DEI Discussion Thread

DEI. What is it? ChatGPT says...

>What is DEI?

Quote:

---

DEI stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. It is a framework used by organizations, businesses, and institutions to promote fair treatment, representation, and opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their background.

Breakdown of DEI:

1. Diversity – The presence of differences, including race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, and more. It recognizes that a mix of perspectives and experiences strengthens an organization.
2. Equity – Ensuring fair treatment, access, and opportunities by addressing systemic barriers and historical disadvantages. Equity differs from equality in that it considers different needs rather than giving everyone the same thing.
3. Inclusion – Creating an environment where all individuals feel valued, respected, and able to contribute fully. Inclusion ensures that diverse individuals are not just present but are actively engaged and empowered.

Organizations adopt DEI initiatives to improve workplace culture, drive innovation, and promote social justice. Would you like to know more about how DEI is implemented in specific settings?

---

What the big freakout?

I agree that diversity is strength. The more different ways you can look at something the better the perspective. Everyone approaches things differently so when you have more people working together you get a better result. Sure there are exceptions to everything but I would say in this case that diversity will consistent get better results over time than a homogenous group. Without diversity you get narrower views or potentially see less than the bigger picture.

Paying people the same money for the same job is just the right thing to do. Giving folks with more modest means a "leg up" towards opportunities to improve themselves is the right thing to do. It would be foolish not to because talent can come from anywhere.

Inclusion is positive. Its what democracy is all about. Everyone no matter their walk of life has a seat at the table and an equal voice. Is being against inclusion mean that people think exclusion is better for society? That only certain people can be at the table and make the decisions?

This is such an interesting topic I prompted ChatGPT to continue explaining how DEI might be used in specific situations.

>Yes

Quote:

---

DEI is implemented across different sectors, including businesses, education, healthcare, and government, to foster inclusive and equitable environments. Here’s how it typically plays out in various settings:

1. Workplace & Corporate Settings

Organizations integrate DEI to build diverse teams, reduce bias, and create a culture of belonging. Common strategies include:

• Hiring & Recruitment – Implementing diverse hiring panels, reducing unconscious bias in job descriptions, and recruiting from underrepresented groups.

• Equitable Pay & Promotion – Conducting pay equity audits and ensuring fair advancement opportunities for all employees.

• Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) – Supporting affinity groups (e.g., Women in Leadership, Black Employee Network, LGBTQ+ groups) to foster community and advocacy.

• DEI Training – Educating employees on bias, inclusive leadership, and allyship.

2. Education & Academia

Schools and universities use DEI to create a supportive learning environment for students and staff. This includes:

• Inclusive Curricula – Incorporating diverse perspectives, histories, and authors into academic programs.

• Scholarships & Outreach – Offering financial aid and support to historically underrepresented students.

• Safe Spaces & Support Services – Providing counseling, affinity groups, and campus resources for marginalized students.

3. Healthcare & Medical Fields

DEI in healthcare focuses on reducing disparities in patient care and workforce diversity. Approaches include:

• Cultural Competency Training – Educating healthcare professionals on treating patients from diverse backgrounds with sensitivity.

• Equitable Access to Care – Addressing racial and economic disparities in healthcare services.

• Diverse Clinical Trials – Ensuring medical research includes participants from varied racial, gender, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

4. Government & Public Policy

Public institutions adopt DEI principles to ensure policies and services are fair for all citizens. Key initiatives include:

• Anti-Discrimination Laws – Enforcing regulations to protect marginalized groups in employment, education, and housing.

• Community Engagement – Ensuring diverse voices influence policy decisions.

• Accessibility Programs – Implementing services to support individuals with disabilities and underserved communities.

Would you like more details on a specific sector or best practices for implementing DEI?

---

None of this seems like OMG ITS THE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA!!!!

Convince us why its such a bad thing.

Also why is it such an anathema to the republican party? Do most republicans think this is outrageous? Only some? Or is this really just a meh issue with most?

Stuff you post is just as dumb as what we see from Clyder, so this is a fitting spot to put your stuff:

A Thread For ClydeR

When you hire based upon skin color/sexual orientation/national origin/any other metric other than merit then you do not get the best and the brightest.

Let's take a look at Kamala Harris.. one of the best examples of a DEI hire. Biden said he will have a (i)woman (ii)minority as his VP. So immediately, he cut his pool of candidates in half when he said he was hiring a woman. Then he cut that pool in half when he stated he will only hire a minority. Do you believe that you can hire the best or brightest if your candidate pool is only a quarter of the total candidates?

It's not.

Your misunderstanding of what DEI is.. is not a surprise to anyone with an IQ over 12.

So far, only you seem to be surprised by this.

And I'm shocked.

Really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

When you hire based upon skin color/sexual orientation/national origin/any other metric other than merit then you do not get the best and the brightest.

---

Trump specifically said the government should actively attempt to eliminate diversity. That's a much more extreme position than most of Trump's supporters have realized or acknowledged.

At his press conference on Thursday, Trump said that diversity at the FAA makes travel less safe and less efficient -- a shocking assertion. It was the worst of all the uninformed and crazy things he said at the press conference. Why would having only white male controllers make flying safer?

Quote:

---

The initiative is part of the FAA's Diversity and Inclusion hiring plan, which says diversity is integral to achieving FAA's mission of ensuring safe and efficient travel. I don't think so. I don't think so. I think it's just the opposite.

More...

---

The only way to achieve Trump's goal of a non-diverse workforce is through active discrimination, like he and his father committed in the 1970s before agreeing, under duress, to rent to black tenants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Trump specifically said the government should actively attempt to eliminate diversity. That's a much more extreme position than most of Trump's supporters have realized or acknowledged.

At his press conference on Thursday, Trump said that diversity at the FAA makes travel less safe and less efficient -- a shocking assertion. It was the worst of all the uninformed and crazy things he said at the press conference. Why would having only white male controllers make flying safer?



The only way to achieve Trump's goal of a non-diverse workforce is through active discrimination, like he and his father committed in the 1970s before agreeing, under duress, to rent to black tenants.

---

https://media1.tenor.com/m/Pwngbw8Yz...-cobra-kai.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Trump specifically said the government should actively attempt to eliminate diversity. That's a much more extreme position than most of Trump's supporters have realized or acknowledged.

At his press conference on Thursday, Trump said that diversity at the FAA makes travel less safe and less efficient -- a shocking assertion. It was the worst of all the uninformed and crazy things he said at the press conference. Why would having only white male controllers make flying safer?



The only way to achieve Trump's goal of a non-diverse workforce is through active discrimination, like he and his father committed in the 1970s before agreeing, under duress, to rent to black tenants.

---

So you, like the rest of the racist as fuck Left are saying that without quotas, DEI and affirmative action, there is no chance for minorities to be hired based on merit?

That sure sounds like what you are saying to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

I would say in this case that diversity will consistent get better results over time than a homogenous group.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

It would be foolish not to because talent can come from anywhere.

---

Back: "A homogeneous group is bad!"
Also Back: "Talent can come from anywhere!"

Which is it?

Also I would take racists such as yourself more seriously when you said shit like "Diversity is our strength!" if that wasn't just code for "Fewer straight cis gendered white men!"

Black men are way overly represented in the NFL and the NBA, yet racists such as yourself never bitch about that. In fact racists such as yourself demand more black coaches because most coaches are white.

Sexists such as yourself never complain that the nursing profession, a very lucrative career, is almost entirely made up of women.

What about "Diversity is our strength!"?

Come on. Racists such as yourself used to have no problem openly saying you wanted racial and gender quotas. When did you racists become so shy with being so open about it? What is with this nonsense about "diversity is our strength"?

4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Trump specifically said the government should actively attempt to eliminate diversity. That's a much more extreme position than most of Trump's supporters have realized or acknowledged.

At his press conference on Thursday, Trump said that diversity at the FAA makes travel less safe and less efficient -- a shocking assertion. It was the worst of all the uninformed and crazy things he said at the press conference. Why would having only white male controllers make flying safer?

The only way to achieve Trump's goal of a non-diverse workforce is through active discrimination, like he and his father committed in the 1970s before agreeing, under duress, to rent to black tenants.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

When you hire based upon skin color/sexual orientation/national origin/any other metric other than merit then you do not get the best and the brightest.

Let's take a look at Kamala Harris.. one of the best examples of a DEI hire. Biden said he will have a (i)woman (ii)minority as his VP. So immediately, he cut his pool of candidates in half when he said he was hiring a woman. Then he cut that pool in half when he stated he will only hire a minority. Do you believe that you can hire the best or brightest if your candidate pool is only a quarter of the total candidates?

It's not.

Your misunderstanding of what DEI is.. is not a surprise to anyone with an IQ over 12.

So far, only you seem to be surprised by this.

And I'm shocked.

Really.

---

And then there is two little retarded white "males" that are confused by DEI.

Any more?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

So you, like the rest of the racist as fuck Left are saying that without quotas, DEI and affirmative action, there is no chance for minorities to be hired based on merit?

---

You're not paying close attention to what Trump said. Most Trump supporters heard what they expected to hear, instead of what he actually said. Read it again. Trump said that having diversity in the federal workplace is harmful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You're not paying close attention to what Trump said. Most Trump supporters heard what they expected to hear, instead of what he actually said. Read it again. Trump said that having diversity in the federal workplace is harmful.

---

Hiring by diversity is harmful.

How is this so hard for you to understand?

I realize it's a complete shift in your way of thinking.. but the color of your skin or who you fuck or what you are identifying as today should not play a role in whether or not you are able to do a job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You're not paying close attention to what Trump said. Most Trump supporters heard what they expected to hear, instead of what he actually said. Read it again. Trump said that having diversity in the federal workplace is harmful.

---

I read it just fine. In fact, I searched the whole transcript you linked for the word diversity and you know what I found? I found every mention by Trump is about diversity hiring and not the racist assertion you make that it's firing anyone that isn't white. So, again, you and the rest of the racist Left are retarded racists. Picking race over merit has cause incalculable harm in our society and needs to end.

You and others are championing race, sex and even disability over safety in the FAA and elsewhere. Fuck off. OH, and answer my original question ya racist hack.

Quote:

---

So you, like the rest of the racist as fuck Left are saying that without quotas, DEI and affirmative action, there is no chance for minorities to be hired based on merit?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You're not paying close attention to what Trump said. Most Trump supporters heard what they expected to hear, instead of what he actually said. Read it again. Trump said that having diversity in the federal workplace is harmful.

---

Hey ClydeR, why don’t you tell us all what is REALLY bothering you about President Trump?

https://media.tenor.com/pgcesDs8cMwA...rry-silver.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Hey ClydeR, why don’t you tell us all what is REALLY bothering you about President Trump?

https://media.tenor.com/pgcesDs8cMwA...rry-silver.gif

---

He no longer has grizzled old diaper dick in his mouth.

Imagine telling white male children they are responsible & must pay for all the sins of their ancestors.

Imagine telling little girls & minority race children that the reason they can’t accomplish great things in their life is because of distant history and the white males in the classroom.

Yet this is the reality that the Democrats party has created for us in the name of identity politics.

Americans of every race, culture, gender, sexual preference, and background are rejecting this nonsense that divides us. A Republican, and not just any but Trump for all his challenges, won the popular vote. If Democrats continue to push this ideology of hate, they will continue to lose national elections & might just fade into political obscurity like the Whig party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

DEI. What is it? ChatGPT says...

>What is DEI?



What the big freakout?

I agree that diversity is strength. The more different ways you can look at something the better the perspective. Everyone approaches things differently so when you have more people working together you get a better result. Sure there are exceptions to everything but I would say in this case that diversity will consistent get better results over time than a homogenous group. Without diversity you get narrower views or potentially see less than the bigger picture.

Paying people the same money for the same job is just the right thing to do. Giving folks with more modest means a "leg up" towards opportunities to improve themselves is the right thing to do. It would be foolish not to because talent can come from anywhere.

Inclusion is positive. Its what democracy is all about. Everyone no matter their walk of life has a seat at the table and an equal voice. Is being against inclusion mean that people think exclusion is better for society? That only certain people can be at the table and make the decisions?

This is such an interesting topic I prompted ChatGPT to continue explaining how DEI might be used in specific situations.

>Yes



None of this seems like OMG ITS THE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA!!!!

Convince us why its such a bad thing.

Also why is it such an anathema to the republican party? Do most republicans think this is outrageous? Only some? Or is this really just a meh issue with most?

---

Pretend you can afford a plane ticket for a moment.

Would you rather the pilot be someone that was hired because he was the best one for the job? Or some dumbass that got hired because he checked off some race/gender/gay boxes despite not being the best candidate for the job?

You can even pretend that the pilot flying your plane is some white guy that got hired over a gay black dude because the airline already met their DEI quota and had to hire more white people, even though the gay black dude was an objectively better pilot.

You're too stupid and full of shit to answer this honestly, so I don't expect any sort of intelligent response. So I'll just wrap this up by reminding you how retarded you are.


Bonus question: What if the race/gender/etc. of the person that gets hired isn't known to the employer until after they're hired? I bet you would take issue with that too. Again, because you're a retard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Trump specifically said the government should actively attempt to eliminate diversity. That's a much more extreme position than most of Trump's supporters have realized or acknowledged.

At his press conference on Thursday, Trump said that diversity at the FAA makes travel less safe and less efficient -- a shocking assertion. It was the worst of all the uninformed and crazy things he said at the press conference. Why would having only white male controllers make flying safer?



The only way to achieve Trump's goal of a non-diverse workforce is through active discrimination, like he and his father committed in the 1970s before agreeing, under duress, to rent to black tenants.

---

What if retards, as in actual legitimate retards, such as yourself, were being hired to fly planes because airlines had to meet their retard quota? Would you fly on those planes?


All workplaces should discriminate, as in discriminate against people who are less qualified for the job.

People like you and Back are too busy scissoring your buttholes together to understand basic concepts like how competence should come before everything else when it comes to hiring people, regardless of their race, gender, etc.

People who are pro DEI are typically bad at everything they do in life. Which explains why you and Back are so for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You're not paying close attention to what Trump said. Most Trump supporters heard what they expected to hear, instead of what he actually said. Read it again. Trump said that having diversity in the federal workplace is harmful.

---

Competence diversity is very bad, yes. You're just too stupid to wrap your retard head around this because you're literally not qualified to do anything other than hide under your adult sized crib with your entire body wrapped up in N95 masks while your parents cry in the other room wondering where they went so wrong with their parenting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Pretend you can afford a planet ticket for a moment.

---

Planet ticket?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Planet ticket?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

Hiring by diversity is harmful.

---

You are correct that Trump said hiring based on diversity is harmful. But you refuse to understand that, in addition, Trump said diversity itself is harmful. That's an un-American belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You are correct that Trump said hiring based on diversity is harmful. But you refuse to understand that, in addition, Trump said diversity itself is harmful. That's an un-American belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M

---

What would be your opinion if the NBA and/or the NFL were forced to have midgets on their team for diversity reasons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You are correct that Trump said hiring based on diversity is harmful. But you refuse to understand that, in addition, Trump said diversity itself is harmful. That's an un-American belief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQl6XBo64M

---

Oh, did he really say that? Yep 0 chance that you are misunderstanding or just making shit up because the “teevee” told you that Trump = Hitler.

Well I guess that Trump will soon be firing all the women and dark colored skin people that he appointed for cabinet positions and replace them with old white men, right?

Your unhinged TDS is making you more retarded by the hour. It’s oddly satisfying to watch your mental illness outbursts just like your alt Latrin during Covid. Since you refuse to get help or treatment, please continue to provide us on the PC a great source of entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Oh, did he really say that?

---

He said it and I posted it here, along with a link the full transcript, so you could read it for yourselves in context.

What is everyone so angry about? Jesus. Your boy won. He's dismantling everything he told you he would. He's tearing down those terrible American institutions he told you were harming you. Why are you all still so nasty and angry? Fucking chill. :)

Thanks, everyone, for contributing to the discussion. Honestly I feel like both sides of this are talking past each other. Pro-DEI are not understanding anti-DEI and anti-DEI are not understanding pro-DEI. In fact I believe both sides are making up what they think the other side thinks about it.

Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants homogeny, inequity, and exclusivity. Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything.

Anti-DEI thinks the best candidates are being passed up for less than optimal candidates in order to meet some quota. Anti-DEI thinks pro-DEI has filled so many positions with less than optimal candidates that everything is at risk of falling apart. Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control.

Neither side is correct in their fears of what the other side is thinking. DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone. There are no quotas in the language of DEI. No good candidates are being passed up for someone less qualified. Failures of any system are not caused by DEI. But because anti-DEI perceives or believes these inaccurate portrayals they are understandably upset about it. Then when anti-DEI voice their concerns pro-DEI assumes it means they think only one group should be hired for everything. Its two sides misunderstanding then talking past each other.

Honestly I think that super elite wealthy people who have literally bought politicians are pushing this kind of racial division and fear so the general population will continue to vote their puppets into power so that they continue to get even richer than they already are.

We need to stop arguing with each other and hold our government accountable for its capitulation to the ultra wealthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

What is everyone so angry about? Jesus. Your boy won. He's dismantling everything he told you he would. He's tearing down those terrible American institutions he told you were harming you. Why are you all still so nasty and angry? Fucking chill. :)

Thanks, everyone, for contributing to the discussion. Honestly I feel like both sides of this are talking past each other. Pro-DEI are not understanding anti-DEI and anti-DEI are not understanding pro-DEI. In fact I believe both sides are making up what they think the other side thinks about it.

Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants homogeny, inequity, and exclusivity. Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything.

Anti-DEI thinks the best candidates are being passed up for less than optimal candidates in order to meet some quota. Anti-DEI thinks pro-DEI has filled so many positions with less than optimal candidates that everything is at risk of falling apart. Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control.

Neither side is correct in their fears of what the other side is thinking. DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone. There are no quotas in the language of DEI. No good candidates are being passed up for someone less qualified. Failures of any system are not caused by DEI. But because anti-DEI perceives or believes these inaccurate portrayals they are understandably upset about it. Then when anti-DEI voice their concerns pro-DEI assumes it means they think only one group should be hired for everything. Its two sides misunderstanding then talking past each other.

Honestly I think that super elite wealthy people who have literally bought politicians are pushing this kind of racial division and fear so the general population will continue to vote their puppets into power so that they continue to get even richer than they already are.

We need to stop arguing with each other and hold our government accountable for its capitulation to the ultra wealthy.

---

lol @ now suddenly "iT's BoTh SiDeS!!!!!!"

No one's angry. Perhaps amazed at how retarded you are, since some of us forgot just how bad it was during your absence, but definitely not angry. Trump is so far doing what people voted for. The left wing meltdowns are simply a bonus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

What is everyone so angry about? Jesus. Your boy won. He's dismantling everything he told you he would. He's tearing down those terrible American institutions he told you were harming you. Why are you all still so nasty and angry? Fucking chill. :)

Thanks, everyone, for contributing to the discussion. Honestly I feel like both sides of this are talking past each other. Pro-DEI are not understanding anti-DEI and anti-DEI are not understanding pro-DEI. In fact I believe both sides are making up what they think the other side thinks about it.

Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants homogeny, inequity, and exclusivity. Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything.

Anti-DEI thinks the best candidates are being passed up for less than optimal candidates in order to meet some quota. Anti-DEI thinks pro-DEI has filled so many positions with less than optimal candidates that everything is at risk of falling apart. Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control.

Neither side is correct in their fears of what the other side is thinking. DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone. There are no quotas in the language of DEI. No good candidates are being passed up for someone less qualified. Failures of any system are not caused by DEI. But because anti-DEI perceives or believes these inaccurate portrayals they are understandably upset about it. Then when anti-DEI voice their concerns pro-DEI assumes it means they think only one group should be hired for everything. Its two sides misunderstanding then talking past each other.

Honestly I think that super elite wealthy people who have literally bought politicians are pushing this kind of racial division and fear so the general population will continue to vote their puppets into power so that they continue to get even richer than they already are.

We need to stop arguing with each other and hold our government accountable for its capitulation to the ultra wealthy.

---

Since you like ChatGPT, I asked it to tell me what it thought about this post.

This argument is flawed in several ways, including logical inconsistencies, misrepresentation of perspectives, and a failure to engage with real-world policies and consequences. Here’s a breakdown of what’s wrong with it:
1. Tone and Emotional Manipulation

• The first paragraph is aggressive and dismissive, assuming that "anger" is unjustified and that people should "chill." This straw-mans opposition by implying they have no valid concerns.
• The phrase "your boy won" assumes political partisanship and reduces complex ideological disagreements to tribal loyalty.

2. False Equivalency & Oversimplification

• The argument treats "pro-DEI" and "anti-DEI" as equally misunderstanding each other, but it does not engage with the actual history and reasoning behind DEI policies.
• It assumes both sides are making up what the other thinks, ignoring well-documented arguments and evidence supporting each stance.

3. Misrepresentation of Anti-DEI Beliefs

• The statement “Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control” is an extreme and misleading characterization.
• Many anti-DEI arguments are not just about quotas but about concerns over meritocracy, effectiveness, and unintended consequences of DEI policies.

4. Misrepresentation of Pro-DEI Beliefs

• The claim that “Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything” is an exaggeration that misrepresents the concerns of DEI advocates.
• Many pro-DEI advocates are concerned with systemic barriers and increasing access, not enforcing racial hiring.

5. Inaccurate Claims About DEI

• The argument asserts that “DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone” and that “no good candidates are being passed up.” However, DEI policies often influence hiring practices, and some companies have adopted quota-like diversity initiatives.
• Courts have ruled against DEI-related hiring and admissions practices, showing that, at times, race-based policies have disadvantaged certain applicants.

6. Conspiracy Thinking

• The argument suggests that “super elite wealthy people” are orchestrating racial division for their own benefit. While economic interests can shape politics, this vague, unfalsifiable claim distracts from substantive discussion.

7. Contradiction Between Individual vs. Systemic Blame

• The argument shifts from saying "people misunderstand each other" to blaming "ultra-wealthy elites," which contradicts the earlier message about mutual misunderstanding.
• If systemic manipulation is the real problem, then people's anger might be justified rather than irrational.

8. Lack of Specific Policy Engagement

• Instead of addressing real DEI policies and their effects, the argument remains in the realm of perception and feelings.
• It dismisses legitimate concerns about DEI-related hiring, admissions, and training programs without evidence.

Conclusion

This argument is flawed because it relies on emotional appeals, straw-manning, false equivalency, misrepresentation of beliefs, and conspiracy rhetoric. It fails to engage meaningfully with the actual policies and their implications. Instead of fostering real discussion, it creates a vague sense of unity while dismissing legitimate concerns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants homogeny, inequity, and exclusivity. Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything.

---

Here is where your basic understanding went completely wrong.

It's because you want to put yourself up on a pedestal and pretend that your pro-DEI is a perfect system.

It's the opposite.

Maybe try again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Since you like ChatGPT, I asked it to tell me what it thought about this post.

This argument is flawed in several ways, including logical inconsistencies, misrepresentation of perspectives, and a failure to engage with real-world policies and consequences. Here’s a breakdown of what’s wrong with it:
1. Tone and Emotional Manipulation

• The first paragraph is aggressive and dismissive, assuming that "anger" is unjustified and that people should "chill." This straw-mans opposition by implying they have no valid concerns.
• The phrase "your boy won" assumes political partisanship and reduces complex ideological disagreements to tribal loyalty.

2. False Equivalency & Oversimplification

• The argument treats "pro-DEI" and "anti-DEI" as equally misunderstanding each other, but it does not engage with the actual history and reasoning behind DEI policies.
• It assumes both sides are making up what the other thinks, ignoring well-documented arguments and evidence supporting each stance.

3. Misrepresentation of Anti-DEI Beliefs

• The statement “Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control” is an extreme and misleading characterization.
• Many anti-DEI arguments are not just about quotas but about concerns over meritocracy, effectiveness, and unintended consequences of DEI policies.

4. Misrepresentation of Pro-DEI Beliefs

• The claim that “Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything” is an exaggeration that misrepresents the concerns of DEI advocates.
• Many pro-DEI advocates are concerned with systemic barriers and increasing access, not enforcing racial hiring.

5. Inaccurate Claims About DEI

• The argument asserts that “DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone” and that “no good candidates are being passed up.” However, DEI policies often influence hiring practices, and some companies have adopted quota-like diversity initiatives.
• Courts have ruled against DEI-related hiring and admissions practices, showing that, at times, race-based policies have disadvantaged certain applicants.

6. Conspiracy Thinking

• The argument suggests that “super elite wealthy people” are orchestrating racial division for their own benefit. While economic interests can shape politics, this vague, unfalsifiable claim distracts from substantive discussion.

7. Contradiction Between Individual vs. Systemic Blame

• The argument shifts from saying "people misunderstand each other" to blaming "ultra-wealthy elites," which contradicts the earlier message about mutual misunderstanding.
• If systemic manipulation is the real problem, then people's anger might be justified rather than irrational.

8. Lack of Specific Policy Engagement

• Instead of addressing real DEI policies and their effects, the argument remains in the realm of perception and feelings.
• It dismisses legitimate concerns about DEI-related hiring, admissions, and training programs without evidence.

Conclusion

This argument is flawed because it relies on emotional appeals, straw-manning, false equivalency, misrepresentation of beliefs, and conspiracy rhetoric. It fails to engage meaningfully with the actual policies and their implications. Instead of fostering real discussion, it creates a vague sense of unity while dismissing legitimate concerns.

---

This is awesome! Thanks for posting it. I like how it agrees with the mischaracterization examples and is so detailed it its analysis. I don't agree with all of it of course. Obviously both sides are not finding common ground on the issue and solutions are not forthcoming from our leaders. Wealthy people controlling everything so that they can remain and get even more wealthy is not a conspiracy. I'm not going to take the time to pick it apart and instead try to expand my understanding of the subject and my approach to arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

This is awesome! Thanks for posting it. I like how it agrees with the mischaracterization examples and is so detailed it its analysis. I don't agree with all of it of course. Obviously both sides are not finding common ground on the issue and solutions are not forthcoming from our leaders. Wealthy people controlling everything so that they can remain and get even more wealthy is not a conspiracy. I'm not going to take the time to pick it apart and instead try to expand my understanding of the subject and my approach to arguments.

---

Why does everything you post sound like you are taking a giant MSNBC suppository every morning and regurgitating it up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

Why does everything you post sound like you are taking a giant MSNBC suppository every morning and regurgitating it up?

---

It gave him 8 reasons why he shouldn't try to debate anything of substance, and he loves it.

Competency to perform a job should be the only thing looked at when hiring. Forcing diversity isn't helping anyone out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

It gave him 8 reasons why he shouldn't try to debate anything of substance, and he loves it.

---

You need to straighten out your Eskimo brother.:wedgie:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

It gave him 8 reasons why he shouldn't try to debate anything of substance, and he loves it.

---

Ok, totally geeking out on AI. Not sure what you asked but I asked ChatGPT to analyze the post and got this...

>analyze the following for accuracy, intent, and effectiveness

Quote:

---

Analysis of the Passage1. Accuracy

• The passage presents an attempt to mediate between two opposing viewpoints on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) but includes some inaccuracies and generalizations:
  
  • "DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone."
    
    • Partially true. While DEI itself is not a law, certain legal frameworks (like affirmative action policies and anti-discrimination laws) have been used to promote diversity and inclusion. Some states have also passed laws restricting or requiring DEI initiatives, making enforcement situational.
    
    
  • "There are no quotas in the language of DEI."
    
    • Largely true. DEI policies typically emphasize outreach and inclusion rather than strict quotas. However, some organizations may implement diversity targets, which can sometimes be interpreted as informal quotas.
    
    
  • "No good candidates are being passed up for someone less qualified."
    
    • Debatable. While DEI policies generally aim for merit-based hiring with inclusive practices, critics argue that some hiring processes prioritize diversity over certain qualifications. The reality depends on the organization and implementation.
    
    
  • "Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control."
    
    • Misleading. This likely refers to a misconstrued claim about FAA hiring policies related to neurodiversity and disability inclusion, but it is an exaggerated characterization rather than a mainstream anti-DEI belief.

2. Intent

• The passage appears to start with a confrontational tone ("What is everyone so angry about? Jesus. Your boy won.") before shifting into an attempt at neutral mediation.
• The central intent seems to be promoting the idea that both pro-DEI and anti-DEI advocates misunderstand each other and that their conflict is manipulated by wealthy elites for political control.
• However, the initial aggressive framing might alienate readers before they reach the more conciliatory discussion.

3. Effectiveness

• Strengths:
  
  • The passage correctly identifies a communication breakdown where each side assumes the worst about the other.
  • It acknowledges frustrations on both sides rather than outright dismissing one perspective.
  • The call to redirect anger toward government and economic elites aligns with broader populist critiques of political division.
  
  
• Weaknesses:
  
  • The opening is emotionally charged and could cause resistance from those who feel mocked or dismissed.
  • The FAA reference and some claims about DEI may reinforce misinformation rather than clarify it.
  • The framing of “super elite wealthy people” pushing division is speculative and could be seen as conspiratorial without supporting evidence.

Conclusion

• The passage tries to bridge a divisive debate but is undermined by its tone and some inaccuracies.
• A more neutral and precise approach—focusing on facts, legal nuances, and case studies—would improve its persuasiveness and credibility.
• If the goal is to encourage understanding, removing the confrontational intro and refining key claims would make the message more effective.

---

Love it. Very cool. Learned a few things today. Thanks again for running that post!

Learn some more and look up these things with respect to AI. Pay particular attention to guardrails, training, fine-tuning, policies and human oversight. In fact, do you even know when the AI you used was last trained?

Training on High-Quality Data
Fact-Checking & Verification
Guardrails & Policies
User Feedback & Fine-Tuning
Context Awareness
Human Oversight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Since you like ChatGPT, I asked it to tell me what it thought about this post.

This argument is flawed in several ways, including logical inconsistencies, misrepresentation of perspectives, and a failure to engage with real-world policies and consequences. Here’s a breakdown of what’s wrong with it:
1. Tone and Emotional Manipulation

• The first paragraph is aggressive and dismissive, assuming that "anger" is unjustified and that people should "chill." This straw-mans opposition by implying they have no valid concerns.
• The phrase "your boy won" assumes political partisanship and reduces complex ideological disagreements to tribal loyalty.

2. False Equivalency & Oversimplification

• The argument treats "pro-DEI" and "anti-DEI" as equally misunderstanding each other, but it does not engage with the actual history and reasoning behind DEI policies.
• It assumes both sides are making up what the other thinks, ignoring well-documented arguments and evidence supporting each stance.

3. Misrepresentation of Anti-DEI Beliefs

• The statement “Anti-DEI believes the FAA is hiring mentally challenged people for air traffic control” is an extreme and misleading characterization.
• Many anti-DEI arguments are not just about quotas but about concerns over meritocracy, effectiveness, and unintended consequences of DEI policies.

4. Misrepresentation of Pro-DEI Beliefs

• The claim that “Pro-DEI thinks anti-DEI wants only white men hired for everything” is an exaggeration that misrepresents the concerns of DEI advocates.
• Many pro-DEI advocates are concerned with systemic barriers and increasing access, not enforcing racial hiring.

5. Inaccurate Claims About DEI

• The argument asserts that “DEI is not a law being enforced by anyone” and that “no good candidates are being passed up.” However, DEI policies often influence hiring practices, and some companies have adopted quota-like diversity initiatives.
• Courts have ruled against DEI-related hiring and admissions practices, showing that, at times, race-based policies have disadvantaged certain applicants.

6. Conspiracy Thinking

• The argument suggests that “super elite wealthy people” are orchestrating racial division for their own benefit. While economic interests can shape politics, this vague, unfalsifiable claim distracts from substantive discussion.

7. Contradiction Between Individual vs. Systemic Blame

• The argument shifts from saying "people misunderstand each other" to blaming "ultra-wealthy elites," which contradicts the earlier message about mutual misunderstanding.
• If systemic manipulation is the real problem, then people's anger might be justified rather than irrational.

8. Lack of Specific Policy Engagement

• Instead of addressing real DEI policies and their effects, the argument remains in the realm of perception and feelings.
• It dismisses legitimate concerns about DEI-related hiring, admissions, and training programs without evidence.

Conclusion

This argument is flawed because it relies on emotional appeals, straw-manning, false equivalency, misrepresentation of beliefs, and conspiracy rhetoric. It fails to engage meaningfully with the actual policies and their implications. Instead of fostering real discussion, it creates a vague sense of unity while dismissing legitimate concerns.

---

I plugged it into DeepSeek and...

1. Retarded

- This dude is a fucking retard.

2. "Chill"

- This is somethng Chillmonster would say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

This is awesome! Thanks for posting it. I like how it agrees with the mischaracterization examples and is so detailed it its analysis. I don't agree with all of it of course. Obviously both sides are not finding common ground on the issue and solutions are not forthcoming from our leaders. Wealthy people controlling everything so that they can remain and get even more wealthy is not a conspiracy. I'm not going to take the time to pick it apart and instead try to expand my understanding of the subject and my approach to arguments.

---

Here's all there is to understand:

Jobs should go to the most qualified candidates, regardless of their race, sex, gayness, etc.

Do you agree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Here's all there is to understand:

Jobs should go to the most qualified candidates, regardless of their race, sex, gayness, etc.

Do you agree?

---

Absolutely. We could get into the finer details on types of jobs, goals of businesses and all that but for the most part that is true.

How I view DEI is in the application process. For-profits/non-that adopt a way to expand their pool of candidates who can fill a position is beneficial for everyone involved. Entities looking in places where they would not have looked before for whatever reason is a good thing. As I said before talent can come from anywhere. From rural to urban and everything in between. Creating opportunities for people to better themselves and their situations no matter what walk of life they are from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Absolutely.

---

This where you should have ended your post.

Quote:

---

We could get into the finer details on types of jobs, goals of businesses and all that but for the most part that is true.

How I view DEI is in the application process. For-profits/non-that adopt a way to expand their pool of candidates who can fill a position is beneficial for everyone involved. Entities looking in places where they would not have looked before for whatever reason is a good thing. As I said before talent can come from anywhere. From rural to urban and everything in between. Creating opportunities for people to better themselves and their situations no matter what walk of life they are from.

---

No, it's not "for the most part" true, it's 100% entirely true. Everything else is just a weak attempt to virtue signal.

Quote:

---

the application process

---

Applications should contain zero info about someone's race, sex, gayness, etc. and only relevant information as to whether the person is qualified for the job or not, unless it's literally some niche thing that only people in XYZ group can perform, i.e. men shouldn't be hired to work QA for tampon testing, only women. The ones who weren't born with a dick and balls, that is.

Name 3 non-niche jobs where someone's race/sex/gayness/etc. is relevant as to whether they can perform the job well or not. I'll wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

No, it's not "for the most part" true, it's 100% entirely true. Everything else is just a weak attempt to virtue signal.

---

There are always exceptions but they should not be the rule. For life and death situations absolutely. For go go go capitalist money making companies absolutely. But sometimes qualified simply means awake and able to follow instructions. Sometimes there aren't enough qualified people for every position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Applications should contain zero info about someone's race, sex, gayness, etc. and only relevant information as to whether the person is qualified for the job or not, unless it's literally some niche thing that only people in XYZ group can perform, i.e. men shouldn't be hired to work QA for tampon testing, only women. The ones who weren't born with a dick and balls, that is.

---

Right, exception should not be the rule.

My use of the word application may not have been the best. I'm talking about where employers recruit from. Giving everyone from every background a chance at proving their merit. Thats it. I'm not saying employers should hire anyone over anyone else based on race, sex, sexual orientation, origination, location, income level, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Learn some more and look up these things with respect to AI. Pay particular attention to guardrails, training, fine-tuning, policies and human oversight. In fact, do you even know when the AI you used was last trained?

Training on High-Quality Data
Fact-Checking & Verification
Guardrails & Policies
User Feedback & Fine-Tuning
Context Awareness
Human Oversight

---

Yeah, I'll check it out. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Absolutely. We could get into the finer details on types of jobs, goals of businesses and all that but for the most part that is true.

How I view DEI is in the application process. For-profits/non-that adopt a way to expand their pool of candidates who can fill a position is beneficial for everyone involved. Entities looking in places where they would not have looked before for whatever reason is a good thing. As I said before talent can come from anywhere. From rural to urban and everything in between. Creating opportunities for people to better themselves and their situations no matter what walk of life they are from.

---

SO you DO believe that companies should hire the most qualified candidates... and not hire based upon skin color, sexual orientation, how they identify...

Weird.

That is all people have been saying who are anti-DEI. NOT that "WE ONLY HIRE WHITE MALES INTO EVERY ROLE" like you first said.

Dumbass.

Backlash.. as an old white man.. don't you feel the need to give up your job to whatever minority you feel deserves it more?

Maybe it's time to practice what you preach... the time for talking is over. Lead by deeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

What is everyone so angry about?

---

lol

Pointing out your racism doesn't make me angry.

President Trump fired Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown, Jr. on Friday. Brown, a four-star fighter pilot, is the first Black chief of staff of the Air Force and the second Black general to serve as chairman, following Colin Powell.

The president also nominated Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine for Joint Chief of Staffs chair, claiming he "was passed over for promotion" by Biden. He is a retired 3-star general and has held roles at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Agriculture.

The president just fired someone so he could install someone less qualified for the job.

I thought being against DEI meant being for merit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

President Trump fired Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown, Jr. on Friday. Brown, a four-star fighter pilot, is the first Black chief of staff of the Air Force and the second Black general to serve as chairman, following Colin Powell.

The president also nominated Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine for Joint Chief of Staffs chair, claiming he "was passed over for promotion" by Biden. He is a retired 3-star general and has held roles at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Agriculture.

The president just fired someone so he could install someone less qualified for the job.

I thought being against DEI meant being for merit.

---

LULZ, you think rank equals merit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

President Trump fired Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown, Jr. on Friday. Brown, a four-star fighter pilot, is the first Black chief of staff of the Air Force and the second Black general to serve as chairman, following Colin Powell.

The president also nominated Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine for Joint Chief of Staffs chair, claiming he "was passed over for promotion" by Biden. He is a retired 3-star general and has held roles at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Agriculture.

The president just fired someone so he could install someone less qualified for the job.

I thought being against DEI meant being for merit.

---

New Presidents typically appoint a new Chairman unless they are from the same party as the previous. Nothing surprising here.

The Chairman of the JCS is purely an advisor and has no operational control over anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

President Trump fired Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown, Jr. on Friday. Brown, a four-star fighter pilot, is the first Black chief of staff of the Air Force and the second Black general to serve as chairman, following Colin Powell.

The president also nominated Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine for Joint Chief of Staffs chair, claiming he "was passed over for promotion" by Biden. He is a retired 3-star general and has held roles at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Agriculture.

The president just fired someone so he could install someone less qualified for the job.

I thought being against DEI meant being for merit.

---

How did you figure out that Brown was more qualified and does a better job than Caine?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

How did you figure out that Brown was more qualified and does a better job than Caine?

---

He clearly stated that Brown is a black man. Twice. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

He clearly stated that Brown is a black man. Twice. :rofl:

---

That was literally the only "qualifications" Back listed, other than he was a 4 star general to the other dude's 3 stars. For a split second there I thought Back might actually have somewhat of a point and say the dude Trump nominated had barely served any time in the military or was kicked out for being a drunk or something. Instead he goes on to list numerous qualifications that Trump's dude has.

"He's only a THREE STAR general?! Where is the justice in this world?!"

Just stop already, Back. Holy shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

That was literally the only "qualifications" Back listed, other than he was a 4 star general to the other dude's 3 stars. For a split second there I thought Back might actually have somewhat of a point and say the dude Trump nominated had barely served any time in the military or was kicked out for being a drunk or something. Instead he goes on to list numerous qualifications that Trump's dude has.

"He's only a THREE STAR general?! Where is the justice in this world?!"

Just stop already, Back. Holy shit.

---

Caine has never been a combatant commander, likely what stopped him from getting to 4 stars before. His career was almost entirely in intel, which kind of makes me think he should have been put over the DIA or CIA or something, not necessarily Joint Chiefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

New Presidents typically appoint a new Chairman unless they are from the same party as the previous.

---

Not true. Although new presidents have the power to remove and replace, with Senate confirmation, the chairman of the joint chiefs, presidents normally allow the chairman of the joint chiefs to serve the remainder of his term, even if he was appointed by another president from a different party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Caine has never been a combatant commander, likely what stopped him from getting to 4 stars before.

---

That is exactly correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClydeR

Not true. Although new presidents have the power to remove and replace, with Senate confirmation, the chairman of the joint chiefs, presidents normally allow the chairman of the joint chiefs to serve the remainder of his term, even if he was appointed by another president from a different party.





That is exactly correct.

---

https://www.mikeleake.net/wp-content...01/DpQ9YJl.png

Shut up, queer.

Yeah, its pretty clear that the phrase "DEI hire" is code for "non-white and/or non-male". You can claim otherwise all day but its happening right in front of our eyes. Just own it already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Yeah, its pretty clear that the phrase "DEI hire" is code for "non-white and/or non-male". You can claim otherwise all day but its happening right in front of our eyes. Just own it already.

---

So are you admitting that DEI is all about excluding white men from certain aspects of society?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

So are you admitting that DEI is all about excluding white men from certain aspects of society?

---

Not at all. That's paranoia talking, brother. Don't listen to the billionaires who try to control you with that nonsense.

DEI is in fact nothing more than a way of expanding the search for the best people for any position in any capacity from commercial profit driven corporations to not for profit services. It reinforces the idea that everyone in America, from the wealthy to the poor, has an equal opportunity and is considered for their qualifications/merits rather than their skin color or who they know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Not at all. That's paranoia talking, brother. Don't listen to the billionaires who try to control you with that nonsense.

DEI is in fact nothing more than a way of expanding the search for the best people for any position in any capacity from commercial profit driven corporations to not for profit services. It reinforces the idea that everyone in America, from the wealthy to the poor, has an equal opportunity and is considered for their qualifications/merits rather than their skin color or who they know.

---

You're that dude who bought parsley from the weed dealer in high school, came in the next day telling everyone how high it got you, and then bought more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Yeah, its pretty clear that the phrase "DEI hire" is code for "non-white and/or non-male". You can claim otherwise all day but its happening right in front of our eyes. Just own it already.

---

So DEI = discrimination based on race and sex. Thanks for clearing that up,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

So DEI = discrimination based on race and sex. Thanks for clearing that up,

---

That is the twisted definition by this administration and the elite class used as propaganda to scare and manipulate the white population.

All it really is is expanding the recruitment pool for everyone regardless of color to get an equal shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

That is the twisted definition by this administration and the elite class used as propaganda to scare and manipulate the white population.

All it really is is expanding the recruitment pool for everyone regardless of color to get an equal shot.

---

No it isn't. You're either extremely gullible or extremely full of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

That is the twisted definition by this administration and the elite class used as propaganda to scare and manipulate the white population.

All it really is is expanding the recruitment pool for everyone regardless of color to get an equal shot.

---

I have been forced to take several DEI classes with my corporate job, and this is flat false.

If you are a DEI advocate the word equal is removed from your vocabulary and replaced with equitable. DEI is all about equitable outcomes over equal opportunity.

IE: This means Shaniqua, an impoverished black woman with less formal education & qualifications to the job role, is given an advantage over Tommy, a white male with better qualifications on paper. DEI is inherently racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

All it really is is expanding the recruitment pool for everyone regardless of color to get an equal shot.

---

How is the recruitment pool limited for people of color today?

Speaking of DEI, did y’all hear what those ra-ra-racists over at MSNBC did to Joy Reid? :rofl:

Former MSNBC star Keith Olbermann accuses network of racism for dropping Joy Reid

‘MSNBC fired Joy Reid, and yes it is racist and maybe worse,’ Keith Olbermann said on Monday. ‘Yes, it is designed to keep out people who might think differently.’

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2703644.html

Why is it that liberals implement DEI mandates and rage about racial injustice here, but only demand aid for foreign countries with 90%+ white racial demographics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Yeah, its pretty clear that the phrase "DEI hire" is code for "non-white and/or non-male". You can claim otherwise all day but its happening right in front of our eyes. Just own it already.

---

Pretend you are someone who actually hired people for a moment and you had 10 applications for employment. It's a huge stretch and something that will never happen, but just play along.

Do you require a check mark on ethnicity to make a decision?

There should be ZERO reason why an employer asks what color your skin is. Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furryrat

Why is it that liberals implement DEI mandates and rage about racial injustice here, but only demand aid for foreign countries with 90%+ white racial demographics?

---

Because liberal guilt is a real thing with liberal females and gaslighting is their main objective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Not at all. That's paranoia talking, brother.

---

Sure.

Take a look at this picture, Back. Do you think this represents a lack of diversity that needs to be rectified? Why or why not?

https://i.imgur.com/vJXIUvZ.jpeg

What about this picture? Same questions.

https://i.imgur.com/pBxZDTg.jpeg

Literally every single person on this forums knows the real answers you would give, but I'm curious to see how you would answer.

And just for the record: I see absolutely nothing wrong with either image, assuming everyone pictured is qualified for their position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furryrat

Why is it that liberals implement DEI mandates and rage about racial injustice here, but only demand aid for foreign countries with 90%+ white racial demographics?

---

Source? Quite a few countries receive aid from the United States.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Sure.

Take a look at this picture, Back. Do you think this represents a lack of diversity that needs to be rectified? Why or why not?

https://i.imgur.com/vJXIUvZ.jpeg

What about this picture? Same questions.

https://i.imgur.com/pBxZDTg.jpeg

Literally every single person on this forums knows the real answers you would give, but I'm curious to see how you would answer.

And just for the record: I see absolutely nothing wrong with either image, assuming everyone pictured is qualified for their position.

---

He will just ignore the question and pretend it never was asked.

Why do we not have "DEI" in sports teams? Like I mean there is a huge uproar about NHL and MLB being too white.. but I don't hear the same issues with the NBA and NFL being too black. I only hear about not enough black QBs or enough black coaches or enough black owners.

Why is that?

Also, what is the deal with AI not being able to draw hands and eyes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

How is the recruitment pool limited for people of color today?

---

Barriers to opportunity don't necessarily have to be about race. In fact I'd say income level is probably the biggest. People without generational/earned wealth have less access to the resources needed for the better paying jobs. That's just a fact.

When you look at it from that perspective generational wealth in the African American community is far less than what it should be due to our history. In the Latin community it's the same issue plus anyone who's recently emigrated to this country starting off with less than people who accrued generational wealth.

Remember all we're talking about is giving more people access to work. That's a good thing. But some political leaders bought by wealthy people are spreading this stupid idea that it's some big plot to replace white people. They are playing on fear to control the working class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Barriers to opportunity don't necessarily have to be about race. In fact I'd say income level is probably the biggest. People without generational/earned wealth have less access to the resources needed for the better paying jobs. That's just a fact.

When you look at it from that perspective generational wealth in the African American community is far less than what it should be due to our history. In the Latin community it's the same issue plus anyone who's recently emigrated to this country starting off with less than people who accrued generational wealth.

Remember all we're talking about is giving more people access to work. That's a good thing. But some political leaders bought by wealthy people are spreading this stupid idea that it's some big plot to replace white people. They are playing on fear to control the working class.

---

Jesus Christ. You almost, ALMOST, make a good point (poor people have a disadvantage), but then immediately come back with "So yeah, black people, Latin people, and recent immigrants are all poor so they need more help!"

You do realize even most white families don't have "generational wealth" and their families are either poor or barely middle class right? Of course you do, you are just once again showcasing your racism and for some reason being proud of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Remember all we're talking about is giving more people access to work.

---

Even those who are less qualified for the job?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Jesus Christ. You almost, ALMOST, make a good point (poor people have a disadvantage), but then immediately come back with "So yeah, black people, Latin people, and recent immigrants are all poor so they need more help!"

You do realize even most white families don't have "generational wealth" and their families are either poor or barely middle class right? Of course you do, you are just once again showcasing your racism and for some reason being proud of it.

---

This type of racism is a very common trait with liberal white women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

He will just ignore the question and pretend it never was asked.

---

This is happening right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Jesus Christ. You almost, ALMOST, make a good point (poor people have a disadvantage), but then immediately come back with "So yeah, black people, Latin people, and recent immigrants are all poor so they need more help!"

You do realize even most white families don't have "generational wealth" and their families are either poor or barely middle class right? Of course you do, you are just once again showcasing your racism and for some reason being proud of it.

---

Don't think I in any way endorse exclusion of white people from opportunities. That's not what DEI is about. That's what I've been trying to explain to you. The story you are getting from Republican leadership and the capitalist owners is that it is somehow meant to replace white people. Thats not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Don't think I in any way endorse exclusion of white people from opportunities. That's not what DEI is about. That's what I've been trying to explain to you. The story you are getting from Republican leadership and the capitalist owners is that it is somehow meant to replace white people. Thats not true.

---

Just the ones who are straight and male right?

Sorry if I don't get to every comment and every point made in every post.

Thanks for proving you guys can actually discuss things without too much hostility. Haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Don't think I in any way endorse exclusion of white people from opportunities.

---

And yet you can't answer these questions. I'll ask again, you know, just in case you somehow missed them:

Take a look at this picture, Back. Do you think this represents a lack of diversity that needs to be rectified? Why or why not?

https://i.imgur.com/vJXIUvZ.jpeg

What about this picture? Same questions.

https://i.imgur.com/pBxZDTg.jpeg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

He will just ignore the question and pretend it never was asked.

---

It's like you're psychic.

I love his lame reasoning though:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Sorry if I don't get to every comment and every point made in every post.

---

Oh right, sure sure. The ONLY post you didn't reply to is the one I posted with the pictures. You're just too busy to get around to that one!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

It's like you're psychic.

I love his lame reasoning though:



Oh right, sure sure. The ONLY post you didn't reply to is the one I posted with the pictures. You're just too busy to get around to that one!

---

He could have used that post to reply to your post instead of:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Sorry if I don't get to every comment and every point made in every post.

Thanks for proving you guys can actually discuss things without too much hostility. Haha

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

It's like you're psychic.

I love his lame reasoning though:



Oh right, sure sure. The ONLY post you didn't reply to is the one I posted with the pictures. You're just too busy to get around to that one!

---

I don't think there's anything wrong with either AI generated picture or the situations they attempt to depict. Honestly I don't understand your point here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

I don't think there's anything wrong with either AI generated picture or the situations they attempt to depict. Honestly I don't understand your point here.

---

Come on, Back. You said you wanted to have a discussion. The question clearly wasn't what your thoughts are about the image itself, but the situation presented. Are you saying you see nothing wrong with a hospital filled with nothing but white doctors and nurses? No diversity issue there whatsoever? The hospital doesn't need a DEI department to "fix" this issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

I don't think . . .

---

Should have stopped here and then you would be right for once in your life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Come on, Back. You said you wanted to have a discussion. The question clearly wasn't what your thoughts are about the image itself, but the situation presented. Are you saying you see nothing wrong with a hospital filled with nothing but white doctors and nurses? No diversity issue there whatsoever? The hospital doesn't need a DEI department to "fix" this issue?

---

You will likely have a better conversation with a capybara. Unless it is on how to make excuses for dead Jewish babies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Should have stopped here and then you would be right for once in your life.




You will likely have a better conversation with a capybara. Unless it is on how to make excuses for dead Jewish babies.

---

Capybaras are awesome, don't put them in the same sentence with retards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Don't think I in any way endorse exclusion of white people from opportunities. That's not what DEI is about. That's what I've been trying to explain to you. The story you are getting from Republican leadership and the capitalist owners is that it is somehow meant to replace white people. Thats not true.

---

Why do you judge people by the amount of melanin in their skin and not by their accomplishments and deeds?

Democrats really need to stop being so fucking racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Back

Sorry if I don't get to every comment and every point made in every post.

Thanks for proving you guys can actually discuss things without too much hostility. Haha

---

So, now that you know you missed a post, why not go back up and address it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

It's like you're psychic.

---

Less about bring a psychic and realizing that Backlash does this every.single.time.

Then, when he DOES actually answer a "tough" question and he's proven so wrong.. he will respond with "I wuz just kidding! Sarcasm!"

He's a one page book with a big picture of a retard on the cover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

He's a one page book with a big picture of a retard on the cover.

---

We have found Backlash’s book:
https://i.yourimageshare.com/PlcCrkWEyb.webp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Capybaras are awesome, don't put them in the same sentence with retards.

---

Hey, they are fricking cool, they just aren't really conversational. In fact, they are known for being quiet and agreeable. Unlike Back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Hey, they are fricking cool, they just aren't really conversational. In fact, they are known for being quiet and agreeable. Unlike Back.

---

Back should learn from capybaras and shut the fuck up.