5 ms·
Same here. I'm pretty liberal on a number of issues, but this kind of language is extremely off-putting to me. If it means that the layoffs were explicitly raci
by rurp 4y ago
Same here. I'm pretty liberal on a number of issues, but this kind of language is extremely off-putting to me. If it means that the layoffs were explicitly racist, that is disgusting.
- nemo44x 4y agoThey were explicitly "anti-racist" which is just racism done differently.
- NaturalPhallacy 4y agoNo it's just regular old racism.
- weatherlite 4y agoBut we are all fine with racist hiring...
- mod 4y agoI don't think that's a true statement.
- anonym29 4y agoI am fine with hiring that enforces equality of opportunity (where nobody is denied an opportunity because of their race). I am NOT fine with hiring that enforces equality of outcome (where some people, who would otherwise be considered unqualified, are granted an opportunity because of their race). Race should account for ZERO percent of a hiring decision.
- prottog 4y agoThe fundamental misconception of today's "anti-racist" movement is that every unequal outcome is the direct result of past or present racism, without stopping to examine the validity of that assumption. A great many eggs have been and will continue to be broken in service of equality of outcome, and we will all be worse off for it.
- etchalon 4y agoBelieving race should account for zero percent of a hiring decision is what any decent person should believe. Acknowledging it has, and does, and that it is more often than not to the detriment of minority groups is what any informed person should recognize.
- HideousKojima 4y agoWho the hell is the "we" you're talking about here? I've been opposed to considering race in hiring (and college admissions, etc.) since I was old enough to understand it (which was in elementary school).