First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last

Diversity is good

Post Reply
Humms 
14952 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
26 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 9/8/18 , edited 9/9/18

evenstar95 wrote:


Humms wrote:

I agree.

Eating the same thing everyday gets boring, you need to diversify every so often


Yeah sometimes you need a Chinese after you've eaten a white person for breakfast and lunch


Well, don't knock it till you try it.
931 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
32 / M / Scandinavia
Offline
Posted 9/8/18 , edited 9/9/18
Diversity is good when introduced slowly, and properly. What they have in the U.S. and in South Africa, however, is segregation.
1533 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
18 / F / AZ
Offline
Posted 9/8/18 , edited 9/9/18


I think diversity is garbage personally.
Sketcy 
918 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
F / Earth
Offline
Posted 9/8/18 , edited 9/9/18
@ Skimt -- I can't speak for South Africa, but I live in the United States and it is an EXTREMELY diverse place--in fact, it's probably THE most diverse place in the world. It's the only place where people from every race and nationality in the world live, a place where you can't get arrested for sharing your opinions even if it's unpopular, and a place where (unlike some countries) being a different nationality isn't so rare that people stare at you in the market for looking different. Where I live is a pretty average town. Kids of all races hang out, go to school, and socialize with one another constantly. Women are CEOs, lawyers, surgeons, authors, politicians, college professors, and everything else you can imagine.In fact, many times they're promoted just BECAUSE of their gender. So, I'm not sure what you mean by "segregation." Please don't add to stereotypes based off what you see on TV...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for diversity in general, I don't think diversity is a bad thing at all. After all, it takes all people with different strengths, weaknesses, backgrounds, etc to build a community. Yet, being diverse just to have the reputation of being diverse is stupid. People focus WAY too much on it to the point they're being prejudiced without even knowing it. They're objectifying diversity. It's a thing being used to please other people to such an extent that they victimize themselves and others.

If you like a show BECAUSE it has a female lead, and/or a lead from [insert race], or whatever----or if you DISLIKE a show because it doesn't have enough female characters, or because it doesn't have enough [insert race] characters----then you're prejudiced. The word "prejudice" literally means to "pre-judge" something. And being prejudice can make OTHERS prejudice against you as well. For example, even though I'm a girl, the modern push for "strong, female leads that don't need men" has slowly made me prejudice to female leads in general with movies, books, and TV programs (with very few exceptions). I've picked books up from the library and immediately put them back when finding out the protagonist was a girl because, more often than not, it seems very bigoted to me. They're not just telling a story that I can appreciate through a female character. Today, they're often going out of their way to specifically make the point that "she's not a man and doesn't need one." I hate that. And, tbh, it's hypocritical and insincere.

If you're FOCUSING heavily on diversification, then you're being prejudiced. If you take someone at face value (hire someone because of their qualifications, not because of their gender or race. Read a book because it's quality, not because of the gender or race of the characters, etc), that's true diversity. You're noticing their strengths, their weaknesses, and how they contribute based on WHO THEY ARE, not what they look like or where they're from. I could care less about a person's gender, race, or nationality--really. I think it's the dumbest thing ever, and it annoys me that people spend so much energy worrying about it. Are you African-American, Asian, White, Hispanic, whatever? Okay--I don't care. It doesn't make you more or less desirable to me. As long as you've got a good personality, are genuine, and (in a professional environment) get the job done well, then you're okay by me.



12987 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18
It has it's pro's and cons.
mxdan 
12386 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
28 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18


Thank you for sharing.
32997 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18


can you diversify your opinion into the trash


6237 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18
Well, originally they had Nanoha, and then she got kids, so her kids are like the new generation, and then her kids have more kids, for another generation of magical girls. But, nothing beats the original
17516 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
23 / AH / Helipad
Online
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18
Whatever is functional, efficient, and brings about good results is good.

Sometimes diversity is good. Sometimes diversity is bad.
25053 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
778 / The White House
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18
Diversity is nothing more than double speak nowadays.



When you have a company that is mostly white males they talk about it needing diversity.

When you have a company that is mostly females they call it a diverse company.

When you have a company that is mostly <insert whatever the popular minority of today is> then it call it a diverse company.

Apple even sacked one of their diversity chiefs after she made a logical argument instead of using diversity double speak: https://nypost.com/2017/11/17/apples-diversity-chief-lasts-just-six-months/?a=2&utm_source=reddit.com

For the lazy of you: “There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blond men in a room and they’re going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation,” the inaugural diversity chief said." “Diversity is the human experience,” she said, according to Quartz. “I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to the people of color, or the women, or the LGBT.”

Diversity should be about ideas not your skin color. Basing it on skin color is in itself racist because you are making decisions based on skin color just like the KKK did.
5158 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18
One of the biggest problems with diversity is that everyone being created equal doesn't mean that everyone was created to be good at the same stuff or has the same interests.

there are a lot of people who look at job fields and see a lack of men or women, or any specific race and instead of looking into what could be drawing a specific demographic into those jobs and looking into how those jobs could change to better fit the preferences of those that aren't there they just automatically assume racism/sexism.

different races and genders have different cultures and are drawn into different areas of interests and different skill sets to be ideal in different jobs and when you force everyone to do the same thing at the same place you are creating a lot of inequality with those that aren't meant to be there.

of course there are exceptions to everything, but that's what they are is exceptions and you don't regulate for the unusual
37 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
33 / M
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18

Greylurker wrote:


geauxtigers1989 wrote:


Kandyzkiss wrote:
Diversity for the SAKE of diversity is BAD!!!


What does this even mean?



One of the myths is that, Diversity targets for positions result in hiring unqualified people just to meet quota. That if you just hire "the most qualified people" that should be enough.

It's a myth that ignores a couple of realities
1) There are plenty of qualified people who can fill those diversity targets, so there "risk of getting an unqualified person to fill the slot" are minimal.
2) There are frequent unconscious bias that put people from visible minorities behind others despite the fact that they are just as qualified. Diversity Targets are simply a way of evening the playing field.


Nice strawman there

The actual argument is that when you pick people to fill quotas, it's likely you're going to pass on someone MORE qualified. No one is claiming they are hiring unqualified people. It's a completely valid argument and incidentally the only one that makes sense from a business perspective. People should be hired on merit, not their gender/ethnicity/sexuality/religion what ever

Also, i want you to think critically about what you're saying. You're saying diversity targets is a way of evening the playing field. There are 2 massive problems with this

1. The implication that they can't get that job based on merit. Ironically, it then goes against your claim that the diversity hires are just as qualified

2. It's discrimination, plain and simple. The end does not justify the means. By supporting diversity hires you're no better than the racist supporting white people only hires

Finally, i'd really like to see you offer scientific proof (as in, peer reviewed by reputable scientists, not some liberal sociologist writing an opinion piece) that minorities are 'put behind' as you claim. I doubt you can find that without resorting to a questionable cause fallacy - correlation does not imply causation
100588 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
45 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18
So you are saying that things like the recent events at Tokyo University where Women's scores in medicine were deliberately lowered, simply because they were women don't happen then?

Like it or not there are biases to be found everywhere, very often at the higher levels of any organization, where the old guard are set in their ways and see the world through an outdated lens.

If efforts are not made to force change, there will not be change
37 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
33 / M
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18

Greylurker wrote:

So you are saying that things like the recent events at Tokyo University where Women's scores in medicine were deliberately lowered, simply because they were women don't happen then?

Like it or not there are biases to be found everywhere, very often at the higher levels of any organization, where the old guard are set in their ways and see the world through an outdated lens.

If efforts are not made to force change, there will not be change

Do you have evidence of your claim that minorities are 'put behind'?

PS Women aren't minorities, just in case you're not aware

931 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
32 / M / Scandinavia
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18

Sketcy wrote:

So, I'm not sure what you mean by "segregation." Please don't add to stereotypes based off what you see on TV...


Subculture. Subculture is the result of lumping immigrants together geographically instead of spreading them out. It is the crux of racism, and is an issue that has been combated in European countries by setting quotas of immigrants per sector over time, so long as the location or relocation does not separate families. The integration process also includes education. These are policies that stem from the mistakes made by among other the U.S., South Africa, and Germany (pre-WW1 and pre-WW2), at times when there was little to no former knowledge around the proceedings necessary when taking in waves of immigrants and liberating mass of slaves. Today, not dealing with these policies knowing what we know now, is the same as indirectly segregating people, or more specifically letting the people segregate themselves. Those of dark complexion are largely segregated from those of lighter complexion in America, but not because of some invisible hand. It's because of past ignorance and neglect, and a garbage subculture perpetuated by mainstream media.
100588 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
45 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18

jn2002dk wrote:


Greylurker wrote:

So you are saying that things like the recent events at Tokyo University where Women's scores in medicine were deliberately lowered, simply because they were women don't happen then?

Like it or not there are biases to be found everywhere, very often at the higher levels of any organization, where the old guard are set in their ways and see the world through an outdated lens.

If efforts are not made to force change, there will not be change

Do you have evidence of your claim that minorities are 'put behind'?

PS Women aren't minorities, just in case you're not aware




what would you consider acceptable evidence then; the government studies do in many nations around the world, the United nation studies. Or is it just the ones from Britbart that support the illusion that whites are the ones under attack that you consider valid?


(Tokyo university is a very recent example of Bias, or again would you like to deny that Bias exists?)

Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18
I'm happy I'm mixed. GOOOO IIITAAALLLYYYYY they always have the best food
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.