DEI

[UrHuckleberry]

Let me see if I get this, so, you're saying that the way to ensure there is no discrimination is to discriminate. Ok, I get it. Typical Dem logic. Do you even read what you write?

HWT

Can you advise which sentence you found to mean that I think we should discriminate?

 

[scotchtiger]

Done, I don’t agree with discrimination. In fact, the majority of DEI programs, the entire point is just to ensure that you aren't discriminating.

Acknowledgment or support, making people feel welcome, broadening and making sure your recruiting doesn’t limit you (blind initial stage recruiting for example, removing identifying language in initial screen; literally means you ensure you’re hiring the most qualified), adding ramps so you could hire qualified disabled candidates, having policies that addresses pay disparities (not paying an entry level woman more than a senior male, but ones than ensure the opposite doesn’t happen). Making skill based hiring in general.

Not saying you’re doing this, but a buuuuunch of people seem to be mistaking DEIA with affirmative action and quotas. And using it as a catch all for everything “woke” they don’t like.

The entire idea behind a lot of DEI programs is to review your policies and procedures to ensure you aren't discriminating. Wether in the way you recruit (do you only recruit in places where you only receive a certain type of candidate), in your interview practices (standardizing the questions you ask, etc to ensure you aren't bringing conscious or unconscious biases to your decision making, but instead are hiring the most qualified candidates on qualifications ALONE).

DEI isn't about discriminating in the way you've been led to think about it, because it's not about hiring the less qualified applicant, it's to ensure the less qualified applicant isn't hired over the more qualified DEI candidate. It's a way to get more applicants into the pool who might otherwise have been unaware of the job or felt they were unwelcome to apply.

It's just not the boogeyman this admin is making it out to be and this cruel backlash that seeks to dehumanize decent people who are just doing their jobs is disgusting.

They are taking this way too far as this example shows. @fatpiggy are you aware of what just happened in your neck of the woods? Ashley Hall has a yearly event to introduce girls to engineering and they had to cancel it this year due to a communication from the Trump administration that it violates Trump's executive order. Are you ok with that?

DEI definitely gets lumped in with affirmative action and quotas. And those are generally part of what people perceive DEI as being focused on.

I get the intent of DEI programs and if they are executed as you both describe, sure, that's not a bad thing. But that's not the case in reality. Two quick examples:

I work for a pre-IPO company. Two years ago, we had a management consultant come in and tell us that our leadership team wasn't diverse enough and that it would negatively impact our IPO. Nevermind the fact that we have people born in 4 different countries on our leadership team, which provides tons of the diversity of perspective sought by these types of initiatives. But there were no "people of color," so we're not diverse enough.

And we know that colleges discriminate based on race. That's been declared as illegal now (correctly so) and groups are suing universities for discrimination. Here's the first link on Google of this happening with CA universities.

Here's the deal. We should all be inclusive and kind and accommodating. But I shouldn't get shit for not manufacturing diversity on my leadership team. And my blond-haired, blue-eyed sons shouldn't be passed over by less qualified students for college admission. Period.

And people are sick of that shit. Rightfully so.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

DEI definitely gets lumped in with affirmative action and quotas. And those are generally part of what people perceive DEI as being focused on.

I get the intent of DEI programs and if they are executed as you both describe, sure, that's not a bad thing. But that's not the case in reality. Two quick examples:

I work for a pre-IPO company. Two years ago, we had a management consultant come in and tell us that our leadership team wasn't diverse enough and that it would negatively impact our IPO. Nevermind the fact that we have people born in 4 different countries on our leadership team, which provides tons of the diversity of perspective sought by these types of initiatives. But there were no "people of color," so we're not diverse enough.

And we know that colleges discriminate based on race. That's been declared as illegal now (correctly so) and groups are suing universities for discrimination. Here's the first link on Google of this happening with CA universities.

Here's the deal. We should all be inclusive and kind and accommodating. But I shouldn't get shit for not manufacturing diversity on my leadership team. And my blond-haired, blue-eyed sons shouldn't be passed over by less qualified students for college admission. Period.

And people are sick of that shit. Rightfully so.

I am fine with much of that. I think discrimination should be illegal. But I think people are using the term DEI as a stand in for anything they don't like right now and a feeling of overall grievance, and a lot of honestly great policies for both sides are getting caught up (example given above, blind resume viewing for example protects everyone). Sort of like separation of church and state actually protects religion as well. Keeps the state out of your church, and protects kids in public schools from taught religions or teachings you don't like or support as well (which I would think Christians want, what if there is a Muslim principal?).

 

[Spencer_York]

The only people who complain about DEI are 1) mediocre white men who are mad that women, people of color, etc are getting more of a say in society and 2) people who don't actually know what it is.

 

[fatpiggy]

I don't doubt we all use it in our daily lives, but the point of a lot of what I was describing was removing it as much as possible. If used correctly, it would eliminate or curb the type of discrimination that conservatives are concerned about by a liberal decision maker. If you are blind judging resumes or qualifications, and all the most qualified candidates are white males, then those would be the only candidates that make it through the blind screening to schedule for an interview. Adding ramps (like the ones that Ken Paxton used due to DEI initiatives in Texas to wheelchair to sign a bill getting rid of DEI initiatives that allowed him to be there in that wheelchair), doesn't require that you hire an unqualified disabled person, it just allows you to hire a qualified person.

I am truly against discrimination. I don't think being a white male should at all be disqualifying (I am one lol).

DEI does not allow him to be there in that wheelchair. The ADA allows him to be there.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

DEI does not allow him to be there in that wheelchair. The ADA allows him to be there.

That's fair. I was wrong on that. Agree with you.

Do think a lot of DEI programs include accessibility and work on making sure in advance you are a place that qualified people with disabilities feel able to apply.

 

[Spencer_York]

Preferential hiring for Veterans is DEI. A lot of common sense things are DEI. Complaining about DEI is just a way for people to drop a hard R

 

[fatpiggy]

Preferential hiring for Veterans is DEI. A lot of common sense things are DEI. Complaining about DEI is just a way for people to drop a hard R

What common sense things require discrimination by the government?

 

[fatpiggy]

That's fair. I was wrong on that. Agree with you.

Do think a lot of DEI programs include accessibility and work on making sure in advance you are a place that qualified people with disabilities feel able to apply.

Accessibility seems fine, just separate any skin color requirements (DEI) and it's all good in my book.

 

[MTTiger19]

What common sense things require discrimination by the government?

All of them apparently. We need them to tell us how to spend our money and who private businesses are allowed to hire. I notice not one of them responded to my posts. Meaning they have no answer or their narrative has been destroyed.

 

[MTTiger19]

That's fair. I was wrong on that. Agree with you.

Do think a lot of DEI programs include accessibility and work on making sure in advance you are a place that qualified people with disabilities feel able to apply.

This is called the ADA and the Civil Rights bill. Both passed decades ago. You don’t need additional programs that use race or sexuality as “qualifications”. It’s wrong. Full stop.

If the it’s good for business it’s good for everyone. I want to see a boycott and protest of both the nba and nfl today. Call it like it is if we are going to discriminate. Well over 80% of people employed by the nba are black. That’s not representative of the country. You must do something about this now. It’s not fair or representative of our society and my guess is a lot of whites were not invited to participate in a lot of these recruiting events and interviews. This is immoral and wrong. It must be stopped today.

See how dumb that sounds?

You seem sensible too, hope this makes sense and you can see it for what it is.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

This is called the ADA and the Civil Rights bill. Both passed decades ago. You don’t need additional programs that use race or sexuality as “qualifications”. It’s wrong. Full stop.

If the it’s good for business it’s good for everyone. I want to see a boycott and protest of both the nba and nfl today. Call it like it is if we are going to discriminate. Well over 80% of people employed by the nba are black. That’s not representative of the country. You must do something about this now. It’s not fair or representative of our society and my guess is a lot of whites were not invited to participate in a lot of these recruiting events and interviews. This is immoral and wrong. It must be stopped today.

See how dumb that sounds?

You seem sensible too, hope this makes sense and you can see it for what it is.

I still feel like you are adding that race or sexuality are qualifications. That's my entire point. I think you are making it something it is not. So you are arguing against things that already are illegal. If someone is requiring those things, they wouldn't stand against legal challenge.

I am saying that the NBA/NFL have qualifications/skills, and they have things like the combine that can also test those things. And so players like Cooper Dejean that are actually qualified will get their shot. That is what I am saying the goal is. That is what I think a lot of DEI programs actually do. If it is proven that qualified white players are being excluded due to their race, I absolutely disagree with that. I keep saying that a lot of DEI programs are removing potential biases upfront to ensure that we are actually hiring and advancing people based on qualifications, and that protects the white male in the same way it can the black woman with a non-standard name.

I feel like you are arguing against what you think something is, and not what I am actually communicating. Can you find a major policy at a company that you think I would support? Not like "big companies are requiring black people are hired" or something like that, unless you can find an actual policy stating that. Because most actual DEI programs, that is not what they are doing. It is what people are saying they are doing.

What I am saying is people are making it out to be a boogeyman. i am fully against discrimination and hiring based on skin color or sexual orientation alone. Period. Any specific policy that requires this should be illegal and already is actually illegal.

 

[PalmettoTiger1]

Please respond to my post above about Ashley Hall. Do you agree with that?

I wish we could ask Former First Lady Barbara Bush Class of 43 what she could add to this conversation

 

[PalmettoTiger1]

I still feel like you are adding that race or sexuality are qualifications. That's my entire point. I think you are making it something it is not. So you are arguing against things that already are illegal. If someone is requiring those things, they wouldn't stand against legal challenge.

I am saying that the NBA/NFL have qualifications/skills, and they have things like the combine that can also test those things. And so players like Cooper Dejean that are actually qualified will get their shot. That is what I am saying the goal is. That is what I think a lot of DEI programs actually do. If it is proven that qualified white players are being excluded due to their race, I absolutely disagree with that. I keep saying that a lot of DEI programs are removing potential biases upfront to ensure that we are actually hiring and advancing people based on qualifications, and that protects the white male in the same way it can the black woman with a non-standard name.

I feel like you are arguing against what you think something is, and not what I am actually communicating. Can you find a major policy at a company that you think I would support? Not like "big companies are requiring black people are hired" or something like that, unless you can find an actual policy stating that. Because most actual DEI programs, that is not what they are doing. It is what people are saying they are doing.

What I am saying is people are making it out to be a boogeyman. i am fully against discrimination and hiring based on skin color or sexual orientation alone. Period. Anything specific policy that requires this should be illegal and already is actually illegal.

if the high lighted is what you believe then you are totally against DEI

 

[MTTiger19]

I still feel like you are adding that race or sexuality are qualifications. That's my entire point. I think you are making it something it is not. So you are arguing against things that already are illegal. If someone is requiring those things, they wouldn't stand against legal challenge.

I am saying that the NBA/NFL have qualifications/skills, and they have things like the combine that can also test those things. And so players like Cooper Dejean that are actually qualified will get their shot. That is what I am saying the goal is. That is what I think a lot of DEI programs actually do. If it is proven that qualified white players are being excluded due to their race, I absolutely disagree with that. I keep saying that a lot of DEI programs are removing potential biases upfront to ensure that we are actually hiring and advancing people based on qualifications, and that protects the white male in the same way it can the black woman with a non-standard name.

I feel like you are arguing against what you think something is, and not what I am actually communicating. Can you find a major policy at a company that you think I would support? Not like "big companies are requiring black people are hired" or something like that, unless you can find an actual policy stating that. Because most actual DEI programs, that is not what they are doing. It is what people are saying they are doing.

What I am saying is people are making it out to be a boogeyman. i am fully against discrimination and hiring based on skin color or sexual orientation alone. Period. Any specific policy that requires this should be illegal and already is actually illegal.

The words are - diversity, equity and inclusion. Those are their words that they chose. I’m not making up anything. That’s what they are calling it. And those words do not mean what you are claiming they mean. Period.
And your copper dejean example is great bc it shows how the real world operates. It’s not some cloak and dagger klan leaders running the world. It’s people, imperfect yes, trying to do what’s best for their business and their lives. Cooper is in the league because he earned it. Not bc dei got him a combine invite. That’s asinine. DEI was and always will be about taking from more qualified candidate to give to a more diverse candidate. It’s literally the name of the program bro.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

The words are - diversity, equity and inclusion. Those are their words that they chose. I’m not making up anything. That’s what they are calling it. And those words do not mean what you are claiming they mean. Period.
And your copper dejean example is great bc it shows how the real world operates. It’s not some cloak and dagger klan leaders running the world. It’s people, imperfect yes, trying to do what’s best for their business and their lives. Cooper is in the league because he earned it. Not bc dei got him a combine invite. That’s asinine. DEI was and always will be about taking from more qualified candidate to give to a more diverse candidate. It’s literally the name of the program bro.

k bro, have a good one

 

[MTTiger19]

k bro, have a good one

You too. Try websters.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

You too. Try websters.

Appreciate it, very helpful.

 

[dpic73]

That’s asinine. DEI was and always will be about taking from more qualified candidate to give to a more diverse candidate. It’s literally the name of the program bro.

It's wild to me that you're arguing with two people who have first-hand experience with this subject and you're calling them liars SMH.

I'll give you my example so it hopefully gives you a better understanding. One of our main clients - Apple - asked us, and other companies they work with, to make an effort to diversify our workforce. Our owner hadn't previously thought about it much but thought maybe it was a good idea and he decided to put some effort into it. We probably ended up hiring one candidate who we wouldn't have previously been aware of, and she turned out to be a superstar, a home-run hire and she deserved it. She has absolutely made our company better.

But for whatever reason, my company is one that mostly white males are interested in, so other than her, all other hires were white males, not because they were white but because they were the most qualified and best fits. No one came away harmed by any of this, no one was discriminated against and Apple didn't penalize us in any way, but we did end up with one excellent addition to our team.

The hysteria around this subject does not match the reality no matter how many tweets you saw on Xchan. Get over it dude.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[MTTiger19]

It's wild to me that you're arguing with two people who have first-hand experience with this subject and you're calling them liars SMH.

I'll give you my example so it hopefully gives you a better understanding. One of our main clients - Apple - asked us, and other companies they work with, to make an effort to diversify our workforce. Our owner hadn't previously thought about it much but thought maybe it was a good idea and he decided to put some effort into it. We probably ended up hiring one candidate who we wouldn't have previously been aware of, and she turned out to be a superstar, a home-run hire and she deserved it. She has absolutely made our company better.

But for whatever reason, my company is one that mostly white males are interested in, so other than her, all other hires were white males, not because they were white but because they were the most qualified and best fits. No one came away harmed by any of this, no one was discriminated against and Apple didn't penalize us in any way, but we did end up with one excellent addition to our team.

The hysteria around this subject does not match the reality no matter how many tweets you saw on Xchan. Get over it dude.

You’re telling me, apple, a publicly traded company, told your company they needed to hire a more diverse workforce? Why would they do that? How would they know if your workplace was diverse to begin with? When you submit your work to them do you tell them this is only done by white people?

Glad, as you say, apple, the publicly traded company, didn’t penalize your company (in any way).

 

[hinds62]

I don't doubt we all use it in our daily lives, but the point of a lot of what I was describing was removing it as much as possible. If used correctly, it would eliminate or curb the type of discrimination that conservatives are concerned about by a liberal decision maker. If you are blind judging resumes or qualifications, and all the most qualified candidates are white males, then those would be the only candidates that make it through the blind screening to schedule for an interview. Adding ramps (like the ones that Ken Paxton used due to DEI initiatives in Texas to wheelchair to sign a bill getting rid of DEI initiatives that allowed him to be there in that wheelchair), doesn't require that you hire an unqualified disabled person, it just allows you to hire a qualified person.

I am truly against discrimination. I don't think being a white male should at all be disqualifying (I am one lol).

Who besides the interviewer should be involved in the decision making process on who is qualified or not qualified? I certainly hope you don't believe that it should be some governmental person who doesn't understand your business but uses the "one size fits all" approach to determining alleged discrimination on your part!! I think we all believe that unjust discrimination should not occur but having the government "dictate" by rules what is unjust discrimination is unjust discrimination.
I have hired a lot of people in my life and have used what I called just discrimination in my hiring process. It worked then and would still work well in today's hiring climate.

 

[dpic73]

You’re telling me, apple, a publicly traded company, told your company they needed to hire a more diverse workforce? Why would they do that? How would they know if your workplace was diverse to begin with? When you submit your work to them do you tell them this is only done by white people?

Glad, as you say, apple, the publicly traded company, didn’t penalize your company (in any way).

Yes they did and they did it for the same reason many others did after the summer of 2020. They asked for the metrics of our diversity so that's how they knew. It didn't matter if we agreed with it or not, they wanted to do business with companies that shared their values and they are our second biggest client that we couldn't afford to lose. That's the story

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Who besides the interviewer should be involved in the decision making process on who is qualified or not qualified? I certainly hope you don't believe that it should be some governmental person who doesn't understand your business but uses the "one size fits all" approach to determining alleged discrimination on your part!! I think we all believe that unjust discrimination should not occur but having the government "dictate" by rules what is unjust discrimination is unjust discrimination.
I have hired a lot of people in my life and have used what I called just discrimination in my hiring process. It worked then and would still work well in today's hiring climate.

Hiring certainly isn't solely done on paper, and I am not advocating for anyone to make any decisions for someone hiring. The DEI that the government has been shutting down has been government DEI programs, and government funded, not private businesses that are still having them today (certainly a number have announced they have stopped). Do you have any details on where the government has dictated who was hired? What I am saying, and have said repeatedly, is that DEI programs can help make sure that you give everyone a chance. I am not advocating for quotas, forced hiring, reach X amount of employees being X amount diverse, etc. I am saying giving qualified candidates a spot at the table or in the room. Studies have been done and people with "black" or "foreign" names with the same resume as a less exotic name have significant less responses. So DEI programs can help with that. ERGs can help people feel supported (we have them, I am not in them, and think they are done really well, people feel seen and heard, different perspectives are shared, etc and we are all stronger for it).

 

[hinds62]

I still feel like you are adding that race or sexuality are qualifications. That's my entire point. I think you are making it something it is not. So you are arguing against things that already are illegal. If someone is requiring those things, they wouldn't stand against legal challenge.

I am saying that the NBA/NFL have qualifications/skills, and they have things like the combine that can also test those things. And so players like Cooper Dejean that are actually qualified will get their shot. That is what I am saying the goal is. That is what I think a lot of DEI programs actually do. If it is proven that qualified white players are being excluded due to their race, I absolutely disagree with that. I keep saying that a lot of DEI programs are removing potential biases upfront to ensure that we are actually hiring and advancing people based on qualifications, and that protects the white male in the same way it can the black woman with a non-standard name.

I feel like you are arguing against what you think something is, and not what I am actually communicating. Can you find a major policy at a company that you think I would support? Not like "big companies are requiring black people are hired" or something like that, unless you can find an actual policy stating that. Because most actual DEI programs, that is not what they are doing. It is what people are saying they are doing.

What I am saying is people are making it out to be a boogeyman. i am fully against discrimination and hiring based on skin color or sexual orientation alone. Period. Any specific policy that requires this should be illegal and already is actually illegal.

What did Biden say about his process for selecting a VP candidate during his term as president?

 

[UrHuckleberry]

What did Biden say about his process for selecting a VP candidate during his term as president?

No idea. Don't feel like looking it up. Not interested in a gotcha battle. Have a good one.

 

[wrw311]

Hiring certainly isn't solely done on paper, and I am not advocating for anyone to make any decisions for someone hiring. The DEI that the government has been shutting down has been government DEI programs, and government funded, not private businesses that are still having them today (certainly a number have announced they have stopped). Do you have any details on where the government has dictated who was hired? What I am saying, and have said repeatedly, is that DEI programs can help make sure that you give everyone a chance. I am not advocating for quotas, forced hiring, reach X amount of employees being X amount diverse, etc. I am saying giving qualified candidates a spot at the table or in the room. Studies have been done and people with "black" or "foreign" names with the same resume as a less exotic name have significant less responses. So DEI programs can help with that. ERGs can help people feel supported (we have them, I am not in them, and think they are done really well, people feel seen and heard, different perspectives are shared, etc and we are all stronger for it).

This is immediately what I think of DEI initiatives.
I remember being 2 years removed from school, sitting in my bosses offices as he was reviewing resumes, and he was immediately setting aside any resume that had names he didn't want to interview, and all were ethnic names (typically Asian names).

Then a few years later at a totally different job, I'm in a meeting looking around and it's all middle aged white dudes. I did find out that a person I competed with for the job was female. I have zero doubts that me being a white male was beneficial to me landing that job. DEI won't necessarily help this, and it's good that there was a female interviewed (which DEI is supposed to help with) but just mentioning it as a moment that I realized my gender and skin color absolutely gave me a leg up for this role. I'm not apologetic about it, there's nothing I can do about it, but it does make me more supportive of DEI type of initiatives.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

This is immediately what I think of DEI initiatives.
I remember being 2 years removed from school, sitting in my bosses offices as he was reviewing resumes, and he was immediately setting aside any resume that had names he didn't want to interview, and all were ethnic names (typically Asian names).

Then a few years later at a totally different job, I'm in a meeting looking around and it's all middle aged white dudes. I did find out that a person I competed with for the job was female. I have zero doubts that me being a white male was beneficial to me landing that job. DEI won't necessarily help this, and it's good that there was a female interviewed (which DEI is supposed to help with) but just mentioning it as a moment that I realized my gender and skin color absolutely gave me a leg up for this role. I'm not apologetic about it, there's nothing I can do about it, but it does make me more supportive of DEI type of initiatives.

Thank you for sharing. It's just not the boogeyman its being made out to be. And the rogue HR person etc that is making it something it isn't, would be doing so illegally.

 

[MTTiger19]

Yes they did and they did it for the same reason many others did after the summer of 2020. They asked for the metrics of our diversity so that's how they knew. It didn't matter if we agreed with it or not, they wanted to do business with companies that shared their values and they are our second biggest client that we couldn't afford to lose. That's the story

Thank you for sharing. I would submit that ESG was most likely the driver there and not the altruism of Apple. They’re a business, they care for profit. It’s silly to not think otherwise.

 

[MTTiger19]

This is immediately what I think of DEI initiatives.
I remember being 2 years removed from school, sitting in my bosses offices as he was reviewing resumes, and he was immediately setting aside any resume that had names he didn't want to interview, and all were ethnic names (typically Asian names).

Then a few years later at a totally different job, I'm in a meeting looking around and it's all middle aged white dudes. I did find out that a person I competed with for the job was female. I have zero doubts that me being a white male was beneficial to me landing that job. DEI won't necessarily help this, and it's good that there was a female interviewed (which DEI is supposed to help with) but just mentioning it as a moment that I realized my gender and skin color absolutely gave me a leg up for this role. I'm not apologetic about it, there's nothing I can do about it, but it does make me more supportive of DEI type of initiatives.

Should they start blacking out the names? Also what type of work are we talking about?

 

[wrw311]

Should they start blacking out the names? Also what type of work are we talking about?

I'm not an expert in these things with answers on what to do, I was giving my perspective as someone who had these moments in my life that obviously stuck with me.

I'll also answer your question of "what type of work are we talking about?" but may I also ask why that's relevant?
The first part of my previous post regarding resumes was for a Process Engineering role in a manufacturing facility.
The seond part of my previous post was regarding my new (at the time) role as a Sales/Market Manager for a raw material company.
(My background is in engineering, but transitioned to commercial activities after 5 years of being a plant engineer since the commercial world can often use someone who has a strong technical background)

 

[MTTiger19]

Hiring certainly isn't solely done on paper, and I am not advocating for anyone to make any decisions for someone hiring. The DEI that the government has been shutting down has been government DEI programs, and government funded, not private businesses that are still having them today (certainly a number have announced they have stopped). Do you have any details on where the government has dictated who was hired? What I am saying, and have said repeatedly, is that DEI programs can help make sure that you give everyone a chance. I am not advocating for quotas, forced hiring, reach X amount of employees being X amount diverse, etc. I am saying giving qualified candidates a spot at the table or in the room. Studies have been done and people with "black" or "foreign" names with the same resume as a less exotic name have significant less responses. So DEI programs can help with that. ERGs can help people feel supported (we have them, I am not in them, and think they are done really well, people feel seen and heard, different perspectives are shared, etc and we are all stronger for it).

What about this?

• 50 million to fund condoms in Gaza
• $1.5 million to advance DEI in Serbia's workplaces
• $70,000 for the production of a DEI musical in Ireland
• $47,000 on a transgender opera in Colombia
• $32,000 for a transgender comic in Peru
• $37 million to the World Health Organization
• $16 million in funding for institutional contractors in gender development offices
• $4 million of funding for the Center for Climate-Positive Development
• $12 million in support services to the Bureau for Resilience, Environment, and Food Security
• $6 million in non-emergency funding for redundant administrative supports for the Center of Excellence
• $3 million in non-emergency funding to provide evaluation services for planning and learning programs
• $600,000 to fund technical assistance for family planning in Latin America

You support this?

 

[UrHuckleberry]

What about this?

-$1.5 million to advance DEI in Serbia workplaces
- $70,000 for the production of a DEI musical in Ireland
- $47,000 for a trans opera in Colombia
- $32,000 for a trans comic book in Peru

Oh look, more gotcha.

If you're in the Upstate of SC, we can grab a beer or bourbon and talk face to face, but not interested in this back and forth where everything I say, you call me a liar or bro and argue against someone I'm not.

 

[MTTiger19]

Oh look, more gotcha.

If you're in the Upstate of SC, we can grab a beer or bourbon and talk face to face, but not interested in this back and forth where everything I say, you call me a liar or bro and argue against someone I'm not.

I am. I’d love to do that. I don’t drink tho. However, we can still do that. I think you’re sensible and I think you have been misled. Perhaps you could show me some error to my thinking too.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I am. I’d love to do that. I don’t drink tho. However, we can still do that. I think you’re sensible and I think you have been misled. Perhaps you could show me some error to my thinking too.

I work downtown (near the Hyatt) and would grab lunch if that works. Shoot me a DM. (if anyone else would be interested, let me know)

And we have our first thing in common: I think you have been misled as to what DEI is.

 

[MTTiger19]

C

I work downtown (near the Hyatt) and would grab lunch if that works. Shoot me a DM. (if anyone else would be interested, let me know)

And we have our first thing in common: I think you have been misled as to what DEI is.

Cheers to that Huck.

 

[Spencer_York]

What about this?

• 50 million to fund condoms in Gaza
• $1.5 million to advance DEI in Serbia's workplaces
• $70,000 for the production of a DEI musical in Ireland
• $47,000 on a transgender opera in Colombia
• $32,000 for a transgender comic in Peru
• $37 million to the World Health Organization
• $16 million in funding for institutional contractors in gender development offices
• $4 million of funding for the Center for Climate-Positive Development
• $12 million in support services to the Bureau for Resilience, Environment, and Food Security
• $6 million in non-emergency funding for redundant administrative supports for the Center of Excellence
• $3 million in non-emergency funding to provide evaluation services for planning and learning programs
• $600,000 to fund technical assistance for family planning in Latin America

You support this?

The condoms to Gaza thing has been completely debunked as a lie so I can only assume a ton of other of these are lies as well. A lot of these aren't bad at all, especially the money to the WHO. You don't know what you're talking about, you're just angry and assume something is bad.

 

[MTTiger19]

The condoms to Gaza thing has been completely debunked as a lie so I can only assume a ton of other of these are lies as well. A lot of these aren't bad at all, especially the money to the WHO. You don't know what you're talking about, you're just angry and assume something is bad.

Right. The who. How’d they do during Covid with all that money. They came up with masks and quarantine. You’re a buffoon. Hopeless. You are a literal liberal talking point. I’ve never seen anything like that.

Cite the debunk. In this one thread I’ve asked you to cite 5 things and you can’t cite one. What a dipshit.

 

[Spencer_York]

Right. The who. How’d they do during Covid with all that money. They came up with masks and quarantine. You’re a buffoon. Hopeless. You are a literal liberal talking point. I’ve never seen anything like that.

Cite the debunk. In this one thread I’ve asked you to cite 5 things and you can’t cite one. What a dipshit.

Triggered?

 

[Spencer_York]

Right. The who. How’d they do during Covid with all that money. They came up with masks and quarantine. You’re a buffoon. Hopeless. You are a literal liberal talking point. I’ve never seen anything like that.

Cite the debunk. In this one thread I’ve asked you to cite 5 things and you can’t cite one. What a dipshit.

Here, straight from the horses mouth. https://internationalmedicalcorps.org/press-release/international-medical-corps-operations-in-gaza/

Also, yes, funding WHO is very important. They recommend masks (which worked) but they didn’t make us do anything. That was our own state, local, and federal governments