>Instead, the article (ironically) appears to be written from the biased standpoint that it "ought to be" so This attitude is pervasive in the US due to the hi

>Instead, the article (ironically) appears to be written from the biased standpoint that it "ought to be" so This attitude is pervasive in the US due to the history of violence, enslavement and segregation against other races. The Chinese, African American and Japanese have all been victims of such crimes in the US. Internationally the biggest culprit that comes to mind is the systematic slaughter and extermination of the Jewish people aka the holocaust. Thus what you see in modern society is an over correction. In attempt to get away from one extreme we've headed towards our objective and over shot it like a control system overshooting equilibrium. Assuming "diversity" as a default without scientific basis isn't even the extreme I'm talking about here, we're shooting way past that. But you see what your post implies right? Yes it's scientifically valid to ask whether diversity is good or bad. Yes it's very possible to find out via science that diversity is bad. But the consequences of such knowledge, means a valid utilization of segregation enforced on the basis of science. Right? Imagine kicking all black people out of a white neighborhood based off of valid and real science about how diversity is bad. Questioning diversity is scientifically valid and a negative conclusion against diversity is a realistic possible truth we may not want to face. Anyway, I digress... I mentioned we overshot the whole diversity question right? We can all probably agree that it's not good to segregate based off of race. But should we segregate people who identify as a wolves or penguins? https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Therian_system https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Therian_system Where is the line drawn? Allowing a transgender female to compete in female sports? Or allowing someone who identifies as a turtle to fly a passenger airplane? When does "diversity" cross the line into scientific absurdity? When should it be classified as insane? That's the big question here and modern society is at a point where all of this is blurry and not obvious yet. Literally I posted a link to a website that lists "therian" as a formal scientific concept. We've definitely overshot here.