Do MAGA not realize that cancelling DEI will greatly affect women’s careers?

[Anonymous]

I don't know why you straight women don't stop putting out for men.

They don't value you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone I know works in the defense field and shared a story with me about some of his colleagues and the bias against women in general in their industry. Does this mean they don't hire women, no, it just means they are prejudged whenever someone has to work with a woman on a project. There is one woman, fifty or so, who sits in rather top level meetings and knits while the conversation is evolving. The men hate it and look down on her because she does this during meetings. The person I know says she is the smartest person in that room and he kills to get her on any team he is working with, point being, those that look for the best, will not care about your gender. The others, who judge, will always just fall further behind. I've seen it happen naturally all too many times. Happy to see DEI disappear, but the damage, I fear, has already been done.

Studies show that knitting during meetings can provide cognitive benefits like improved focus, concentration, and mental alertness by engaging the brain through repetitive hand movements while simultaneously listening to information, essentially acting as a form of mindful activity that can help you stay present and actively engaged in the discussion. Knitting activates brain areas associated with fine motor skills and attention, which can lead to better information retention and reduced distractions.

The fact that it's an historically female activity should be irrelevant, but is likely the basis for the men "looking down on her" for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s all just seems like cultural panic. Young women are slightly over taking men in college, including Medical School and Law School. The birth rate, specifically with White women is low. It’s quite more than just some poorly thought out HR and university policies. Vance’s “childless cat ladies” comment and “I want more babies in America”. Elon Musk gender selected several of his children to be male and has connections to the Afd in Germany which is anti multiculturalism as was as Russ Vought, the project 2025 guy who is working with Trump. Trump blaming a plane crash on “DEI” before there was even an investigation. It all goes together.

It's that LBJ quote, "if you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you," but this time, the young men have black friends and hate the women they think would never date them.

Something I think women who escaped the "social media and dating apps ARE now the real world" age don't realize is the massive negative effect that kind of tech has had on sexual politics and the vulnerability of younger men to emptying their pockets and giving their ballot to anyone who listens. Many Gen Z men swung right because Trump engaged and went on Rogan and Dems just ignored the problem. Apps that were supposed to help younger generations find relationships and that have become the main method millions of young people are socially expected to use made subtle tweaks to increase profits that ended up creating a horrible dating culture we're seeing the ripple effects of now. It's less profitable for the apps if you actually find a partner and delete them than if you struggle to and continue to use them. So, apps like Tinder are well-known to artificially constrain matches men get without upgrades, which incentivizes men to swipe right (try to match with) on literally as many women as possible, which leads to harassment and drives women off platforms, which causes men to swipe right on even more women and so forth, until the boys are desperate and enraged and the girls are terrified. Whether or not you guys raise your sons well does not change the fact that phrases like "manlet," "6-6-6" (women will only date men who are 6 feet, 6 inches, 6 figures), and beliefs that the average woman only wants to be part of "Chad's" harem (the Pareto principle applied to dating) have hit the mainstream among Zoomer and Gen Alpha boys. 20 percent of them think Andrew Tate is a good guy. Again, whether or not you or people in your circles are good parents and guide your kids away from this kind of stuff does not change the fact that it's a massive cultural problem nobody is dealing with.

[Anonymous]

I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Non discrimination is enough for women. Create a pre employment exam or writing assignment without disclosing gender or race. I am 1000% confident I can compete with a man in my field. If I can't compete in a blind test I don't want the job. I don't need a quota of women or extra points. That's DEI.

You're so close to getting it!

Gender and race-blind applications are a form of DEI. The GOP has been pushing lies that DEI means racial quotas or hiring unqualified minorities over qualified white people, but it's simply not true. DEI literally means nondiscrimination.

NP. It literally does NOT mean that. It means focusing on and emphasizing race and gender above all else. Which is ridiculous. It absolutely doesn’t mean race-blind. That’s a bad word now, remember? And Harvard is mad that they are being forced to go race-blind in applications? Race-blind (& gender-blind) should be society’s ultimate goal, but DEI hurts that goal, along with racists.

No, it doesn’t. It really doesn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

But you are missing the plus side. Some moms want to be SAHMs. The CFO of Lehman brothers left shortly before the collapse in 2008 to be a SAHM. She already reached CFO and sick of working and just had her first child. Is she supposed to stay for what reason? To make you happy.

[Anonymous]

More women go to college. It’s some colleges there are 60% more women than men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

But you are missing the plus side. Some moms want to be SAHMs. The CFO of Lehman brothers left shortly before the collapse in 2008 to be a SAHM. She already reached CFO and sick of working and just had her first child. Is she supposed to stay for what reason? To make you happy.

Being a SAHM should be a choice based on your family’s needs, not because the government or corporations decided that they don’t want mothers or less women in the workforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Non discrimination is enough for women. Create a pre employment exam or writing assignment without disclosing gender or race. I am 1000% confident I can compete with a man in my field. If I can't compete in a blind test I don't want the job. I don't need a quota of women or extra points. That's DEI.

You're so close to getting it!

Gender and race-blind applications are a form of DEI. The GOP has been pushing lies that DEI means racial quotas or hiring unqualified minorities over qualified white people, but it's simply not true. DEI literally means nondiscrimination.

NP. It literally does NOT mean that. It means focusing on and emphasizing race and gender above all else. Which is ridiculous. It absolutely doesn’t mean race-blind. That’s a bad word now, remember? And Harvard is mad that they are being forced to go race-blind in applications? Race-blind (& gender-blind) should be society’s ultimate goal, but DEI hurts that goal, along with racists.

You are simply wrong. That's what is so annoying and frustrating about Trump's lies. People believe them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

You’re missing the GD point. You weren’t hired because of DEI; you simply weren’t passed over because of DEI (and its predecessors). JFC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

But you are missing the plus side. Some moms want to be SAHMs. The CFO of Lehman brothers left shortly before the collapse in 2008 to be a SAHM. She already reached CFO and sick of working and just had her first child. Is she supposed to stay for what reason? To make you happy.

PP here. I 100% SAHMs who have made the choice themselves. Sadly, too many women are forced to be SAHMs because their salaries can't afford childcare or their works are inflexible (for no reason).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More women go to college. It’s some colleges there are 60% more women than men.

You mean to say women are 60% of the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

But you are missing the plus side. Some moms want to be SAHMs. The CFO of Lehman brothers left shortly before the collapse in 2008 to be a SAHM. She already reached CFO and sick of working and just had her first child. Is she supposed to stay for what reason? To make you happy.

PP here. I 100% SAHMs who have made the choice themselves. Sadly, too many women are forced to be SAHMs because their salaries can't afford childcare or their works are inflexible (for no reason).

In other words, none of this has anything to do with SAHMs. It's about equal rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

You’re missing the GD point. You weren’t hired because of DEI; you simply weren’t passed over because of DEI (and its predecessors). JFC.

This is the point of “DEI” it may not have been implemented properly every where, but the goal isn’t to just hire a woman or a minority just for the sake of it. It means people aren’t supposed to toss your resume out so they can hire their frat bro from college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really resent the implication that I was hired as a woman because of DEI. I was hired because I was the best at my job.

What WILL hurt women is the lack of telework. DH's job is 100% in person and inflexible due to the career he chose. I chose a fed career that had more work life balance and of course had a lower salary because of it. Nearly every family I know chose similarly and has one spouse in a flexible job. If there are no flexible jobs anymore, we will be back to the 1950s. Even in the 1980s and 90s, my mom couldn't work full time because she couldn't get school schedules to work with work schedules. And schools have gotten worse since covid at being family friendly.

You’re missing the GD point. You weren’t hired because of DEI; you simply weren’t passed over because of DEI (and its predecessors). JFC.

The predecessors have nothing to do with it. Republicans agree with MLK now on race. Can you not admit that some of the “DEI” went too far? If you don’t see what was happening, you are being willfully obtuse. Many people did go that far to make it all about skin color and dozens of genders, and it is too much. We just want equality to be reasonable again.