- Feb 21, 2012
- 39,990
- 12,573
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
I thought this was a good video explaining why DEI (Diversity, equity,and inclusion....also known as Didn't Earn It) doesn't ever work.
Although DEI is really just an political ideal to justify discrimination against white men, many people on the left don't genuinely believe that or understand it. Instead, they believe...
1. In diverse societies, businesses and employment should generally reflect the diversity of the population.
2. If #1 isn't true of a company...the reason is bigotry...or some sort of social oppression of whichever group is underrepresented.
I don't recall if the woman in the video is originally Icelandic or if her business is Icelandic and therefore race is far less of a factor than sex....but the general thrust of her argument is....
1. I hired women in IT because women are underrepresented in IT.
2. I no longer hire women (or perhaps no longer favors hiring women) because women are bad IT employees.
Are women bad IT employees....well no...of course not. It does appear that way to her though...because she tried to fulfill point #1 of DEI.
The problem is that far less women than men go into IT careers. Let's say it's 90% men...and 10% women (the actual percentages don't really matter as long as it's more men than women). Within that group of men who make up 90% of potential employees....competency or merit....can be expressed on a standard bell curve.
This is a bell curve.
If we were describing the merit of potential male employees....that first 15.8% describes the weak or bad employees. The middle 68.2% describes the average employees. The right side 15.8% will describe the exceptional employees.
The exact same curve applies to the smaller pool of female potential employees. The only difference is that for every one of them....there are 9 men.
So for this businesswoman to have a "diverse" group of employees where roughly 50% are men and 50% are women....she cannot simply hire the average or exceptional woman, as they will be in high demand by every other IT company that has bought into DEI.
No...she'll have to also hire the bad, weak, incompetent women....who she probably wouldn't have hired if they were men.
The end result of her "diverse, equitable, and inclusive" workplace is one where her typical male employees are far more competent and far more capable than her typical female employees.
I would usually believe that because she's in IT... she would understand this already because it's rather simple statistics. The fact that she's telling this audience quite honestly that her female employees are bad and she doesn't want to keep hiring women suggests that perhaps statistics aren't a strong point of hers.
Watching the video made me think perhaps my friends on the left don't really understand this either. Hopefully I've explained it well enough. DEI is a dismal ideal for most companies....but in sectors like medical professionals and pilots or even law enforcement....it should be terrifying.
The only way to achieve the goals of DEI (point #1) is to quite literally hire those underrepresented potential employees despite a lack of ability, competency, or merit.
I'm not suggesting that a black woman, for example, cannot be an excellent fighter pilot in the airforce. In fact, the first black female fighter pilot retired not long ago....and without any knowledge of her career, I'm inclined to believe she was at least competent if not exceptional....because she earned that job before DEI initiatives existed in the Air Force.
Thoughts?
Although DEI is really just an political ideal to justify discrimination against white men, many people on the left don't genuinely believe that or understand it. Instead, they believe...
1. In diverse societies, businesses and employment should generally reflect the diversity of the population.
2. If #1 isn't true of a company...the reason is bigotry...or some sort of social oppression of whichever group is underrepresented.
I don't recall if the woman in the video is originally Icelandic or if her business is Icelandic and therefore race is far less of a factor than sex....but the general thrust of her argument is....
1. I hired women in IT because women are underrepresented in IT.
2. I no longer hire women (or perhaps no longer favors hiring women) because women are bad IT employees.
Are women bad IT employees....well no...of course not. It does appear that way to her though...because she tried to fulfill point #1 of DEI.
The problem is that far less women than men go into IT careers. Let's say it's 90% men...and 10% women (the actual percentages don't really matter as long as it's more men than women). Within that group of men who make up 90% of potential employees....competency or merit....can be expressed on a standard bell curve.
This is a bell curve.
If we were describing the merit of potential male employees....that first 15.8% describes the weak or bad employees. The middle 68.2% describes the average employees. The right side 15.8% will describe the exceptional employees.
The exact same curve applies to the smaller pool of female potential employees. The only difference is that for every one of them....there are 9 men.
So for this businesswoman to have a "diverse" group of employees where roughly 50% are men and 50% are women....she cannot simply hire the average or exceptional woman, as they will be in high demand by every other IT company that has bought into DEI.
No...she'll have to also hire the bad, weak, incompetent women....who she probably wouldn't have hired if they were men.
The end result of her "diverse, equitable, and inclusive" workplace is one where her typical male employees are far more competent and far more capable than her typical female employees.
I would usually believe that because she's in IT... she would understand this already because it's rather simple statistics. The fact that she's telling this audience quite honestly that her female employees are bad and she doesn't want to keep hiring women suggests that perhaps statistics aren't a strong point of hers.
Watching the video made me think perhaps my friends on the left don't really understand this either. Hopefully I've explained it well enough. DEI is a dismal ideal for most companies....but in sectors like medical professionals and pilots or even law enforcement....it should be terrifying.
The only way to achieve the goals of DEI (point #1) is to quite literally hire those underrepresented potential employees despite a lack of ability, competency, or merit.
I'm not suggesting that a black woman, for example, cannot be an excellent fighter pilot in the airforce. In fact, the first black female fighter pilot retired not long ago....and without any knowledge of her career, I'm inclined to believe she was at least competent if not exceptional....because she earned that job before DEI initiatives existed in the Air Force.
Thoughts?
