Move is to comply with state law passed by Governor Ron DeSantis that prohibits public funding of DEI programs

Archived version: https://archive.ph/2NkY3

  • Maalus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Your example doesn’t make sense. Being a specific race doesn’t make you better at science, or in your example doesn’t make the guy be 3 bases behind. This is just discrimination mixed with wishful thinking i.e. “if this guy would have lived with millionaire parents he would’ve scored higher” you don’t know that, nobody knows. So your example is completely inverted, where a kid from a wealthy family starts at the start and has to work hard, and the kid that had a poor family starts 3 bases ahead. Except now it is based on subjective reasoning and imaginary scenarios of “what if”.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Being a specific race doesn’t make you better at science

      Exactly, so why are the results so lopsided? Being brought up in an environment where you had less education opportunities for whatever reason, less opportunity to show your worth, can make you appear worse at science, when if you had the same opportunity, you might show our were as good or better. Why should we settle for good scientists being left behind by the circumstances of their birth or upbringing. If they’re good, they’re good.

      Ok, fine, maybe a better example is:

      • I start at third base and run home for a score
      • you start at bat, get on base, work your way around the bases to third …. Then the inning is over as I strike out

      You didn’t score, so should you be cut from the team? I scored and helped the team win, so do I deserve more credit? I didn’t show whether I could bat, get on base, or work my way around the bases. Am I better because I scored, or are you better because you showed more merit at more things, overcame a more difficult challenge, show a better likelihood of more contribution to the team over the season? The coach should consider all the facts before deciding who to cut, not just the score of one game

      discrimination mixed with wishful thinking

      None of this is meant to give anyone a free ride, only an adjustment and only where appropriate

      I recently had this conversation with my brother where he voiced a similar opinion to you.

      • At his company they made a big push for more women in engineering and management and disregarded merit. The result was unqualified people, lost confidence in corporate leadership, and more ingrained biases. No one wants that
      • At the last several companies I work for, they also recognize a need for more women in engineering and management. They recruit more strongly from nontraditional sources, encourage stronger networking in women in leadership, put more effort into fighting discrimination throughout the company, and have given themselves more opportunities to hire and promote more women. I followed my manager to a new job because she is outstanding. She had the opportunity to show her merit despite the fact that she was born in another country, didn’t speak the same language, is “the wrong gender”, and didn’t even have the same economic system
      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        In the end, what should matter is skills of a specific person and recruiting based on getting the best of the best. Otherwise it is lacking objectivity. Your brother’s example comes to mind - would the situation be better if they didn’t push unqualified people based on a less represented gender?

        Overall what I am saying is this. You can take action, or you can decide not to. Taking action and it resulting in incredible bias, misogyny, misandry, racism is in the end worse, than if someone hadn’t prefferred employees / students based on the characteristics that make those things appear. Not having special programs based on background means it’s everyone for themselves, and the best candidate is selected. It seems extremely hard to have a perfect program that changes the hiring / enrolling students process. Otherwise I see two sides of the same coin - a company not hiring a 25yo woman, since she’s part of the demographic most likely to have maternity leave, and a company doing the exact opposite and hiring women because they are underrepresented in the field.

        Please explain to be the need to have women in engineering / leadership. What’s a difference between a woman that knows CAD, went to study engineering / mechanics, etc, and a man that knows CAD, went to study engineering / mechanics etc. I see none. I wouldn’t hire someone because of their sex, had everything been equal (which we all know never are). If a woman has great work ethics and has the knowledge / expertise I need, I hire a woman. If a man has the knowledge / expertise I need and great work ethics, I hire a man. It doesn’t matter what sex they are, what they like to do in their own time, how they dress (maybe only when it’d be a customer facing job). What matters is how good of a worker they’ll be.