What is DEI, and why is it dividing America?

[TheVat]

12 hours ago, zapatos said:

but the purpose of the mission is not to 'put a woman on the mood because it's never been done before'.

Earth population: 8 billion people - no way this was achieved without putting a woman in the mood.  

[Trurl]

Well I would say NASA is a place that is already diverse and doesn’t need DEI.

Where DEI is needed is primary schools for mentally and physically challenged kids. Now that the department of education is in trouble this may change. Some kids need 5 or more aides.

There is always going to be corruption in the workplace. But DEI can also discriminate. The problem is not white Christian males. Those are hard workers who are on your side. The problem is that government is all about money. Biden gave it away and now Trump destroys agencies to save 2%. And the agencies provide more benefits than they cost. The problem is not DEI. Instead it is a class system of billionaires vs middle class.

[iNow]

14 minutes ago, Trurl said:

I would say NASA is a place that is already diverse

Have you ever looked at their HR data?

15 minutes ago, Trurl said:

The problem is not white Christian males. Those are hard workers who are on your side.

Your bias is blinding, both of us it seems

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, Trurl said:

Well I would say NASA is a place that is already diverse and doesn’t need DEI.

It got more diverse because of DEI. Prior to their efforts to increase diversity it was (as most other places) white male dominated and the efforts of the female scientist at work there was often overlooked or diminished. Especially in leadership positions, NASA is known to be less successful in increasing representation of women and minorities compared to some other agencies.

To paraphrase Ginsburg, throwing out DEI when it has worked (to whatever degree) and is continuing to work to stop discrimination is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.

 

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Trurl said:

Well I would say NASA is a place that is already diverse and doesn’t need DEI.

Based on what? Wishful thinking? The fact the it wasn’t until 1978 that they had a woman astronaut (Sally Ride)?

Once again, no effort to find out, when it’s not difficult to find analyses

https://www.nextgov.com/people/2023/04/nasa-struggles-improve-workforce-diversity/385608/

“NASA struggles to improve workforce diversity”

“In fiscal year 2021, women made up around 35% of the NASA workforce, compared to the federal workforce overall, where women are 45% of the workforce. 

Women make up only 25% of the science and tech workforce at NASA, which makes up about 67% of NASA's 18,000 strong workforce, compared to the 31% representation in the federal government's science and tech workforce overall.”

Quote

There is always going to be corruption in the workplace. But DEI can also discriminate. The problem is not white Christian males. Those are hard workers who are on your side. The problem is that government is all about money. Biden gave it away and now Trump destroys agencies to save 2%. And the agencies provide more benefits than they cost. The problem is not DEI. Instead it is a class system of billionaires vs middle class.

Bullshitting isn’t so effective on a science site. You need
e v i d e n c e

[toucana]

You could hardly make this up, but it appears to be true ...

According to this AP report, one of the very first of over 26,000 images flagged for immediate deletion by  the Defence Department is this photo of Captain Paul Tibbets standing in front of his B-29 Superfortress bomber Enola Gay which dropped the first atomic bomb in history on the Japanese city of Hiroshima on 6 August 1945.

https://apnews.com/article/dei-purge-images-pentagon-diversity-women-black-8efcfaec909954f4a24bad0d49c78074

Quote

 

The vast majority of the Pentagon purge targets women and minorities, including notable milestones made in the military. And it also removes a large number of posts that mention various commemorative months — such as those for Black and Hispanic people and women.

In some cases, photos seemed to be flagged for removal simply because their file included the word ”gay,” including service members with that last name and an image of the B-29 aircraft Enola Gay, which dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had given the military until Wednesday to remove content that highlights diversity efforts in its ranks following President Donald Trump’s executive order ending those programs across the federal government.

 

 

[MSC]

5 hours ago, Trurl said:

There is always going to be corruption in the workplace. But DEI can also discriminate. The problem is not white Christian males. Those are hard workers who are on your side. The problem is that government is all about money. Biden gave it away and now Trump destroys agencies to save 2%. And the agencies provide more benefits than they cost. The problem is not DEI. Instead it is a class system of billionaires vs middle class.

It almost sounds like your problem isn't really with DEI, but that one of the things that isn't often enough explicitly included in those policies, is socioeconomic class. This to me suggests that the better use of your time that would be in line with your values, isn't arguing for getting rid of DEI, but for expanding it. 

There is pragmatic sense in this, as when it comes to actively pursuing a credible case of discrimination on the basis of race or gender or some other protected characteristic, outcome is decided by how much money you can afford to throw at a lawyer, not whether or not a violation of employment law was actually committed. 

However there are some clear misunderstandings about class and a strange focus on billionaires vs the middle class specifically in your comment. Not sure I understand this rather specific portion, as I'm part of the working class and honestly feel that there is a level of privilege the middle class has, that causes them to behave in ways that benefit the billionaires in the long-run anyway, and it usually involves taking advantage of the lower socioeconomic classes or depriving them of access to the necessities of life that enable survival, nevermind the ability to thrive and prosper. 

In the end though, class is just another thing that divides us, but it's the division with the clearest impact and so it's unspoken in comparison with the more cosmetic aspects of difference that people use to drive wedges between humans. 

[Trurl]

13 minutes ago, MSC said:

In the end though, class is just another thing that divides us, but it's the division with the clearest impact and so it's unspoken in comparison with the more cosmetic aspects of difference that people use to drive wedges between humans.

I agree.

As we learned in Soc 101 from the start people starved when others prospered. I tried looking it up but there was a word for the lower class rising up to crush the upper class. I don’t think it ever worked.

From the things I have watched on tv and read about early American history, I arrive at the conclusion that threatening a man’s job caused much racism. It start on the railroads where if you didn’t work they would replace you. It continues to this day with the border. Maybe more BS but it is observation not statistical.

[Phi for All]

19 hours ago, Trurl said:

The problem is not white Christian males. Those are hard workers who are on your side.

OMG, try checking out who really grooms children and abuses them. It's not the drag queens or trans folks, it's white Christian males almost every time you look. Youth pastors, ministers, policemen, white men working hard to abuse positions of authority while they pretend to be "on your side". 

[CharonY]

In other words, folks in position of authority. Also the same being afraid of losing that position to folks who are not like them. Weird that.

[CharonY]

Another very important point that I think has not been mentioned here is the role of DEI to identify inequity in the population. One example we discussed in a different context is maternal death rates. As a whole, the USA has one of the highest maternal death rates among high-income countries. Something like 24/100,000 compared to, say around 6.5/100,000 in the UK or 3.2/100,000 in Germany.

Now, if you look at the data more closely, you can see that the high death rates are more than double in black compared to white women. Pre-pandemic the rate was about 37.3 for black women (per 100,000), 11.8 for Hispanic and 14.9 for White.

During the pandemic there was a general increase, but for black women the rate was 69.3 (1.9x increase), 18.2 for Hispanic (1.5x increase) and  19.1 for White (1.3x increase). Thus, by collecting this more detailed data it is apparent that the health structures in the USA are especially weak for black women and is way better at supporting health for white women. The next step is of course to identify weaknesses and ways to address them. By stopping DEI and related initiatives, the government is blinding itself to this information and money injected into the system will likely disproportionately flow into areas serving white women (even if there is a simple equal distribution) where the health benefits will be the least.

In other words DEI is a system that allows us to go beyond simple narratives and helps us to figure out disparities and address them. It does not mean that all initiatives are successful or even helpful, but the idea of being "woke" in this context merely means that we are collecting and looking at data rather than substituting them with ideology.

[MSC]

12 hours ago, CharonY said:

During the pandemic there was a general increase, but for black women the rate was 69.3 (1.9x increase), 18.2 for Hispanic (1.5x increase) and  19.1 for White (1.3x increase). Thus, by collecting this more detailed data it is apparent that the health structures in the USA are especially weak for black women and is way better at supporting health for white women. The next step is of course to identify weaknesses and ways to address them. By stopping DEI and related initiatives, the government is blinding itself to this information and money injected into the system will likely disproportionately flow into areas serving white women (even if there is a simple equal distribution) where the health benefits will be the least.

Adding to this point; systemic racism has also birthed some very dangerous myths about black people, within medicine. Thicker skin, higher tolerance to pain being a few of those myths. This is one of the reasons why DEI in medicine is clearly needed. These myths also contribute towards health outcomes for black women in labour. Their pain is minimized and ignored a lot of the times. When a white women is in labour, her pain is viewed as information that reflects the difficulty of her condition, if she feels something is wrong, they'll listen. A black woman in labour is far more likely to be dismissed when self reporting their own symptoms. 

The worst thing about it, is that even when faced with these statistics, racists and eugenics espousers will deny these health outcomes have anything to do with different treatment and everything to do with genes and genetics. 

12 hours ago, CharonY said:

In other words DEI is a system that allows us to go beyond simple narratives and helps us to figure out disparities and address them. It does not mean that all initiatives are successful or even helpful, but the idea of being "woke" in this context merely means that we are collecting and looking at data rather than substituting them with ideology.

What I would also add is that even when they aren't successful or helpful, its less to do with DEI as a concept and more to do with the competency of the individuals implementing the policies. To me, it's like listening to people say boxing is a terrible form of self defense, when really the only thing making them say that, is they happened to see someone try to box who happened to suck at boxing. 

As far as I'm concerned, the road to proving that DEI is a bad thing, requires actively proving that each portion of that acronym DEI; Diversity, equity and inclusion, are a net negative towards the thriving of the species, individually and collectively in the long-term. 

As far as I can make out, we owe our current state of humanities progress, to the strength we have in our species diversity, and when we value that diversity we recognize the value of keeping things fair and inclusive, not just from the physiological perspective where psychologically we are pro-social animals, but sociologically too; as the person who cures cancer, eliminates chronic illness, achieves FTL etc could come from any demographic. 

Do we physiologically need there to be a first man/woman/other, Black/White etc person on the moon or Mars? No, sociologically though, you want that inspiration to be impactful for as many as possible because the more people encouraged to do great things for the sake of the species, the better the species. 

I think those against DEI also really have to do a better job of not only explaining why diversity, equity (fairness) and inclusion are bad, but also explaining how they aren't being included in this? Can't be that it excludes white males, because I'm a white male and I do not feel excluded and my social circle has many friendships which transcend national, cultural, racial, class and religious divides and my life feels all the richer for it. Not only that, courts have upheld lawsuits on discrimination grounds where the pursuant was a white male. So clearly DEI laws and policies enabled that lawsuit as yes, advocates of DEI will all tell you the same thing, it's not okay to discriminate against a white male because they are a white male. 

 

20 hours ago, Phi for All said:

OMG, try checking out who really grooms children and abuses them. It's not the drag queens or trans folks, it's white Christian males almost every time you look. Youth pastors, ministers, policemen, white men working hard to abuse positions of authority while they pretend to be "on your side". 

Agreed. +1 Anyone that doubts the truth of this, a quick Google search of "FLDS" or "Catholic sex scandal" should suffice. 

Anecdotally I also read a story of a girl who was about to be date raped by a white guy, and was saved by a drag queen, or as she called "her fairy dragmother." I also walked away from a group of neds (Non-educated delinquent) kicking the shit out of me because of a gay guy I went to school with, getting me TF out of there and putting himself between me and four guys all twice his size.

I'd say the majority of the violence I've experienced in life, has come from my own demography, white guys. 

[CharonY]

4 hours ago, MSC said:

The worst thing about it, is that even when faced with these statistics, racists and eugenics espousers will deny these health outcomes have anything to do with different treatment and everything to do with genes and genetics. 

Well, that argument is typically not in good faith and the way they address it is the current attempt to look into it and to gather better data. This, in a nutshell is what the conservative war against education is all about. Validating their ideology, reality be damned. And it is sad because it took such a long time for health systems to even acknowledge that this type of analyses are needed. Now the US is throwing them out gleefully. Even if the administrations changes, it will take a long while to rebuild that knowledge.

 

4 hours ago, MSC said:

What I would also add is that even when they aren't successful or helpful, its less to do with DEI as a concept and more to do with the competency of the individuals implementing the policies.

Not only that. The issue is that because these are somewhat new concepts, there are still disagreement what the best policies are in the first place. Moreover, most attempts are targeted patchworks to plug obvious issues, but it is not clear how a systemic change would even look like (and much less how to get there). It is one of the big systemic issues and most folks are careful not tear things down too much (as what the current administrations is doing).

4 hours ago, MSC said:

Can't be that it excludes white males, because I'm a white male and I do not feel excluded and my social circle has many friendships which transcend national, cultural, racial, class and religious divides and my life feels all the richer for it. Not only that, courts have upheld lawsuits on discrimination grounds where the pursuant was a white male. So clearly DEI laws and policies enabled that lawsuit as yes, advocates of DEI will all tell you the same thing, it's not okay to discriminate against a white male because they are a white male. 

Again, this is usually not a good-faith situation. Certain white men feel discriminated because the power is starting to swing away from them. But they obviously want to keep sitting on top and need to find ways to justify it. No one really wants to get scrutinized whether they really deserve their position in society. It is easier just to scrutinize the others.

 

4 hours ago, MSC said:

I'd say the majority of the violence I've experienced in life, has come from my own demography, white guys. 

I mean, that is the "normal" situation. Experiences of violence comes from those around you. But event hat is being weaponized. The big talk about violence in communities of color is often amplified and the implicit suggestion is that this is not happening in white communities. It is sadly very common practice to project negative attributes to others. Even in academia it is fairly common, where students (but also faculty) often assume that international students are big cheaters in contrast to nationals. Now, the issue is that there is an implicit moral judgement there without understanding underpinning factors (e.g., they got caught easier due to language issues, they are more likely to fail and have therefore more incentives to cheat, which also applies to low-scoring national students and so on).

The funny bit is that during the pandemic and the use of remote teaching, we basically saw that blatant cheating (including literal copy/pasting of wrong answers) is all over the place and was likely just better hidden among nationals.

[TheVat]

DEI is actually stated in our nation's declaration of Independence, which holds that government should secure the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens.  (we needed a Bill of Rights and Constitution, with many revisions in order to articulate that to where it could begin to be implemented)  It takes a shit-ton of Orwellian Newspeak to obscure this reality.  F all these right-wing snowflakes and their whining litany of grievances.  If you're stupid enough to believe all this anti-woke garbage, you probably are too stupid to be hired for that job you're whining you didn't get.  

[dimreepr]

19 hours ago, TheVat said:

DEI is actually stated in our nation's declaration of Independence, which holds that government should secure the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens. 

Indeed, it's a square peg in a round hole that required a certain amount of cognitive dissonance.

19 hours ago, TheVat said:

It takes a shit-ton of Orwellian Newspeak to obscure this reality.  F all these right-wing snowflakes and their whining litany of grievances.  If you're stupid enough to believe all this anti-woke garbage, you probably are too stupid to be hired for that job you're whining you didn't get.  

I think Stephen Fry was correct in what he said, "The rise of the right is the lefts fault, bc we'd rather be right than effective".

Which is kind of Orwellian, but more Animal Farm...

[swansont]

20 hours ago, TheVat said:

DEI is actually stated in our nation's declaration of Independence, which holds that government should secure the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens. 

All men are created equal literally meant men. White men. Women had few rights, and  if you weren’t white, there’s a good chance you were property. 

And that's the modern republican view - whites being inherently superior - so in a sense it was in the Declaration

 

[toucana]

The Calvin and Hobbes take on DEI - one of the most succinct

Edited 9 minutes ago by toucana
corrected typo 'once'