Question for Anti-DEI types
- Thread starter theiacowtipper
- Start date
What isn't fair about hiring managers being trained to look past potential bias?
By measuring the population of practicing African and Latino paramedics and describing them as "under represented" your example appears to be trying to achieve equality of outcome,.. Not all groups will be evenly represented in all areas of our society, nor should you expect them to be,.. Is diversity in the NBA in sync with our overall society?
And that experience honestly has you stuck on affirmative action? If I recall you're in Ed, do up not have an hr team that filters unqualified applicants?
Unfortunately the implementation seems to be race/gender based and quota driven.
The problem for some of these people is they think DEI is giving people of other colors, people with disabilities and other groups some leg up on white people. The Prez and other leaders who are anti-DEI talk in terms of disabilities, etc.
Well Steven Hawking was very disabled but not mentally.
To me some of this DEI backlash has the feeling of Nazis going after the disabled in Europe, the non-whites in Europe, during their reign of terror.
No. The interview process is 10 qualified people in the waiting room, some chosen because of diversity and inclusion. The hiring process is giving the job the one in that room who is most qualified and did the best in that interview.
That is what “equal opportunity” means…even though there may already be some more qualified people excluded from that room due to DEI.
But when the guy hiring says “you did a really good job and are the most qualified but we need more red heads here to keep up appearances”, that’s outcome equality.
CRT was a flop but they hit the bullseye with DEI.
Folks I've been reading have been saying what this is really about is rolling back Civil Rights to the pre-1964 Civil Rights Act norms.
I’m simply debating his definitions of “outcome” and “opportunity”.
No. Absolutely not. Absolutely 100% not. I'm going to go off on an example. In the news was a paramedic from Sioux City who made a medication error. Killed a patient. She was charged with involuntary manslaughter. The mistake lies with her. She should have check the medication. However, the system needs to look at itself. Was there a systemic issue that was at least partially responsible for the error? That may have prevented the error. The medication she gave in error was a powerful paralytic. Should it have been segregated better. Should it have had more pronounced warning labels? So that it was harder to make an error with, because it is so powerful.
Getting more people into my field isn't about running classes and hoping more apply. Are there systemic issues that we can address that make it more palatable? Make it more accessible. Perhaps they aren't aware of the opportunities that exist. Perhaps they need more recruitment funding. Once they are in they are in. They have to meet the same standards.
I just want everyone to have a chance. That's all.
I just hate the forced trainings, corporate 2 speak BS on it, and the constant bombardment of DEI propaganda from corporations to its employees.
I’m sure there are plenty of people that hate DEI just for the fact that our employers make us hate DEI because of the things I listed above haha. In terms of what it actually is, it is a good thing but it has also been abused like every other initiative.
I’m sure there are plenty of people that hate DEI just for the fact that our employers make us hate DEI because of the things I listed above haha. In terms of what it actually is, it is a good thing but it has also been abused like every other initiative.
Because that is nothing but white-washed nonsense. The real goal of DEI is to give jobs to individuals less qualified so we can feel good about ourselves. Diversity obtained organically is great. It means everyone from every background is getting the education needed to succeed. DEI obtained through legislation or edict is proving failure in past preparation. DEI is the new spelling for racism.
We are talking past each other to a point. We in the same book at least, if not on the same page. My thought is that we make sure that everyone has a chance to apply. They have an equal chance at an application. If the boss only posts the opening on a board frequented by graduates of the University of Iowa that's not equitable. The candidates are then screened using equal criteria. That's equitable. They are selected into interviews on equal footing. That's equitable. Then the hiring takes place based on best applicant.
That's an equitable process.
No one really mentioned DEI much on the forums until the guy obsessed with trans started really posting on it in 2022. In 2023 there was maybe 200 ish posts on DEI. Now in 2025 there are probably 200 a week on DEI. It seems like a persistence campaign started with it in 2023 but really went into full momentum in 2024.
Now you would think that DEI is a bigger issue in the nation than medical debt being the top reason for bankruptcy in the US or the rapidly growing wealth inequality which put regular people under the thumbs of robber barons.
It's almost like DEI is a distraction to rile up people and make them take their eyes off of what really ails the people.
Now you would think that DEI is a bigger issue in the nation than medical debt being the top reason for bankruptcy in the US or the rapidly growing wealth inequality which put regular people under the thumbs of robber barons.
It's almost like DEI is a distraction to rile up people and make them take their eyes off of what really ails the people.
Okay,.. so in your example why are you expecting to see practicing African American and Latino paramedics at levels representative of their populations in the general society?,.. You are looking at outcome and then claiming that there is some systemic problem to be corrected... Not necessarily the case, and how far do you go to try to achieve the flawed result you are looking for...
There may not be a systemic problem. Maybe African Americans have a cultural aversion to being a paramedic. That's not my point. A DEI program should look to see if there is a systemic problem, and work to see if there is a solution. Maybe there isn't a solution that can be implemented. There may never be equal outcomes. That's ok. If everyone truly has an equal chance that's ok.
So when do you stop looking?,.. When have you achieved your goals?,.. You seem to be measuring outcomes.
aiming to have an organization that is diversity, equitable and inclusive is an ongoing effort
and while i understand that "the hiring process" is an easy thing to identify, if that's the only thing an organization's DEI efforts are focused on, that's a bad process and it's not going to help anything
my organziation doesn't have an official "dei" program, but since we serve the public, it is to our benefit - and the public we serve - that our organization is as representative of that population as possible
Lol.
So Obama if he were white, would still have had the same standards to become president? Obama went to a church where he had to apologize for the pastor, and you trumpers won’t hold your guy accountable at all for anything, let alone something someone in his orbit does. But hey, race has nothing to do with it right??
We stop looking when white Americans are no longer racist on their own. Nudging them there isn’t helpful. And white Americans means the people who think American means white. Not white people as a whole.
You do measure outcomes. Then you look for a cause of those outcomes. Is there a systemic issue preventing equity? Is there a solution for that inequitable situation? Is that solution reasonable to implement? Perhaps you have to accept the outcome as is because there is no reasonable implementable solution. For instance, if my paramedic program has no African American candidates, perhaps it's because African Americans only graduate at our local school at something like a 20% rate. African American males. A requirement for our program is a high school diploma or equivalent. I can't fix that. If that's the cause, you can't address it, you stop.
So when you measure these outcomes, how do you know that the perceived inequity is the result of systemic issues?,.. Perhaps it's simply little more than African Americans not particularly being drawn to hockey, or Caucasians not normally being the best basketball player on the court?,.. Problem is that you won't know, and because of that you will forever be attempting to game the system to get to the numbers you think you are supposed exist.
again...if all you're doing is looking at the final numbers, you're not doing a good job
sports organizations often have programs that look to improve inclusion - like MLB's RBI program
Outcomes MIGHT identify a problem, but you still need to find a problem. There might not be a problem. That's the point. As far as anyone is able to identify, there is no systemic problem with Caucasians being excluded from the NBA, they just aren't good enough. However, there was an identified problem with African Americans being excluded from interviews for coaching vacancies in the NFL. As a result, more AA candidates are being hired.
I would argue that indeed it is. The NBA and Major League Soccer are considered the most diverse professional sports.
From Google:
The NBA has a history of hiring people of color into league positions. In a survey by the University of Central Florida, the NBA had the best record of all men's professional sports in this regard.
Yep. Equity means the same outcome. What if YOUR kid, simply cannot and never will read as well as MY kid? How will you get them to the same outcome? It's obvious...
There is only one way to ensure equity, because some people will have a lower ceiling. The only solution to equity is to bring down the top. It's why you get the removal of advanced classes if not enough of some people or groups qualify for advanced classes. Equity is impossible without lowering the top end of the scale.
In the context of say educational materials, my concern about equity would be dumbing down the material so that more average kids are "excellent", leaving actual excellent students underserved.
But that goes to show you, the statement is always unobjectionable. It's the concrete actions that are taken in service of the statement that can be a problem.
No matter how you cut it, at some point putting a finger on the scale becomes the problem,.. not the solution.
I am enjoying reading your take on it. I might not agree with every single thing, but what you are mostly describing is a structure than 85% of people would agree with, and is consistent with what most Gen X and Millennials were originally raised with...
- Federally mandated equality of opportunity and non-discrimination
- Resources to lift up communities that aren't seeing enough qualifying for opportunities (ex grants for extra math education in under performing districts to get their performance up to other groups), the wifi example you gave
- Push to broaden the net in search for qualified people...i.e. forcing jobs to be posted and not just filled internally every time, the Rooney Rule, making sure your office is wheelchair accessible, etc.
- A tacit understanding that not every disparity in outcomes is defacto evidence of a problem or structural racism
However, that is not the modern DEI/CRT/Antiracist regime in the post-Floyd era, and that has caused the backlash. In the modern DEI climate, based on the Antiracist agenda, any disparity IS BY DEFINITION discrimination, and can only be resolved with discrimination. The equity of outcomes is the only measure. You either need to change how you measure "success", i.e. what it takes to become a doctor or get into advanced classes, or you need restrict opportunities for those that create the imbalance, i.e. barring qualified air traffic controllers for being white. This is both tacitly, obviously immoral to most observers, does little to improve ACTUAL outcomes, and has resulted in a massive backlash, which is taking plenty of sensible approaches down with it.
By all mean, starting with your approach and haggling around the edges would be welcome. But that's not where we've been recently.
Not every white person has been rolling. That's life, and for immigrants who came to this country of any stripe, they did it and are doing it.
Asians and people from India seems to do very well at the highest levels.
Tough to DEI yourself out of a shitty home life and bad/ non existent parents.
I sure as hell don’t want rules or standards bent to the person responsible for shoving a camera up my ass or operating on my heart.
you need after school programs to give kids places to get help with their homework take a shower and fed and clothes cleaned. Mentors to show them the path and help them walk it. Get something like that moving and a lot less will need preferential treatment later in life when it might be too late. Lots of “white trash” kids are in the same boat in rural America. Sadly, nobody loves them enough.
Tough to DEI yourself out of a shitty home life and bad/ non existent parents.
I sure as hell don’t want rules or standards bent to the person responsible for shoving a camera up my ass or operating on my heart.
you need after school programs to give kids places to get help with their homework take a shower and fed and clothes cleaned. Mentors to show them the path and help them walk it. Get something like that moving and a lot less will need preferential treatment later in life when it might be too late. Lots of “white trash” kids are in the same boat in rural America. Sadly, nobody loves them enough.
It's actually pretty simple:
Seriously, though, from what I can glean from their comments, DEI detractors two biggest gripes are:
- DEI serves as an extension of affirmative action.
- DEI is nothing more than a trans-push of ideals.
Personally, and I've said this before, because we already have Equal Opportunity (EO) laws AND affirmative action, I've never seen the duplicative need for DEI. I was raised to treat others with dignity and respect, and don't require the training. If there are those who need the training, those are likely the ones who will ignore it, therefore, my time continues to be wasted. For example, I don't need a sign that tells me to wash my hands after I wipe my arse. If someone else needs that sign, I recommend not shaking that persons' hand...ever.
Latest posts
-
Jaxx DeJean Creating His Own Path, Forging Relationships with Iowa- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-
-