TBH, as a poor white kid from coal country, DEI based scholarships were quite unfair to me. Busting my ass to survive while these kids who were already better off than me from the start got a free ride. Nonsense.
I don’t have a great answer, but the extreme implementations of these programs and now the extreme removal of them are both wrong.
It should, but America hates poor people. I absolutely feel like this is intentional to deepen the divides, to pit one person against another so we’re so busy with fighting each other they can pick all of our pockets without being noticed.
It was interesting that there was this program my kid qualified for that was DEI oriented. Which I found strange because we are relatively well off and could easily pay for what this program covered.
To their credit, you might have been qualified too, since this program also accepted people under a household income threshold, and as a result had quite a few white boys in it too.
So certain DEI initiatives are flawed in unfair ways. So there’s room for valid criticism.
However, more critically it’s a gigantic dog whistle. The magnitude of the flaws does not call for massive emails demanding everyone snitch at any whiff of DEI and sweeping offices to remove anything deemed DEI aligned and cancelling any hint of celebrating cultural diversity.
So on the one hand I can relate to a discussion of flaws, but in the broader context it seems more to serve the agenda of those blowing the dog whistle.
This anecdote ignores what the broader statistics prove, though. There will always be outliers. But in general, there are groups that are not white kids that are more likely to be disenfranchised and excluded at large scale.
TBH, as a poor white kid from coal country, DEI based scholarships were quite unfair to me. Busting my ass to survive while these kids who were already better off than me from the start got a free ride. Nonsense.
I don’t have a great answer, but the extreme implementations of these programs and now the extreme removal of them are both wrong.
But that should come under equity.
There should be funding to help you.
I think it’s fine to be criticise badly implemented DEI.
It should, but America hates poor people. I absolutely feel like this is intentional to deepen the divides, to pit one person against another so we’re so busy with fighting each other they can pick all of our pockets without being noticed.
You just figured out what Left v Right is all about.
It was interesting that there was this program my kid qualified for that was DEI oriented. Which I found strange because we are relatively well off and could easily pay for what this program covered.
To their credit, you might have been qualified too, since this program also accepted people under a household income threshold, and as a result had quite a few white boys in it too.
Care to describe the extreme implementation?
I think this is an area that is perilous.
So certain DEI initiatives are flawed in unfair ways. So there’s room for valid criticism.
However, more critically it’s a gigantic dog whistle. The magnitude of the flaws does not call for massive emails demanding everyone snitch at any whiff of DEI and sweeping offices to remove anything deemed DEI aligned and cancelling any hint of celebrating cultural diversity.
So on the one hand I can relate to a discussion of flaws, but in the broader context it seems more to serve the agenda of those blowing the dog whistle.
This anecdote ignores what the broader statistics prove, though. There will always be outliers. But in general, there are groups that are not white kids that are more likely to be disenfranchised and excluded at large scale.
Their point seems to be exactly that the bigger point ignores the anecdotes and we shouldn’t do that either?