(07-23-2024, 11:00 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]From what I have seen DEI is just another form of discrimination. At least the way it is being enacted presently.
It was a hailmary attempt of pandering at it's longest distance. Brought on by a weak party that morally bankrupted itself over a decade ago.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
(07-23-2024, 09:51 PM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2024, 09:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Lol.
Was social security about race?
Was the national labor relations act about race?
Was medicare and medicaid about race?
You ask me if I'm kidding. No. I'm not. Are you?
Your going back to Medicare dude back in the 60's? Just to school you, that Democrat political party, back in the 60's was a Dramatically different Democrat from your modern Democrat. They were very much a racist party and would be very much against Diversity and Gender inclusion. That Democratic party was also for segregation. I am referring to the modern Democratic party who is a very different animals. The common Denominator is they have always been race hustlers.
The PragerU video went back to the 1800s so I figured the 1960s was fair game.
A majority of both parties voted for the civil rights act of 1964, the equal employment opportunity act of 1972, and the education amendments of 1972. The consensus at the time was in favor of diversity and gender inclusion. The one difference is they didn't know that transgender identity would be a thing in the future. Both parties also expanded so-called affirmative action at the time, with President Nixon implementing the first racial quotas for federal contractors.
(07-24-2024, 06:21 AM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2024, 11:00 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]From what I have seen DEI is just another form of discrimination. At least the way it is being enacted presently.
It was a hailmary attempt of pandering at it's longest distance. Brought on by a weak party that morally bankrupted itself over a decade ago.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
DEI is a flexible moral framework that is the impetus for operating social governance. It gives power to the wielder (in this case mega corporations), and it keeps a majority from forming. It sounds good on paper, but it's really just another mechanism for control.
(07-24-2024, 10:40 AM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2024, 11:00 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]From what I have seen DEI is just another form of discrimination. At least the way it is being enacted presently.
Exactly what it is
Take a look at this link from the SS website. You find they dropped the height requirement and the physical requirements are a lot less for a female compared to a man. IF DEI is about equality not just diversity why the difference? (best person for the job) I have a friend retired from the military and say the same thing is happening there.
https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/te...-standards
(07-24-2024, 03:33 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2024, 10:40 AM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly what it is
Take a look at this link from the SS website. You find they dropped the height requirement and the physical requirements are a lot less for a female compared to a man. IF DEI is about equality not just diversity why the difference? (best person for the job) I have a friend retired from the military and say the same thing is happening there.
https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/te...-standards
Physical fitness requirements for male and female have always been different in the military.
What alarms me is a U.S. government agency assuming someone’s gender before administering a fitness test. Furthermore, shouldn’t they be referred to as birthing and non-birthing persons?
The outrage!
(07-24-2024, 03:33 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2024, 10:40 AM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly what it is
Take a look at this link from the SS website. You find they dropped the height requirement and the physical requirements are a lot less for a female compared to a man. IF DEI is about equality not just diversity why the difference? (best person for the job) I have a friend retired from the military and say the same thing is happening there.
https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/te...-standards
Agreed, Elon Musk calls the woke way of thinking the Woke mind virus. I don't know about you but if I have a medical emergency, I want the most qualified doctor not the most diverse. Same on a plane I want the best pilot.
Look at secret service with 5'5-5'8 women guarding a 6'3 man in Donald Trump during that assassination attempt. Also the women in charge was totally unqualified to lead.
I believe you should not be awarded anything due to your race, gender, or Sexual orientation. You should have to earn your place in life and never just given it.
So tired of the woke victim complex. It makes me want to vomit.
(07-24-2024, 03:33 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2024, 10:40 AM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly what it is
Take a look at this link from the SS website. You find they dropped the height requirement and the physical requirements are a lot less for a female compared to a man. IF DEI is about equality not just diversity why the difference? (best person for the job) I have a friend retired from the military and say the same thing is happening there.
https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/te...-standards
DEI is about equity, not equality. Know the difference.
(07-25-2024, 03:48 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2024, 03:33 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Take a look at this link from the SS website. You find they dropped the height requirement and the physical requirements are a lot less for a female compared to a man. IF DEI is about equality not just diversity why the difference? (best person for the job) I have a friend retired from the military and say the same thing is happening there.
https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/te...-standards
DEI is about equity, not equality. Know the difference.
The difference seems to be up to interpretation.
I see equality as providing the same opportunity, rights, etc. for everyone.
Equity is forcing the same outcome for everyone, especially for those regarded as “less privileged”.
Is that how you see it?
(07-25-2024, 03:56 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 03:48 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]DEI is about equity, not equality. Know the difference.
The difference seems to be up to interpretation.
I see equality as providing the same opportunity, rights, etc. for everyone.
Equity is forcing the same outcome for everyone, especially for those regarded as “less privileged”.
Is that how you see it?
It's not about how I see it. It's what it is.
Horse racing is the most long standing and successful DEI program.
(07-25-2024, 04:05 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 04:02 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]It's not about how I see it. It's what it is.
Horse racing is the most long standing and successful DEI program.
Can you explain, please?
Handicapping to achieve an equitable outcome has been a feature of horse racing for almost 200 years. The best horse isn't allowed to win based on merit..
(07-25-2024, 03:56 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 03:48 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]DEI is about equity, not equality. Know the difference.
The difference seems to be up to interpretation.
I see equality as providing the same opportunity, rights, etc. for everyone.
Equity is forcing the same outcome for everyone, especially for those regarded as “less privileged”.
Is that how you see it?
Equality is everyone gets the same good or service. Every kid in the school get the same minutes of individual attention from the teacher.
Equity is everyone's individual needs are considered and everyone gets exactly what they need, no more and no less. So at a school the kid with the learning disability gets extra attention.
Both are just ideals to aim at. Any system that lasts more than a day will have some inequality and some inequity.
(07-25-2024, 04:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 03:56 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]The difference seems to be up to interpretation.
I see equality as providing the same opportunity, rights, etc. for everyone.
Equity is forcing the same outcome for everyone, especially for those regarded as “less privileged”.
Is that how you see it?
Equality is everyone gets the same good or service. Every kid in the school get the same minutes of individual attention from the teacher.
Equity is everyone's individual needs are considered and everyone gets exactly what they need, no more and no less. So at a school the kid with the learning disability gets extra attention.
Both are just ideals to aim at. Any system that lasts more than a day will have some inequality and some inequity.
All well and good until it gets people killed. Just recently it did just that.
(07-25-2024, 04:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 03:56 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]The difference seems to be up to interpretation.
I see equality as providing the same opportunity, rights, etc. for everyone.
Equity is forcing the same outcome for everyone, especially for those regarded as “less privileged”.
Is that how you see it?
Equality is everyone gets the same good or service. Every kid in the school get the same minutes of individual attention from the teacher.
Equity is everyone's individual needs are considered and everyone gets exactly what they need, no more and no less. So at a school the kid with the learning disability gets extra attention.
Both are just ideals to aim at. Any system that lasts more than a day will have some inequality and some inequity.
Translation = Lets pass up on people that are much more qualified to fit a Gender/Race/Sexuality quota to fill some kind of crazy agenda.
(07-25-2024, 04:53 PM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 04:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Equality is everyone gets the same good or service. Every kid in the school get the same minutes of individual attention from the teacher.
Equity is everyone's individual needs are considered and everyone gets exactly what they need, no more and no less. So at a school the kid with the learning disability gets extra attention.
Both are just ideals to aim at. Any system that lasts more than a day will have some inequality and some inequity.
Translation = Lets pass up on people that are much more qualified to fit a Gender/Race/Sexuality quota to fill some kind of crazy agenda.
Right. It makes sense when you think about schools but not when you think about jobs. The problem is, the left often views work the way normal people view school. The left thinks of good jobs the way normal people think of admission slots in a good college. In a very limited sense, some jobs should be making accomodations and trainings for workers who need it, but mandates for that kind of thing usually aren't called for.
(07-25-2024, 05:30 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 04:53 PM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Translation = Lets pass up on people that are much more qualified to fit a Gender/Race/Sexuality quota to fill some kind of crazy agenda.
Right. It makes sense when you think about schools but not when you think about jobs. The problem is, the left often views work the way normal people view school. The left thinks of good jobs the way normal people think of admission slots in a good college. In a very limited sense, some jobs should be making accomodations and trainings for workers who need it, but mandates for that kind of thing usually aren't called for.
I think the question is, how much do you want to make up for the fact that some people are born with advantages that other people don't have? We all say we want equal opportunity, but does a poor man have the same opportunity that a rich man has? Should we try to even the playing field?
Equality is the process.
Equity is the outcome.
Modern Americans use equity and equality interchangeably, but these words are not the same. I was just talking with a progressive friend of mine today about this. I don't mind DEI minus the E. Equity is unachievable. It's a pipe dream. The funny part is that the E is the only part of DEI that means what it means, at least as it pertains to progressive theory. Equity comes straight out of Marxist ideology and concerns itself primarily with the outcome of results. There are far too many variables in humanity to EVER get that result. We have taller people and shorter people, and better-looking people and uglier people and fatter people and skinnier people, and lazier people and ambitious people. You will NEVER end up with the same result. I can't take anyone seriously who advocates for Equity.
Diversity and Inclusion as we understand them, are perfectly fine concepts. HOWEVER, they don't mean what you think they do as I was saying earlier. I can explain why they don't mean what you think, but most people don't really concern themselves with that type of information.
(07-25-2024, 05:37 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 05:30 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Right. It makes sense when you think about schools but not when you think about jobs. The problem is, the left often views work the way normal people view school. The left thinks of good jobs the way normal people think of admission slots in a good college. In a very limited sense, some jobs should be making accomodations and trainings for workers who need it, but mandates for that kind of thing usually aren't called for.
I think the question is, how much do you want to make up for the fact that some people are born with advantages that other people don't have? We all say we want equal opportunity, but does a poor man have the same opportunity that a rich man has? Should we try to even the playing field?
As a poor white male I was born in total poverty. The difference is nobody is trying to help me out. In fact being white I am assumed to have some kind of white advantage. Nobody should get anything based on skin color or gender.
(07-25-2024, 05:37 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2024, 05:30 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Right. It makes sense when you think about schools but not when you think about jobs. The problem is, the left often views work the way normal people view school. The left thinks of good jobs the way normal people think of admission slots in a good college. In a very limited sense, some jobs should be making accomodations and trainings for workers who need it, but mandates for that kind of thing usually aren't called for.
I think the question is, how much do you want to make up for the fact that some people are born with advantages that other people don't have? We all say we want equal opportunity, but does a poor man have the same opportunity that a rich man has? Should we try to even the playing field?
Equity should be a minimum standard.
We want everyone to have equitable living standards (fresh water, a roof over their heads, access to essential utilities etc). It doesn't mean everyone has the same house.
Same with Mike's education example. We should strive for equity (minimum language skills etc) but not hold back high achievers. If that means spending more time to help some kids get to that minimum, then that should happen.