3 ms·

Nondiscrimination is also the law . See Title 6, Title 9 of course the Civil Rights Act

by hackyhacky 1y ago

colpabar 1y ago
Do you see how you're doing the "even if that is happening, which it isn't, it's actually a good thing" thing?
- hackyhacky 1y ago
  No, I don't. What is "that" in your telling? Obeying the law?
  - ethbr1 1y ago
    Performative statements of allegiance. There are redresses for breaking the law -- the courts.
    - hackyhacky 1y ago
      > Performative statements of allegiance. I think you don't know what that word means. The comment I'm addressing claimed that DEI statements are partisan. They weren't, until an ideologue decides to make them so. Performative, maybe. In many jobs, I have to prove that I can be legally hired: is that performative as well?
      - ethbr1 1y ago
        Performative : made or done for show (as to bolster one's own image or make a positive impression on others) It's hard to parse how they were used any other way. https://web.archive.org/web/20250403173227/https://edib.harvard.edu/files/dib/files/dei_commitment_statement_final_0.pdf?m=1617641784 https://web.archive.org/web/20250403173227/https://edib.harv... https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedom-at-harvard/article/2024/4/2/kennedy-abandon-dei-statements/ https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedo... https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedom-at-harvard/article/2024/4/2/hall-dont-eliminate-improve/ https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedo... Both of the writers seem to believe that DEI statements, as implemented at Harvard, were mildly to wildly partisan.
        hackyhacky 1y ago
        > It's hard to parse how they were used any other way. No, it's pretty easy. They were used to comply with the law. > Both of the writers seem to believe that DEI statements, as implemented at Harvard, were mildly to wildly partisan. Do you know what partisan means? It means favoring a particular political party. The attempt to cast perfectly normal rules against discrimination as a partisan project is one of the more evil ideas to come out of this administration, and that's saying something. Believe it or not, some people take actions because they have authentic beliefs. Not everything you don't like is performative, and not everything is calculated for it's political impact. The current government, like you, sees everything through a partisan lens. They thinks that a lawyer who takes the case of a client who opposes the administration is necessarily partisan (and therefore worthy of punishment). More recently, the American Bar Association was singled out for alleged [1] partisanship for having the gall to support a plaintiff who thinks the government should pay its debts. Or how about the Associated Press [2] is a partisan organization now because of the name they choose to assign to the body of water south of the US. The expansion of the world "partisan" to mean anyone who has any beliefs at all makes every person and every action a partisan. Which means that everyone is either with the administration or against it. That's exactly how they see the world, but that's not the world that I want to live in. [1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-temporarily-blocks-canceling-aba-grants-amid-trump-crackdown-2025-05-14/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-temporarily-blocks-cance... [2]https://www.ap.org/media-center/ap-in-the-news/2025/the-associated-press-banned-from-white-house-press-pool-renews-request-to-court-for-reinstatement/ https://www.ap.org/media-center/ap-in-the-news/2025/the-asso...
        ethbr1 1y ago
        You managed to write three full paragraphs that didn't respond to what I wrote. If you want to monologue, that's fine, but I thought we were having a conversation. One of the greatest travesties of our modern times is that political conversation somehow robs people of the capacity to read and listen, because another person being wrong seemingly trumps any requirement for either.
        1y ago

Nondiscrimination is also the law . See Title 6, Title 9 of course the Civil Rights Act

colpabar 1y ago

Do you see how you're doing the "even if that is happening, which it isn't, it's actually a good thing" thing?

hackyhacky 1y ago
No, I don't. What is "that" in your telling? Obeying the law?
- ethbr1 1y ago
  Performative statements of allegiance. There are redresses for breaking the law -- the courts.
  - hackyhacky 1y ago
    > Performative statements of allegiance. I think you don't know what that word means. The comment I'm addressing claimed that DEI statements are partisan. They weren't, until an ideologue decides to make them so. Performative, maybe. In many jobs, I have to prove that I can be legally hired: is that performative as well?
    - ethbr1 1y ago
      Performative : made or done for show (as to bolster one's own image or make a positive impression on others) It's hard to parse how they were used any other way. https://web.archive.org/web/20250403173227/https://edib.harvard.edu/files/dib/files/dei_commitment_statement_final_0.pdf?m=1617641784 https://web.archive.org/web/20250403173227/https://edib.harv... https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedom-at-harvard/article/2024/4/2/kennedy-abandon-dei-statements/ https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedo... https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedom-at-harvard/article/2024/4/2/hall-dont-eliminate-improve/ https://www.thecrimson.com/column/council-on-academic-freedo... Both of the writers seem to believe that DEI statements, as implemented at Harvard, were mildly to wildly partisan.
      - hackyhacky 1y ago
        > It's hard to parse how they were used any other way. No, it's pretty easy. They were used to comply with the law. > Both of the writers seem to believe that DEI statements, as implemented at Harvard, were mildly to wildly partisan. Do you know what partisan means? It means favoring a particular political party. The attempt to cast perfectly normal rules against discrimination as a partisan project is one of the more evil ideas to come out of this administration, and that's saying something. Believe it or not, some people take actions because they have authentic beliefs. Not everything you don't like is performative, and not everything is calculated for it's political impact. The current government, like you, sees everything through a partisan lens. They thinks that a lawyer who takes the case of a client who opposes the administration is necessarily partisan (and therefore worthy of punishment). More recently, the American Bar Association was singled out for alleged [1] partisanship for having the gall to support a plaintiff who thinks the government should pay its debts. Or how about the Associated Press [2] is a partisan organization now because of the name they choose to assign to the body of water south of the US. The expansion of the world "partisan" to mean anyone who has any beliefs at all makes every person and every action a partisan. Which means that everyone is either with the administration or against it. That's exactly how they see the world, but that's not the world that I want to live in. [1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-temporarily-blocks-canceling-aba-grants-amid-trump-crackdown-2025-05-14/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-temporarily-blocks-cance... [2]https://www.ap.org/media-center/ap-in-the-news/2025/the-associated-press-banned-from-white-house-press-pool-renews-request-to-court-for-reinstatement/ https://www.ap.org/media-center/ap-in-the-news/2025/the-asso...
        ethbr1 1y ago
        You managed to write three full paragraphs that didn't respond to what I wrote. If you want to monologue, that's fine, but I thought we were having a conversation. One of the greatest travesties of our modern times is that political conversation somehow robs people of the capacity to read and listen, because another person being wrong seemingly trumps any requirement for either.
        1y ago