The coordinated attack on D.E.I. is a vast right wing conspiracy

[Anonymous]

Can somebody explain to me why companies care so much about being woke nowadays? How is DEI going to boost profits? When you think about it DEI goes in the complete opposite direction of capitalism since by definition makes your company less efficient (by hiring/promoting based on identity and not merit).

Are they worried about boycotts or getting sued for not being woke enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the NYT brought receipts.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/20/us/dei-woke-claremont-institute.html

Why do conservatives hate America and everything it stands for? Why are they so racist?

So many choice bigoted quotes from this article. I’ll start with a few.

Scott Yenor, of the Claremont Institute, on what their true goal is - the ability to discriminate against individuals based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation:

”The core of what we oppose is 'anti-discrimination.' That is too much of a sacred cow.”

Thomas Klingenstein, president of Claremont Institute, admits that they the point of their effort is to seek to indoctinate K-12 children with rightwing ideologies:

“In support of ridding schools of C.R.T., the Right argues that we want nonpolitical education. No we don’t. We want our politics. All education is political.”

Scott Yenor, again, on revisions his editor wanted to include in a new piece of writing but that Yenor found too strident for publication, though Yenor admits in the emails that he privately agrees with the language:

“Our sexual culture will not heal until ‘faggot’ replaces ‘bigot’ as the slur of choice,” or “Our sexual culture will not be healed until we once again agree that homosexuality belongs in the closet and that a healthy society requires patriarchy.”

Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute on recent gay marriage developments in India:

She speculated in the May exchange that it would be “fun to see” what liberals would say about Indians if the court conferred gay marriage rights but Indians refused to “go along.” “How will western elites explain the benightedness of yet another group of POCs?” In response, Dr. Yenor noted that “not tons of asian countries have SSM” but rather “more wholesome policies like prison” for gays.

David Azerrad, a professor at Hillsdale College, who often tries to appeal to liberals in his writings but really harbors very bigoted beliefs in private:

“Heather, that's an easy one. Indians are Asians who are white-adjacent so at the bottom of the totem poll. Gays are second after blacks.”

Heather MacDonald, sarcastically voicing her true feelings about Peter Theil and his gay lifestyle + the news story about the suicide of Thiel’s throuple boyfriend:

Some female over the last year or so, eager to show her openmindedness, was crowing to me about how wonderful Thiel's "husband" was, making them out to be the most proper couple.

I wonder if he will feel any shame in public. Probably not.

Professors Yenor and Azerrad making fun of the appearance of one of the students at Yenor’s university (Boise State):

On one occasion, he forwarded a Boise State email featuring a photo of a female computer science student with close-cropped hair and a plaid shirt. “Gynocracy update!” Dr. Yenor wrote.

Riffing on the woman’s masculine appearance, his friend Dr. Azerrad chimed in with a correction: “Androgynococracy update.”

Heather MacDonald, taking a walking on the Upper East Side and seething at the thought of working mothers and persons of color who enter her field of vision:

As I was taking my evening power walk in the hood here (upper east side) and seeing all the nannies of color walking school children back to their apartments, it struck me again the bizarreness of females deciding that their comparative advantage is in being an associate in a law firm, say, and thus that they should outsource the once in a lifetime unduplicable unrepeatable experience of raising a unique child to some one else, especially someone from the low IQ 3rd world, while they do the drone work of making partner. The child is evolving so quickly, absorbing so many influences, and yet they would rather absent themselves from its life to show that they are as good as males. such a distribution of labor is allegedly pareto optimal. Another curse of feminism.

yes, they have horrible beliefs. But "coordinated attack on dei is a vast right wing conspiracy" is just calling the normal political process names. They have a right to these beliefs. They have a right to organize. We have a right not to vote for them.

And the NYT has the right to expose them as the evil arseholes they are and I have a right to start a thread highlighting how everyone in the article and anyone who shares their beliefs are fundamentally awful people who will burn in Hell for all eternity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Have you ever read accounts about women who try to break into male dominated fields?

Sure, if there are jobs that you need particular strength to perform, then it's not a surprise that fewer women will be aiming for those jobs. If women can perform them then they should be welcome into those fields.

But what a crock to say women avoid tough, labor intensive, and dangerous jobs. Have you ever looked to see who are doing those back-breaking health care jobs? You really want to say that those aren't labor intensive and tough or even dangerous (how many health care people died from covid during the first year of the crisis?). Do you know what it's like to have to turn bed-ridden patients over? What about women who do all the nasty cleaning jobs - would you want to do those? Especially for such paltry salaries.

Lol, what a joke. Health care is no where near as dangerous as iron work, sewer work, fishing, logging, power line work, etc. where you risk immediate shock with 100 kilovolts, asphyxiation by hydrogen sulfide, and falls of over 150 feet. The COVID pandemic is a one off event and a historic pandemic that happens once every 100 years.


Try moving 4000 lb drill bits in a matter of seconds on an oil rig, risking your limbs being crushed or severed if you don’t do it right. The vast, vaaaaaaast majority of work place deaths are men, not women. Healthcare isn’t even remotely as backbreaking as working on something like a fishing boat. Let’s see you do a 12 hour shift in sub zero temperatures hauling in catches all night that weigh multiple tons. Big whoop, you turn over a patient in bed while the fisherman is feeding thousands of people and risking life and limb working exhausting hours around ropes and chains with multiple tons of tension that can cut them in half on a whim if they make a mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the NYT brought receipts.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/20/us/dei-woke-claremont-institute.html

Why do conservatives hate America and everything it stands for? Why are they so racist?

So many choice bigoted quotes from this article. I’ll start with a few.

Scott Yenor, of the Claremont Institute, on what their true goal is - the ability to discriminate against individuals based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation:

”The core of what we oppose is 'anti-discrimination.' That is too much of a sacred cow.”

Thomas Klingenstein, president of Claremont Institute, admits that they the point of their effort is to seek to indoctinate K-12 children with rightwing ideologies:

“In support of ridding schools of C.R.T., the Right argues that we want nonpolitical education. No we don’t. We want our politics. All education is political.”

Scott Yenor, again, on revisions his editor wanted to include in a new piece of writing but that Yenor found too strident for publication, though Yenor admits in the emails that he privately agrees with the language:

“Our sexual culture will not heal until ‘faggot’ replaces ‘bigot’ as the slur of choice,” or “Our sexual culture will not be healed until we once again agree that homosexuality belongs in the closet and that a healthy society requires patriarchy.”

Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute on recent gay marriage developments in India:

She speculated in the May exchange that it would be “fun to see” what liberals would say about Indians if the court conferred gay marriage rights but Indians refused to “go along.” “How will western elites explain the benightedness of yet another group of POCs?” In response, Dr. Yenor noted that “not tons of asian countries have SSM” but rather “more wholesome policies like prison” for gays.

David Azerrad, a professor at Hillsdale College, who often tries to appeal to liberals in his writings but really harbors very bigoted beliefs in private:

“Heather, that's an easy one. Indians are Asians who are white-adjacent so at the bottom of the totem poll. Gays are second after blacks.”

Heather MacDonald, sarcastically voicing her true feelings about Peter Theil and his gay lifestyle + the news story about the suicide of Thiel’s throuple boyfriend:

Some female over the last year or so, eager to show her openmindedness, was crowing to me about how wonderful Thiel's "husband" was, making them out to be the most proper couple.

I wonder if he will feel any shame in public. Probably not.

Professors Yenor and Azerrad making fun of the appearance of one of the students at Yenor’s university (Boise State):

On one occasion, he forwarded a Boise State email featuring a photo of a female computer science student with close-cropped hair and a plaid shirt. “Gynocracy update!” Dr. Yenor wrote.

Riffing on the woman’s masculine appearance, his friend Dr. Azerrad chimed in with a correction: “Androgynococracy update.”

Heather MacDonald, taking a walking on the Upper East Side and seething at the thought of working mothers and persons of color who enter her field of vision:

As I was taking my evening power walk in the hood here (upper east side) and seeing all the nannies of color walking school children back to their apartments, it struck me again the bizarreness of females deciding that their comparative advantage is in being an associate in a law firm, say, and thus that they should outsource the once in a lifetime unduplicable unrepeatable experience of raising a unique child to some one else, especially someone from the low IQ 3rd world, while they do the drone work of making partner. The child is evolving so quickly, absorbing so many influences, and yet they would rather absent themselves from its life to show that they are as good as males. such a distribution of labor is allegedly pareto optimal. Another curse of feminism.

yes, they have horrible beliefs. But "coordinated attack on dei is a vast right wing conspiracy" is just calling the normal political process names. They have a right to these beliefs. They have a right to organize. We have a right not to vote for them.

Well I guess that’s the insidious part. We don’t get a choice to vote for these people, yet they try to stealthily influence public discourse, actively want to indoctrinate children slyly, and try to hold power over public officials. They use social media to astroturf ideas and ideologies that their own research shows are unpopular, thereby disproportionately infecting the public debate. They also don’t have to reveal their donors, despite being clearly political actors who have partisan preferences.

They are fundamentally anti-democratic bigoted partisans pretending to be free-speech loving academics.

but that's the way democracy works? We don't get to vote about what people believe, only who runs our government. And we have to accept the will of the majority. If we don't like their opinons (and I certainly don't like the opinions of these people... a patriarchy is the last thing I want) don't vote for them. I'll be voting for Biden.

Some of us expect a little more better faith behavior in our democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Misogyny at its finest. Why WOULDN'T women also want to do labor-intensive work?

Because it is labor intensive, back breaking work.


Let me know when women makeup 50% of all fatalities on the job. That’s when we will achieve true gender equality in the workplace. Given that men basically makeup 95% (give or take one or two percent) of all workplace deaths, you’ve got a lot of catching up to do in another area of gender equality in the workplace ladies.

Or, hear me out. How about we reduce workplace deaths for everyone? Equity isn’t a race to the bottom.

It is for conservatives. Also women can’t get hired for some of those jobs that have high death rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Being a white man, I was depicted as the oppressor or perhaps a racist for my skin colour. I wondered how people of colour felt during the session as the oppressed. These were my colleagues and friends, and now there seemed to be a wall of division going up that did not previously exist.

I had to edit out the majority of that entitled butt-hurt prattle to just say what a shining example of white fragility. This guy fancies himself a good person — he very well may be — but has internalized too much and clearly cannot get passed the cognitive dissonance. He takes it sooooo personally and feels personally attacked instead of considering instead how people who HAVE been oppressed feel and look at things.

And yeah, Christianity is pretty much the evil. That’s not exactly in dispute.

Why won’t you explain why it’s not disputed that Christianity is evil? Christians are evil?

Is Judaism evil? Jews are evil?

Islam is evil? Muslims are evil?

Is all religion evil, or just Christianity?

What does DEI say about religion?

Yes. Jusdaism is evil. Islam is evil.

Religion is evil.

Christianity is particularly evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Have you ever read accounts about women who try to break into male dominated fields?

Sure, if there are jobs that you need particular strength to perform, then it's not a surprise that fewer women will be aiming for those jobs. If women can perform them then they should be welcome into those fields.

But what a crock to say women avoid tough, labor intensive, and dangerous jobs. Have you ever looked to see who are doing those back-breaking health care jobs? You really want to say that those aren't labor intensive and tough or even dangerous (how many health care people died from covid during the first year of the crisis?). Do you know what it's like to have to turn bed-ridden patients over? What about women who do all the nasty cleaning jobs - would you want to do those? Especially for such paltry salaries.

Lol, what a joke. Health care is no where near as dangerous as iron work, sewer work, fishing, logging, power line work, etc. where you risk immediate shock with 100 kilovolts, asphyxiation by hydrogen sulfide, and falls of over 150 feet. The COVID pandemic is a one off event and a historic pandemic that happens once every 100 years.


Try moving 4000 lb drill bits in a matter of seconds on an oil rig, risking your limbs being crushed or severed if you don’t do it right. The vast, vaaaaaaast majority of work place deaths are men, not women. Healthcare isn’t even remotely as backbreaking as working on something like a fishing boat. Let’s see you do a 12 hour shift in sub zero temperatures hauling in catches all night that weigh multiple tons. Big whoop, you turn over a patient in bed while the fisherman is feeding thousands of people and risking life and limb working exhausting hours around ropes and chains with multiple tons of tension that can cut them in half on a whim if they make a mistake.

So you think therefore that white men therefore deserve to be given advantages in white collar jobs because of this? Is that what you're saying?

You won't say "big whoop" when a health care worker takes care of and maybe even saves a loved one's life. Good lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Misogyny at its finest. Why WOULDN'T women also want to do labor-intensive work?

Because it is labor intensive, back breaking work.


Let me know when women makeup 50% of all fatalities on the job. That’s when we will achieve true gender equality in the workplace. Given that men basically makeup 95% (give or take one or two percent) of all workplace deaths, you’ve got a lot of catching up to do in another area of gender equality in the workplace ladies.

Or, hear me out. How about we reduce workplace deaths for everyone? Equity isn’t a race to the bottom.

PP again. Plus, if you look at who's dying in the workplace, it isn't the jobs you noted.
Per BJS statistics for 2022, transportation deaths were the #1 cause of workplace death, coming in at 38% of all workplace deaths. Then other causes like exposure to harmful substances, falls and slips, violence in the workplace, etc. Overexertion was like 3%.

Breaking it down, your logic doesn't hold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Have you ever read accounts about women who try to break into male dominated fields?

Sure, if there are jobs that you need particular strength to perform, then it's not a surprise that fewer women will be aiming for those jobs. If women can perform them then they should be welcome into those fields.

But what a crock to say women avoid tough, labor intensive, and dangerous jobs. Have you ever looked to see who are doing those back-breaking health care jobs? You really want to say that those aren't labor intensive and tough or even dangerous (how many health care people died from covid during the first year of the crisis?). Do you know what it's like to have to turn bed-ridden patients over? What about women who do all the nasty cleaning jobs - would you want to do those? Especially for such paltry salaries.

Lol, what a joke. Health care is no where near as dangerous as iron work, sewer work, fishing, logging, power line work, etc. where you risk immediate shock with 100 kilovolts, asphyxiation by hydrogen sulfide, and falls of over 150 feet. The COVID pandemic is a one off event and a historic pandemic that happens once every 100 years.


Try moving 4000 lb drill bits in a matter of seconds on an oil rig, risking your limbs being crushed or severed if you don’t do it right. The vast, vaaaaaaast majority of work place deaths are men, not women. Healthcare isn’t even remotely as backbreaking as working on something like a fishing boat. Let’s see you do a 12 hour shift in sub zero temperatures hauling in catches all night that weigh multiple tons. Big whoop, you turn over a patient in bed while the fisherman is feeding thousands of people and risking life and limb working exhausting hours around ropes and chains with multiple tons of tension that can cut them in half on a whim if they make a mistake.

So you think therefore that white men therefore deserve to be given advantages in white collar jobs because of this? Is that what you're saying?

You won't say "big whoop" when a health care worker takes care of and maybe even saves a loved one's life. Good lord.

You’re really dim, aren’t you.


All of these charades about equity in the work place really aren’t about true equity. Women may want more representation in the most lucrative cushy jobs that exist, they don’t want true equality across ALL employment. If they did then they’d start dying at equal rates as men in the job because women would start doing the most dangerous and most laborious jobs out there. But that’s not what we are talking about. There are tons of women who clamor for special treatment in STEM fields and the corporate sector in tech, for example. But where are all of the women’s groups demanding more representation of women in sewer cleaning work, fishing, and iron work? Oh that’s right, women don’t want to do the latter jobs, because they’re too dangerous and too labor intensive for the pay. Women don’t want true equality, they just want the most high paying easy jobs. Gee, who DOESN’T want those?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the NYT brought receipts.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/01/20/us/dei-woke-claremont-institute.html

Why do conservatives hate America and everything it stands for? Why are they so racist?

So many choice bigoted quotes from this article. I’ll start with a few.

Scott Yenor, of the Claremont Institute, on what their true goal is - the ability to discriminate against individuals based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation:

”The core of what we oppose is 'anti-discrimination.' That is too much of a sacred cow.”

Thomas Klingenstein, president of Claremont Institute, admits that they the point of their effort is to seek to indoctinate K-12 children with rightwing ideologies:

“In support of ridding schools of C.R.T., the Right argues that we want nonpolitical education. No we don’t. We want our politics. All education is political.”

Scott Yenor, again, on revisions his editor wanted to include in a new piece of writing but that Yenor found too strident for publication, though Yenor admits in the emails that he privately agrees with the language:

“Our sexual culture will not heal until ‘faggot’ replaces ‘bigot’ as the slur of choice,” or “Our sexual culture will not be healed until we once again agree that homosexuality belongs in the closet and that a healthy society requires patriarchy.”

Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute on recent gay marriage developments in India:

She speculated in the May exchange that it would be “fun to see” what liberals would say about Indians if the court conferred gay marriage rights but Indians refused to “go along.” “How will western elites explain the benightedness of yet another group of POCs?” In response, Dr. Yenor noted that “not tons of asian countries have SSM” but rather “more wholesome policies like prison” for gays.

David Azerrad, a professor at Hillsdale College, who often tries to appeal to liberals in his writings but really harbors very bigoted beliefs in private:

“Heather, that's an easy one. Indians are Asians who are white-adjacent so at the bottom of the totem poll. Gays are second after blacks.”

Heather MacDonald, sarcastically voicing her true feelings about Peter Theil and his gay lifestyle + the news story about the suicide of Thiel’s throuple boyfriend:

Some female over the last year or so, eager to show her openmindedness, was crowing to me about how wonderful Thiel's "husband" was, making them out to be the most proper couple.

I wonder if he will feel any shame in public. Probably not.

Professors Yenor and Azerrad making fun of the appearance of one of the students at Yenor’s university (Boise State):

On one occasion, he forwarded a Boise State email featuring a photo of a female computer science student with close-cropped hair and a plaid shirt. “Gynocracy update!” Dr. Yenor wrote.

Riffing on the woman’s masculine appearance, his friend Dr. Azerrad chimed in with a correction: “Androgynococracy update.”

Heather MacDonald, taking a walking on the Upper East Side and seething at the thought of working mothers and persons of color who enter her field of vision:

As I was taking my evening power walk in the hood here (upper east side) and seeing all the nannies of color walking school children back to their apartments, it struck me again the bizarreness of females deciding that their comparative advantage is in being an associate in a law firm, say, and thus that they should outsource the once in a lifetime unduplicable unrepeatable experience of raising a unique child to some one else, especially someone from the low IQ 3rd world, while they do the drone work of making partner. The child is evolving so quickly, absorbing so many influences, and yet they would rather absent themselves from its life to show that they are as good as males. such a distribution of labor is allegedly pareto optimal. Another curse of feminism.

yes, they have horrible beliefs. But "coordinated attack on dei is a vast right wing conspiracy" is just calling the normal political process names. They have a right to these beliefs. They have a right to organize. We have a right not to vote for them.

And the NYT has the right to expose them as the evil arseholes they are and I have a right to start a thread highlighting how everyone in the article and anyone who shares their beliefs are fundamentally awful people who will burn in Hell for all eternity.

Arseholes? You even an American?

Anyway, I thought we were supposed to value diversity. Guess you disagree?

[Anonymous]

What funny is at my organization white men are benefiting from DEI considerations in hiring. Our workforce is predominately white women. But we also have a healthy mix of African American women, Asian men and Latino women. We just hired two white male managers. They look good on paper and aced the interview. But they actually weren’t the top candidates. A few others beat them out. But with DEI considerations and white men being a dying breed at my organization, they got hired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what conservatives miss is that DEI is a statement on a brochure. It’s pure corporate marketing. Companies will claim to have DEI but will still hire and rapidly promote white guys.

At the C-suite level, sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can somebody explain to me why companies care so much about being woke nowadays? How is DEI going to boost profits? When you think about it DEI goes in the complete opposite direction of capitalism since by definition makes your company less efficient (by hiring/promoting based on identity and not merit).

Are they worried about boycotts or getting sued for not being woke enough?

Because it is a checkbox for investors. Investors want ESG factored into how they throw money around, therefore corporate world had to placate the demand. It’s really just a bunch of fluff. Do some superficial crap to checkmark boxes, investors can see the boxes are checked, and keep proceeding as usual. lol, they still manage to do mental gymnastics for investing in oil companies like chevron. Hey, as long as chevron has a DEI officer we goood. They’re meeting ESG requirements so we can still invest in them even though they’re choking the planet with fossil fuels. DEI and ESG is just a buzzword industry, nothing more, nothing less. It’s divisive yes, but it doesn’t do anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Have you ever read accounts about women who try to break into male dominated fields?

Sure, if there are jobs that you need particular strength to perform, then it's not a surprise that fewer women will be aiming for those jobs. If women can perform them then they should be welcome into those fields.

But what a crock to say women avoid tough, labor intensive, and dangerous jobs. Have you ever looked to see who are doing those back-breaking health care jobs? You really want to say that those aren't labor intensive and tough or even dangerous (how many health care people died from covid during the first year of the crisis?). Do you know what it's like to have to turn bed-ridden patients over? What about women who do all the nasty cleaning jobs - would you want to do those? Especially for such paltry salaries.

Lol, what a joke. Health care is no where near as dangerous as iron work, sewer work, fishing, logging, power line work, etc. where you risk immediate shock with 100 kilovolts, asphyxiation by hydrogen sulfide, and falls of over 150 feet. The COVID pandemic is a one off event and a historic pandemic that happens once every 100 years.


Try moving 4000 lb drill bits in a matter of seconds on an oil rig, risking your limbs being crushed or severed if you don’t do it right. The vast, vaaaaaaast majority of work place deaths are men, not women. Healthcare isn’t even remotely as backbreaking as working on something like a fishing boat. Let’s see you do a 12 hour shift in sub zero temperatures hauling in catches all night that weigh multiple tons. Big whoop, you turn over a patient in bed while the fisherman is feeding thousands of people and risking life and limb working exhausting hours around ropes and chains with multiple tons of tension that can cut them in half on a whim if they make a mistake.

So you think therefore that white men therefore deserve to be given advantages in white collar jobs because of this? Is that what you're saying?

You won't say "big whoop" when a health care worker takes care of and maybe even saves a loved one's life. Good lord.

You’re really dim, aren’t you.


All of these charades about equity in the work place really aren’t about true equity. Women may want more representation in the most lucrative cushy jobs that exist, they don’t want true equality across ALL employment. If they did then they’d start dying at equal rates as men in the job because women would start doing the most dangerous and most laborious jobs out there. But that’s not what we are talking about. There are tons of women who clamor for special treatment in STEM fields and the corporate sector in tech, for example. But where are all of the women’s groups demanding more representation of women in sewer cleaning work, fishing, and iron work? Oh that’s right, women don’t want to do the latter jobs, because they’re too dangerous and too labor intensive for the pay. Women don’t want true equality, they just want the most high paying easy jobs. Gee, who DOESN’T want those?

Where are all of the male house cleaners, the male child care workers, teachers are starting to include men but that's only recent? Etc. Etc. Etc. These are all traditionally grossly underpaid jobs. Guess who always has them? Women. Look, no one wants anyone dying on the job, but that's not the way to look at it (and the fact that the jobs you claim are so risky aren't where the deaths are). But the jobs you're describing are well paid, unionized work that of course women want to break into. You're just wrong for suggesting that women don't want really good paying work, even with risk. Because you also forget - women face risk just being women. Risk on the job isn't something that factors in for many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was sitting in a management meeting at my company earlier this month.

14 white men. 1 Black man. Two women. It was ridiculous. Those men are not more talented than all the people in the office.

It is like a PP said. Whiny white men who have had every opportunity now don't like it when they have to compete. They always want the finger on the scale in favor of them.

Black males are 6% of the population. One black guy out of 17 people = 6% of the representation. That's exactly on par with the demographics of the country, so what are you complaining about.

I also don't hear you whining about lack representation of women in fields like fishing, logging, oil rig work, etc. You know, the most dangerous and hazardous jobs on the planet. Your beef is that women don't have more representation in cushy white collar jobs with high pay and low risk. It would be better to be honest and admit first you don't want true equality across employment. You just want more female representation in very specific roles and sectors where jobs are easier, safer, and less labor intensive.

Are women welcomed in those professions? Be honest.

Oh, because I'm suuuure the primary issue with very tough, labor intensive jobs is that they aren't safe spaces for women. It couldn't possibly be that women don't like to do those jobs *because* they're tough, labor intensive and dangerous.

Just be honest......all of this equity talk is a joke. You okay want equity in the cushy, white collar, high paying jobs, not across fields though that require back breaking work that's dangerous and yet the county still needs to function.

Have you ever read accounts about women who try to break into male dominated fields?

Sure, if there are jobs that you need particular strength to perform, then it's not a surprise that fewer women will be aiming for those jobs. If women can perform them then they should be welcome into those fields.

But what a crock to say women avoid tough, labor intensive, and dangerous jobs. Have you ever looked to see who are doing those back-breaking health care jobs? You really want to say that those aren't labor intensive and tough or even dangerous (how many health care people died from covid during the first year of the crisis?). Do you know what it's like to have to turn bed-ridden patients over? What about women who do all the nasty cleaning jobs - would you want to do those? Especially for such paltry salaries.

Lol, what a joke. Health care is no where near as dangerous as iron work, sewer work, fishing, logging, power line work, etc. where you risk immediate shock with 100 kilovolts, asphyxiation by hydrogen sulfide, and falls of over 150 feet. The COVID pandemic is a one off event and a historic pandemic that happens once every 100 years.


Try moving 4000 lb drill bits in a matter of seconds on an oil rig, risking your limbs being crushed or severed if you don’t do it right. The vast, vaaaaaaast majority of work place deaths are men, not women. Healthcare isn’t even remotely as backbreaking as working on something like a fishing boat. Let’s see you do a 12 hour shift in sub zero temperatures hauling in catches all night that weigh multiple tons. Big whoop, you turn over a patient in bed while the fisherman is feeding thousands of people and risking life and limb working exhausting hours around ropes and chains with multiple tons of tension that can cut them in half on a whim if they make a mistake.

So you think therefore that white men therefore deserve to be given advantages in white collar jobs because of this? Is that what you're saying?

You won't say "big whoop" when a health care worker takes care of and maybe even saves a loved one's life. Good lord.

You’re really dim, aren’t you.


All of these charades about equity in the work place really aren’t about true equity. Women may want more representation in the most lucrative cushy jobs that exist, they don’t want true equality across ALL employment. If they did then they’d start dying at equal rates as men in the job because women would start doing the most dangerous and most laborious jobs out there. But that’s not what we are talking about. There are tons of women who clamor for special treatment in STEM fields and the corporate sector in tech, for example. But where are all of the women’s groups demanding more representation of women in sewer cleaning work, fishing, and iron work? Oh that’s right, women don’t want to do the latter jobs, because they’re too dangerous and too labor intensive for the pay. Women don’t want true equality, they just want the most high paying easy jobs. Gee, who DOESN’T want those?

Where are all of the male house cleaners, the male child care workers, teachers are starting to include men but that's only recent? Etc. Etc. Etc. These are all traditionally grossly underpaid jobs. Guess who always has them? Women. Look, no one wants anyone dying on the job, but that's not the way to look at it (and the fact that the jobs you claim are so risky aren't where the deaths are). But the jobs you're describing are well paid, unionized work that of course women want to break into. You're just wrong for suggesting that women don't want really good paying work, even with risk. Because you also forget - women face risk just being women. Risk on the job isn't something that factors in for many.

I think you’re both actually saying the same thing, which is that there are some jobs that are (for logical reasons) dominated by one sex or the other

For example, how many families do you think would hire male strangers to come into their house and clean? Call it prejudice if you want but there are good reasons for it which are obvious to everyone.