3 ms·
Imo it's very different bc the ideology pledge itself is mostly distracting from the real purpose of the dei statement (again imo), which is to provide a way to
by beerandt 2y ago
Imo it's very different bc the ideology pledge itself is mostly distracting from the real purpose of the dei statement (again imo), which is to provide a way to select employees based on race, etc, without it being the explicit reason.
A better comparison would be if instead of an anti-theft pledge, there were a ten-commandments plus beatitudes test/ statement, without referencing the source religion. Maybe call it a morality pledge.
It's essentially a religious test hiding behind another name and terms, and even if it doesn't explicitly discriminate based on religion, it's obviously designed so that people of certain religions do better.
And filters people not from those religions by boosting those who essentially share the same values, or can fake it.
In the same way, dei doesn't explicity select for diversity applicants, but for people who are explicitly pro-diversity-applicant.
Which doesn't sound quite as pure of you replace "diversity" with any of the approved / included groups...
'I'm not picking applicant based on them being black, but based on them having an ideology that is pro-black-applicant.'
Although sadly we've normalized it to crossing that line as well, with the last SCOTUS nominee.
- jhardy54 2y ago> diversity applicants Friendly nudge that this isn’t a meaningful term. Once you start noticing people saying things like “our hiring pool is 60% diversity” it’s hard to unsee.
- BaronVonSteuben 2y agoI don't agree. "Diversity" has a commonly accepted meaning which in the US at least, means everything except white men. Female or non-white are "diversity." A great example are the statements and articles from 2020 when Biden announced the most diverse ever White House Communications Team which was 100% female. Biden talked about how critical diversity was and bragged about this 100% female communications team. All the articles I read about it had things like "most diverse White House Communications Team in history" to describe it. At least from a gender perspective, I don't see how they could make it more clear that diversity == women
- JSavageOne 2y agoAsians aren't counted as "diversity" either. This is why they're referred to as "an inconvenient minority" in the context of DEI.
- justinclift 2y agoFor that, does "asians" mean people from the middle of asia (ie middle east), or people from south east asia (ie oriental)? Asking because the term has different meanings in say the UK (asian -> from middle east) vs Australia (asian -> from south east asia).
- recursivecaveat 2y agoIn the US almost no-one would say "asian" for any country west of Nepal. Sometimes they say "south-asian" for India or the surrounding countries, but even that term is only sometimes extended out to pakistan.
- KorematsuFredt 2y ago[flagged]
- KorematsuFredt 2y agoRead replies to the tweet https://twitter.com/USAndMumbai/status/1787772852084830251 https://twitter.com/USAndMumbai/status/1787772852084830251
- fsckboy 2y ago>people from south east asia (ie oriental) it is actually more common from the European and Middle Eastern context to call the (Turkish and Levantine and Arabian) Middle East "oriental"; in Israel, "oriental food" is hummus and felafel; the Orient Express train went to Istanbul. East Asian is the term for ... east Asians and of course the SE Asians you mentioned, and South Asian is the term for "India+Pakistan+" people. Central Asian is the "the -stans" and Mongolia and parts of Russia.
- beerandt 2y agoIt may not be a category (imo it is), but it's at least a hierarchy.