3 ms·
It's not out of spite. That'd be childish. I'm aware of things I was ignorant of before, like how much crime is commited by people of color. Now I also have t
by slashdev 3y ago
It's not out of spite. That'd be childish.
I'm aware of things I was ignorant of before, like how much crime is commited by people of color.
Now I also have to consider if someone earned their position through merit or if it was the result of DEI. Before it was never a question in my mind.
- krapp 3y agoI think it's childish to interpret crime statistics as a valid justification for racism, rather than consider correlating factors such as increased poverty among non-whites, and more aggressive policing and conviction of non-whites, and purposeful misinterpretation of statistics by white supremacists. I think it's childish to assume candidates hired under DEI are less likely to deserve their position than white male candidates. There is no reason to believe that DEI policies require lowering standards other than a belief that white men are categorically more qualified by default. Otherwise, one wouldn't see race, gender and quality as mutually exclusive. I'm not going to get into a long, drawn out argument over this because I suspect it would be a waste of time and it would ruin my day - you came into this thread virtue signaling your racism after all, so it seems you're not in a mood to have your point of view challenged. But I do think you and the normalized cultural bigotry you're expressing are clear examples of why we cannot afford to "just go back to not seeing those things." You can disagree with the incentives of the politics without embracing prejudice against the people those politics are meant to help.
- slashdev 3y agoI'll respect your wishes and not try to draw you into a debate here. I strongly disagree with all these points.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]