3 ms·

Diversity of culture between workplaces is collateral damage of diversity and inclusion efforts. All cultures are not compatible. Not everyone will not be comf

Diversity of culture between workplaces is collateral damage of diversity and inclusion efforts. All cultures are not compatible. Not everyone will not be comfortable in a particular culture. Not everyone will not be wanted in a particular culture. [0] The left call this immoral, believing that any exclusion or disparity is the result of circumstances that enslave humanity, from which humanity should be liberated [1]. The result of this thinking is the limiting and constricting of various liberties, and a push towards the formation of a soulless, foundationless, conglomerated monoculture. Instead of fighting to produce this horrible monoculture, we should accept that people don't get along, and then find a way to allow all cultures to thrive. [0] https://mobile.twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651 https://mobile.twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory

imiric 5y ago
What I don't understand about this ideology is what the end goal is. Will the fight be over once every facet of society is equally distributed among everyone, effectively abolishing majorities? And which human attributes will we choose to make diverse? Today it's gender, race and ethnicity. Yet there are countless other attributes we can choose to select on where not every group will be represented equally, so why stop with these? This argument also ignores inherent imbalances in society, like the fact that professions are largely chosen by interest. The same male-female inequality that exists in tech also exists in nursing, construction, hairdressing, etc.[1] I hope that we can one day accept that this is OK and not the result of some huge conspiracy and systemic discrimination (not that this doesn't exist, but that it's not the main cause for the imbalance). [1]: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm

imiric 5y ago

What I don't understand about this ideology is what the end goal is. Will the fight be over once every facet of society is equally distributed among everyone, effectively abolishing majorities? And which human attributes will we choose to make diverse? Today it's gender, race and ethnicity. Yet there are countless other attributes we can choose to select on where not every group will be represented equally, so why stop with these? This argument also ignores inherent imbalances in society, like the fact that professions are largely chosen by interest. The same male-female inequality that exists in tech also exists in nursing, construction, hairdressing, etc.[1] I hope that we can one day accept that this is OK and not the result of some huge conspiracy and systemic discrimination (not that this doesn't exist, but that it's not the main cause for the imbalance). [1]: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm