Social DEI is so dead

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

The market corrects this stuff. Firms that hire better people do better and make more money. If a firm ignored a huge pot of talent because of racial or gender bias, competing companies would quickly eat their lunch by hiring in a race & gender blind way. Having huge DEI departments may be good politically, but adds no actual value to what any organization actually does. More firms and universities are going to quietly scale DEI back because it does not improve organizational outcomes. This is a trend we're already seeing in many industries, and will surely gain momentum.

I think it was an immediate consequence of emergence of social media mobs. But humans are catching up to the fact that if 10 million losers disliked something on instagram, it s still nothing more than some random loser‘s opinion, even if it gets aggregated.

 

[SSgt Dickweed]

 

[evansusmc2]

It has been weakened but it’s still no where close to dead. There is a DEI hire running for President as we speak and could win.

True. If she loses it will be a HUGE blow to DEI. Not necessarily the nail in the coffin but it'll hurt some of the blue haired people in the feels.

 

[evansusmc2]

Speaking of signs, a sign that you're making a dumbass argument is when you quote Jordan Peterson. This guy has been rightly branded "the stupid man's smart man" (google it, it's a thing).

Who cares that some weirdo came up with some opinion??

 

[Madmick]

Uhmm that's not true at all. Princeton did a study and found Asian students must score 140 points higher on the SAT than whites and 450 points higher than Blacks to have the same chance of admission to private colleges.

They're going to pretend that defendant-submitted data is reliable since it favors their narrative. However, that's funny because even Harvard's fudged dataset doesn't spare them.

Yeah it is, if you actually look at SAT scores

Obviously the scores for blacks and Latinos is gonna be lower, if it wasn't there wouldn't be a need for these programs. But it's not a dramatic difference.

The average black student has something like a 1400-1450 while the average white near 1500 and average Asian 1550. Where are the vastly unqualified sub-1000 students? And if you've ever taught at a high school (I have), you'll know that the difference between a 1450 student and a 1550 student is absolutely negligible. They're both extremely bright and dedicated.

So evil Affirmative Action was just giving very bright blacks and Latinos a small bump over very bright whites and Asians.

A small bump over a small percent. White opposition to anti-discrimination programs is just them saying they should be able to get the whole pie if they feel like they qualify for it. The Supreme Court case was them making that argument, but supplanting Asians for themselves

"But that's not a dramatic difference"
"A small bump over a small percent"


Is your comprehension of data sets really this poor? That's a massive difference. You realize the classic SAT is out of 1600, right? There's almost no room for scoring gaps at the near-perfect end of scoring.

Asian-American Harvard Admits Earned Highest Average SAT Score of Any Racial Group From 1995 to 2013 | News | The Harvard Crimson

Over an 18-year period stretching from 1995 to 2013, Asian-American students admitted to Harvard scored higher on the SAT than did their peer admits from other racial groups, according to data released in the admissions trial.

www.thecrimson.com

A Crimson analysis of the previously confidential dataset — which spans admissions cycles starting with the Class of 2000 and ends with the cycle for the Class of 2017 — revealed that Asian-Americans admitted to Harvard earned an average SAT score of 767 across all sections. Every section of the SAT has a maximum score of 800.

By comparison, white admits earned an average score of 745 across all sections, Hispanic-American admits earned an average of 718, Native-American and Native-Hawaiian admits an average of 712, and African-American admits an average of 704.

The gap there between Asian-Americans and African-Americans was staggering; 1534 on average for Asians over the period in question versus 1408 on average for African Americans. Now, that's bullshit, and we know that from past internal review documents ivy league schools released in prior decades looking at the academic indexing and undergraduate academic performance of their own minorities, but we'll go ahead and pretend this data is authentic for the sake of exposing how ignorant one has to be to make comments as misguided as the ones I've quoted here in analyzing it. That's the difference between a score that is around the 94% percentile and a score that is in the 99.8% percentile on the test. In other words, there are roughly 120K students who score 1408+ or higher every year. There's fewer than ~4K who score a 1534 or higher.

Understanding distribution curves is hard, apparently.

 

[SuperAlly]

The sooner we can get away from judging or awarding merits based on sex, sexuality, or race the better for society.

DEI is holding us back in that regard and for that reason it's forced equity needs to go.

Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome

 

[tastaylvr]

Why are people still bringing up sat scores lol

Not everyone that enters university ends up finishing and not everyone that gets accepted into medical school magically becomes a doctor overnight ..

You still need to finish the course which requires some form of knowledge..

 

[Madmick]

Why are people still bringing up sat scores lol

Not everyone that enters university ends up finishing and not everyone that gets accepted into medical school magically becomes a doctor overnight ..

You still need to finish the course which requires some form of knowledge..

Are you deliberately trying to ask the dumbest possible question one could conceive?

Because standadized test scores are the primary benchmark by which applying students are measured. That's why people are still talking about them. Because it's the most pertinent piece of objective information we have to assess whether people are being treated fairly based on their achievements, rather than their skin color.

Freaking derp, dude.

 

[tastaylvr]

Are you deliberately trying to ask the dumbest possible question one could conceive?

Because standadized test scores are the primary benchmark by which applying students are measured. That's why people are still talking about them. Because it's the most pertinent piece of objective information we have to assess whether people are being treated fairly based on their achievements, rather than their skin color.

Freaking derp, dude.

I’m talking about people who finished medical school, completed residency and become doctors and you’re talking about the SAT lol

Nobody cares about your entrance score in the real world besides unaccomplished clowns

The entrance score is only relevant at one point in their journey. It’s also laughable that you think it’s fair without talking about environmental factors. I know so many kids that went to great schools that made them excellent at taking tests while they fizzled away uni and life.

There is a reason universities use this approach because having a slightly lower SAT in a shitty environment is more impressive than a higher one in an easier one.

 

[The_Renaissance]

Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome

Which is why the use of the word 'equity' is fantasyland stuff. I shudder when I hear intelligent people using this term as though it's possible. The former, absolutely, the latter, never.

 

[Loiosh]

My point is that minorities prefer living in mixed neighborhoods more than whites.

A black person looking to invest purchases properties. As they're valuable properties, they're in predominantly white neighborhoods. Black person is criticized for buying "white properties".

The racism is so ingrained they probably aren't even aware of it. It just feels natural.

 

[Madmick]

I’m talking about people who finished medical school, completed residency and become doctors and you’re talking about the SAT lol

Nobody cares about your entrance score in the real world besides unaccomplished clowns

The entrance score is only relevant at one point in their journey. It’s also laughable that you think it’s fair without talking about environmental factors. I know so many kids that went to great schools that made them excellent at taking tests while they fizzled away uni and life.

There is a reason universities use this approach because having a slightly lower SAT in a shitty environment is more impressive than a higher one in an easier one.

That would be relevant if we were discussing the "real world", and not the equality of college admissions pertaining to race. Derp.

FYI, one of the reasons the SAT has prevailed for as long as it has is because it has been the single most successful tool universities have figured out as a predictor for a student's success at their schools. No other metric on a college admissions application correlates more closely to success such as GPAs, graduation rates, and matriculation at graduate schools. Furthermore, it will probably disappoint you to learn, your real-world benchmark (such as employment rates and average earnings measured at various points post-graduation) doesn't steer the way you want it. Again, that isn't what we're discussing, it's entirely irrelevant to racial fairness in the admissions process, but LOL, you can't even attempt to change the subject without stepping in it.

 

[Koro_11]

Pointing out that racists oppose anti-racist programs =/= racism

Anti racist programs... that discriminate against certain people... based on... race?

 

[Koro_11]

Speaking of signs, a sign that you're making a dumbass argument is when you quote Jordan Peterson. This guy has been rightly branded "the stupid man's smart man" (google it, it's a thing).

And it'd be great if there were tons of white women just yearning to be hotel housekeepers but that keep getting passed over by Hispanic women. But there's not, it's a shitty job and only the people at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder are willing to do it. And, surprise-surprise, it's mostly brown and black women.

This shows you how much higher whites are than Latinos and blacks socioeconomically... which is the whole point of "pushing diversity." Society is tremendously unequal which creates a ton of built-in biases towards gender, race, disability, etc., so in order to overcome these biases, extra efforts should be made to consider groups on the losing end of these biases in positions of power and influence.

More like he's the stupid man's boogy man, which is why stupid people can never make an argument against his position so all they're left with is personal insults.

If society is unequal it's not because of the amount of melanin in someone's skin. Nigerian Americans are some of the most prosperous immigrants in the entire country, yet they're as black as can be... none of you race grifters can ever explain how skin colour seems to be a barrier for some and a non issue for others.

 

[sanguinius]

Pointing out that racists oppose anti-racist programs =/= racism

You don’t have to be racist to hate dei nonsense, but you do have to be to support it.