4 ms·

As somebody who born and spent significant portion of my life in very homogenous country. Reading these threads I always come to the very same conclusion: dive

As somebody who born and spent significant portion of my life in very homogenous country. Reading these threads I always come to the very same conclusion: diversity IS the problem and creates problems instead of providing any tangible benifits. DEI is attempted solution to the "problem" and yet creates even more of a problem where people aren't hired based on merit and being the best candidate for the job. None of those things are a problem in homogenous country. They simply do not exist. Similarly it doesn't make sense that a person with a different skin color could bring anything new to the table, after all skin color does not matter.

ceejayoz 2y ago
There are no homogenous countries. Skin color is just one of the many ways people get slotted into buckets. Your country has men and women. It has gay and bi people. It has trans people. Young and old. It has blind people. It has amputees. It has atheists and religious people. It has mentally ill and chronically sick and abused kids and all sorts of other diverse conditions that have to be addressed with various accommodations.
- Johanx64 2y ago
  You live in such a twisted "diverse" world-view that has pitted even men and women, young and old against each other. What a rotten culture. Don't No-True-Scotsman and pontificate me what a homogenous and non-homegenous country is, I very well now what the difference is. I've lived it, I've seen it, I've experienced it. It's a symptom of a sick, atomized diverse society if it can be so easily fractured by using <0.1% fringe cases as tool.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Why do you believe skin color is the only possible thing “diverse” covers?
    - Johanx64 2y ago
      What benefits does your linguistic framework and redefinitions of commonly used terms offer? I'm not seeing it. Looks like you're desperately looking for some seams from which to break fabric of cohesive society appart. Homogenous societies do not need nor should they offer special affordances to either atheists or religious people. Only diverse societies that have imported bunch of incompatible religions that beef with each other and prevailing culture (often violently!) that need "special" accomodations and guard rails to prevent escalations of conflict.
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        I’m not the one redefining terms. Diversity covers far more variation than skin color alone. DEI efforts have long included things like “women in tech” or “LGBT friendly”. Your country may be homogenous in color, but in everything? Closest you probably get to that is the Vatican, and even there there’s various kinds of diversity.
        Johanx64 2y ago
        Preferential treatment based on immutable characteristics. It's called discrimination. Great idea! What you're engaging in is transparent and glaringly obvious. It's subversive and downright malicious. Even in a cohesive and homogenous society, you are desperately looking for any and all means to split, fracture and divvy up the population in warring "diversity" groups that are constantly at odds with each other. There has to be something you can use right? Young children, the elderly, women, atheists or religious folk aren't a diversity group. They are just people. I know exactly what you're doing, and it doesn't work in cohesive functional societies. They reject it.
        ceejayoz 2y ago
        > Preferential treatment based on immutable characteristics. No. Not preferential. > It's called discrimination. Using the US as an example again, we only got our first female Supreme Court justice until the 1980s. Two hundred years of men. Never a female President. This is pretty concrete evidence for discrimination against them in American society. Somehow, trying to recognize that gets twisted backwards into the act itself. A cohesive, functional society seeing significant gendered threats and violence: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2621gzvkdo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2621gzvkdo Why are black people “diverse” but women or Jews or blind people are not? You keep dodging the question. Help me understand - what’s “diverse” and what’s “normal homogenous”? How do you determine which is which?

ceejayoz 2y ago

There are no homogenous countries. Skin color is just one of the many ways people get slotted into buckets. Your country has men and women. It has gay and bi people. It has trans people. Young and old. It has blind people. It has amputees. It has atheists and religious people. It has mentally ill and chronically sick and abused kids and all sorts of other diverse conditions that have to be addressed with various accommodations.

Johanx64 2y ago
You live in such a twisted "diverse" world-view that has pitted even men and women, young and old against each other. What a rotten culture. Don't No-True-Scotsman and pontificate me what a homogenous and non-homegenous country is, I very well now what the difference is. I've lived it, I've seen it, I've experienced it. It's a symptom of a sick, atomized diverse society if it can be so easily fractured by using <0.1% fringe cases as tool.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Why do you believe skin color is the only possible thing “diverse” covers?
  - Johanx64 2y ago
    What benefits does your linguistic framework and redefinitions of commonly used terms offer? I'm not seeing it. Looks like you're desperately looking for some seams from which to break fabric of cohesive society appart. Homogenous societies do not need nor should they offer special affordances to either atheists or religious people. Only diverse societies that have imported bunch of incompatible religions that beef with each other and prevailing culture (often violently!) that need "special" accomodations and guard rails to prevent escalations of conflict.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      I’m not the one redefining terms. Diversity covers far more variation than skin color alone. DEI efforts have long included things like “women in tech” or “LGBT friendly”. Your country may be homogenous in color, but in everything? Closest you probably get to that is the Vatican, and even there there’s various kinds of diversity.
      - Johanx64 2y ago
        Preferential treatment based on immutable characteristics. It's called discrimination. Great idea! What you're engaging in is transparent and glaringly obvious. It's subversive and downright malicious. Even in a cohesive and homogenous society, you are desperately looking for any and all means to split, fracture and divvy up the population in warring "diversity" groups that are constantly at odds with each other. There has to be something you can use right? Young children, the elderly, women, atheists or religious folk aren't a diversity group. They are just people. I know exactly what you're doing, and it doesn't work in cohesive functional societies. They reject it.
        ceejayoz 2y ago
        > Preferential treatment based on immutable characteristics. No. Not preferential. > It's called discrimination. Using the US as an example again, we only got our first female Supreme Court justice until the 1980s. Two hundred years of men. Never a female President. This is pretty concrete evidence for discrimination against them in American society. Somehow, trying to recognize that gets twisted backwards into the act itself. A cohesive, functional society seeing significant gendered threats and violence: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2621gzvkdo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2621gzvkdo Why are black people “diverse” but women or Jews or blind people are not? You keep dodging the question. Help me understand - what’s “diverse” and what’s “normal homogenous”? How do you determine which is which?