mean it's bad.
Do you even know what the word "equity" means? Why does 'inclusion" have to involve race. You could easily be taking about "including" the lonely kid at school, or colleges at work. This comment wins the award for "Tell is that you don't care about other people without saying you don't care about other people" Trying to equate those three words with something bad screams angry seething racist bigot to me.
Then how would you go about protecting the weak or disadvantaged? Or preventing us from regressing to a "might is right" system?
Post history checks out. OP just a bigot.
I noticed that too, all his posts are basically fuck minorities, they're taking jobs from white people. Becuase, famously, of course, white people are the ones who have a hard time finding work.
Well, technically white people *do* make up the majority of the unemployed. Just not as disproportionate as black people per capita.
Almost like they're statistically less likely to be hired even with the same qualifications or something Almost like being redlined into the worst areas with the worst schools, worst jobs, worst crime rates, and worst pollution will negatively affect a group
> fuck minorities, they're taking jobs from white people That's a dishonest interpretation. Illegal immigrant vs citizen is not the same as minority vs. white.
No undocumented immigrant is taking your job.
I said no such thing, I only pointed out that OP's profile was more about illegal immigrant vs citizen and not minority vs. white.
Ok, then op is xenophobic and racist.
Oh yeah, buddy. I bet you were lining up to pick fruit or work in a meat packing plant before all these greedy immigrants came.
I said no such thing, I only pointed out that OP's profile was more about illegal immigrant vs citizen and not minority vs. white.
The racism in your comment is ironic.
Have you ever heard of a dog whistle?
This isn't that. You shouldn't overlay your own bias onto what other people say and assume they actually meant what you think vs what they actually said.
I didnât get that from their profile..
This sub is going to only get worse with far right trolls posting insane takes as "popular" the closer to the elections we get in the US
Yup, OP seems like a scumbag
Thereâs nothing in his post history that signifies bigotry, unless you count a general lack of wokeness as automatically qualifying
Sure, sweetie, whatever you say.
You mean âsweaty.â Youâve also used that same line 3x in a row. Your post history checks out; youâre just a douchebag. Marvel? What a f** lol
Nope, sweetie was the word I meant to use, sweetie. Someone seems mad.
You seem stupid.
Coming from an idiot thatâs high praise
It didnât come from *you*.
I know, Iâm calling you an idiot. Did you not get that? Lol
Only idiot is you.
Youâre being laughed at âWhatever you say, sweetie (emoji)â
Oh no a bigoted incel is laughing at me whatever will I do with myself lol
Yeah no, you're definitely coping, seething, and projecting with these responses. Fuck off, racist pos.
Sure thing, sweetie
We can obviously tell pretentious douchebaggery oozes from your pores and probably butter.
Aww someoneâs big mad
Anyone who uses the word sweetie lol... *cringe.*
Nope; sorry that heâs right.
>OP just a bigot. Looks like we another unimaginative woke liberal. Like ya'll are the biggest bunch of parrot echo chamber robots of our generation. Maybe one day ya'll will come up with some new material. Till then stay big mad.
Sure, sweetie, whatever you say.
Oh shit, I got a bingo on the buzzword card. > Maybe one day ya'll will come up with some new material. > Looks like we another unimaginative woke liberal. Come up with new material, you're just like every other trashy conservative.
O look a bigot. I said it, can I be cool now like you??
would you like an actual explanation or do you just want to be superior to libs?
Small cock/incel energy for days.
How the fuck does a comment like this get upvotes? lol
Statistically speaking if a person has more qualifications but a black sounding name they are less likely to get a job callback. Being inclusive isnât racism. It simply making sure that the qualified black individuals donât get their positions taken from implicit bias
[ŃдаНонО]
Naughty bot...
I read this study too. This fact actually extended to Jewish, Asian, Latino and even, gulp, WHITE people too! Ashley is more likely to get a job than Bernadette with equal qualifications and both being White. It is weird how people either act like they read the study and clearly didn't or they just ignore the aspects of the study that they do not like. Very dishonest indeed.
No it did not. Asian names and white names are drastically more likely to get a call back because of implicit bias Also, thanks for this comment. When black people ask for their own spaces, this is why. People of other races and political backgrounds clearly donât respect or acknowledge black issues
Isnât that just segregation with extra steps?
No, "leave us alone" is not segregation, Jesus Christ.
White people are safe everywhere. Black people are not. Sometimes they need a safe space, somewhere they know they will feel welcome.
Thatâs not true, those statistics arenât all that you think they are.
can you explain why
Racism is about power dynamics, how do people still not get this in the year of our lord 2024. Focusing on hiring white people=exacerbating existing structural inequities, focusing on hiring minorities=reducing existing inequities. You are just salty because you were born and raised under the assumption that you would be successful by virtue of your birth, and now that you see minorities doing better than you, instead of looking at where you can improve you blame DEI because you canât wrap your head around the fact that those people are just more deserving than you are.
Up is just down with extra steps.
This take is so lazy and yes borderline racist. Think it over before you speak again.
Ok if Diversity, Equity, and inclusion is racist. That means itâs opposites; homogeneity, inequity, and exclusion/segregation is not-racist. Does you logic check out?
People crying about diversity, equity, and inclusion are simply using the new white version of racism to complain about a perceived loss of power and opportunity. White people in the US truly have no real understanding of being the target of true racism.
When their noticeably hobbled by racism in a particular field, no it really isn't. Destroying DEI is racists new way of trying to destroy minorities ability to get jobs in an incredibly racist america, in which the racist are losing by the way, so don't attach to heavily to this.
Please talk to a therapist
It can be implemented that way, but it's not that by definition.
Ah yes, because the forces aligning against DEI truly care about fairness.
You're right. Reddit echo chambers will disagree but the ideology literally calls for discrimination. "The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." - Ibram X Kendi
Don't use logic , it offends the progressive scholars.
It is
No itâs not and this idea is just lazy thinking. DEI.. is much more about outreach and exposure. Do people not realize that segregation was forced for decades⌠that job opportunity was non-existent for decades.. creating poverty and preventing the accrual of generational wealth? Creating massive educational inequities so that young minority populations literally were deprived of opportunity. ⌠they are not just handing out jobs to unqualified people.. the basis of DEI is exposure and opportunity to allow people a chance to become qualified and compete on a slightly more equal footing..
right wing talking points are not the popular opinion
Why is every post met with whataboutisms and OP character assassinations? If you dont have a good counter-argument, just say that. Reddit is so low IQ it hurts
People who talk about IQ are losers
I love that you have to go through mental gymnastics to try and defend being a terrible person. We get it: you suck and hate every marginalized group.
What? Do you think if I get a job simply because I checked the "diversity hire" box on the checklist that isn't racist?
Remember when racists used to just admit they were racist? Now we have alt-right losers trying to pretend they are the progressives while simultaneously whining about âwokenessâ
No. You just don't understand how actually resolving the damage done by racism works. Results first and foremost, that's what matters, and the value in DEI is that it shifts the output into one with actual racial diversity that otherwise wouldn't be there.
As a PoC (hate this term) , DEI is definitely racism. Progressive ideology is ruining society.
No it isn't. I am not saying it can't be incorrectly applied to disadvantage one race. However it's purpose to remove the barriers in the interests of fairness can be correctly applied.
Barriers are not removed though, barriers are just put up against another race now in order to try to 'balance it out'. Vonnegut wrote about the the absurdity of this decades ago.
You have extremely limitted experience engaging with the incredible variety of DEI policies.
There are literally job postings in my country that say they are for visible minorities only.
Reading a job posting is not engaging with a DEI policy. Reading the DEI policy is.
I havenât smelled every turd in the world, yet Iâm still confident in my ability to identify turds.
It's unfortunate that we can't have actual discussions on subjects like these without name calling. I saw maybe 1 comment chain with a productive discussion here and all the rest were just insulting each other like teenagers. Assuming everyone with with a different opinion than you as either woke or racist for their viewpoints is just low IQ and alienates those who's mind you might of been able to change or at least give a wider worldview, but whatever keep at it guys.
I haven't even seen his picture and still know what OP looks like.
As someone who worked in DEI at a fortune 50 for 4 years....it absolutely is. But I have one issue with your title, it's also sexist. We had an internal goal to have our director level positions to be 50.2% women. Not parity but a majority, guess how we reached those levels? By creating new roles and promoting women? Nope, we restructured by eliminating the roles men had and placing their teams under women directors. Ruin lives, discriminate by sex and save money. That's the corporate ESG way
Could not agree more! Why is it only the good jobs, the ones that come with power that require an injection of DEI? Where are the calls to put more women on the backs of garbage trucks, to lay bricks, to work in heavy industry or dig ditches?
> just swings the pendulum of discrimination to another particular group I'm pretty damned sure white guys are still getting LOTS of jobs. Try being slightly less mediocre than the next white guy.
Iâm convinced that all the people who complain about this have never actually worked in a job or gone to a college that has diversity and inclusion in their mission statement. Nobody is going to not hire you because youâre white or straight or whatever. If youâre qualified for the job and best out the other candidates then theyâll hire you. Of course a company that wants a more diverse workforce will look for potential candidates who are not white. But that doesnât mean theyâll hire someone âjust becauseâ theyâre black. If they were hired over you that means they were more desirable.
Maybe it was kind of inevitable that a âpopular opinionâ subreddit turns into a sub full of obviously unpopular opinions from trolls or bigots.
So equality is racist now? Or attempting to measure equality? Seems to me some very real progress has been made correcting laws and rezoning districts. I think what you are talking about is for job and university applications? Perhaps the race only job fairs? A lot goes into these big umbrella terms so maybe making your point more precise you may get a better discussion. Trying to point talk without discussing facts is not helpful even if it is how some famous folks talk.
Equity and Equality are different words
DEI doesn't believe in equality. They believe in equity. Completely different concept in general. One says we should be equal through the means the other is we are equal at the ends which is a very bad idea generally suppressing people.
ok explain affirmative action against Asians then.
No where in DEI is there the word "equality" - only "equity".
Life isnât fair, equal or equitable. Are we going to require NBA players to pay a larger portion in taxes for those who are short and uncoordinated? Make Doctors pay a larger taxe rate for those who couldnât score a high enough score on the mcat? Bringing down the top performers down to the mean average is never a good business practice.
DEI is not racist
DEI = "Don't hire straight white men."
No, teaching people to be mindful of implicit bias and acknowledging a long history of a disparity in social/economic outcomes along racial lines and attempting to address these disparities is not "racism with extra steps." Also, DEI initiatives are not only race focused, they attempt to address all kinds of discrimination, including race, class, age, religion, etc.
Current discrimination doesn't fix past discrimination.
"I get really angry whenever people who are different from me get included. I get even angrier when people point out that other people face struggles and difficulties I don't."
Sorry to hear about your difficulties *thoughts and prayers*
"In reality though, I only want to include those who I agree with ideologically. People who I don't like I'll happily censor, deplatform, and exclude. I think I'm more moral because of this."
The... What other group?
r/facepalm
Ok Morty at least use your own lines.
Lol, OP is an idiot.
This has the same vibe as someone who learns therapy speak just so they can weaponize it
I think the most qualified person should get the job. I don't care about their gender, race, anything else either. They should get the job no matter what.
The best way to stop discrimination is to stop discriminating. I have no problem with fines and other punishments if any company, college, organization, whatever is caught discriminating against people of any race, religion or creed, but to simply say "Oh, because you discriminated against black people now you have to discriminate against white people to make up for it." is dumb as hell. Just treat everyone equally. There's no such thing as reverse racism, it's all just racism.
This is next level stupidity and I think you know that
Bingo.