Donald Trump tells Apple to "get rid" of diversity programs after shareholders back them

[Kirby1]

DEI is 100% racist and sexist

If company need to hire 10 people.... and let say that top 10 candidates were all males and Asian/white .... if you hire people based on who is most qualified then then those 10 should all get that job... Under DEI policy some of these top 10 candidates will be replaced by less qualified candidate because of their race/gender. How is that not racist and sexist... If I more qualified than other person but I was not chosen because of my race/gender then thats 100% racist and sexist and unfair

You COMPLETELY failed to understand what DEI is and what it aims to do.

It's a well-documented fact that when candidates are equally qualified, POC are significantly less likely to be hired vs white people. DEI policies simply aim to correct that imparlance. They're not all perfect, but you clearly have zero sense of what this topic is even about and all you are capable of is spouting weak-minded rage bait comments every time the thread quiets down enough that you don't think anyone will respond directly to it.

 

[Ohnooze]

There was barely 10 comments when I read this lol

And it's going so well.....

 

[Joey Rakas]

Ya'll need to chill and practice some fruitages of the spirit. No law against those. They will help every human on this planet. It will make all these arguments on this thread cease None of us on this thread are going to fix nor change the political and humanitarian issues this world is facing. That is a fact. No source needed. Calling people out on the web has the same effect now as it did 20-30 years ago. Say your peace and move on.

 

[ErinNotAmerican]

My two sense after skimming the comments:

No one is hiring an unqualified person because of their race. That would be *****ic. There are always multiple qualified people applying for a job. If someone is belittling you as a token hire undeserving of your position, they are racist. Had they done the hiring, not had DEI, they'd probably favour not hiring you simple because of race. If you feel like you are undeserving of your job, consider your feelings may be the standard imposters syndrome as well.

The point of DEI is to make sure no one is discriminating minorities while hiring. Without it, anyone can descriminate against whoever they chose. The goal of DEI is to get to a point where you do not need it. The goal is to normalize a diverse environement. If you all think the USA is there, scrap it. The point is non-minorities have more opportunities because they grew up with more wealth, more opportunities, and more connections already in the workplace.

 

[Karlos95]

Before DEI was a thing, I never assumed someone was in a position because of the colour or heritage, instead, I thought they belonged there because how else did they get there without merit. Now DEI has turned capable people into poster boys because the looney left think so little of people who aren't white... It has literally created a situation that now if they aren't white that they'll be a question, did they get here on merit or just because of a quota...

DEI is stupid and divisive to say the least. If you are good at something, you will get hired, regardless of what you look like or where you came from. There might be fringe businesses that don't hire because of those things, but like they cared about DEI policy in the first place. You just ****ed it up for the people who actually deserve to be in that job.

 

[Arthurik_jan]

I dunno, @Kirby1, I read through the whole thing and the impression that I got was you wanted Squid Surprise to be wrong or proven wrong more than actually to understand his stance first and then actually educate him, if he even needs to be educated in the first place.

You both seem like articulate clever individuals. You have a chance to actually have a meaningful conversation with this guy. I seriously worry by reading this, because if you can't have a conversation with him (and he's not even a die hard republican), who CAN you have a conversation with? Why not serve as an example here on a minuscule scale and show how cooperation is done? Your rhetoric is divisive, dude, think about it. You feel like he is saying DEI is bad and is not providing evidence for it, I get that, but I believe he stated something that had a ring of truth to it: Things like this take time to truly find out, whether they work or not. AND he wasn't 100% against it in the first place.

DEI is definitely not the reason why societies in so many countries around the world are suffering, especially economically at the moment. But it definitely is such a strong and divisive subject that it easily obstructs and blinds us to seeing the truth and as clearly demonstrated here, stops us from working together.

 

[Eldrach]

I think what needs to be taken from all of this is that Trump is catering to his zealots, as cutting DEI will allow him to replace any people in higher ranking goverment positions with handpicked choices from his rich campaign contributors. Taking DEI out of the equation he can surround himself with Yes people with no restrictions.
It will also help the oligarchy by allowing them to reject applications from people that might be qualified - but could be a «hassle» to hire, wheelchair users for instance. «Can’t hire you - would have to buy a wheelchair elevator - and as you know, they cost about as much as the helicopter ride I took to work today».
«I see you are qualified, but you’re a 28 year old lady that might get pregnant in a couple of years..we have to remove you from the pile».
These are both examples that although not communicated this way to the applicant - would still lead to not getting jobs if there were no checks and balances on ensuring a forced diversity.
Probably not relevant for all the Trump supporters that are happy it’s finally time to «get them all….Parasites..all of them»

 

[Kirby1]

I dunno, @Kirby1, I read through the whole thing and the impression that I got was you wanted Squid Surprise to be wrong or proven wrong more than actually to understand his stance first and then actually educate him, if he even needs to be educated in the first place.

You both seem like articulate clever individuals. You have a chance to actually have a meaningful conversation with this guy. I seriously worry by reading this, because if you can't have a conversation with him (and he's not even a die hard republican), who CAN you have a conversation with? Why not serve as an example here on a minuscule scale and show how cooperation is done? Your rhetoric is divisive, dude, think about it. You feel like he is saying DEI is bad and is not providing evidence for it, I get that, but I believe he stated something that had a ring of truth to it: Things like this take time to truly find out, whether they work or not. AND he wasn't 100% against it in the first place.

DEI is definitely not the reason why societies in so many countries around the world are suffering, especially economically at the moment. But it definitely is such a strong and divisive subject that it easily obstructs and blinds us to seeing the truth and as clearly demonstrated here, stops us from working together.

Your impression is wrong.

Squid has no real stance that's worth discussing because his opinions are not based on reality but simply a preconceived idea and agenda for what he wants to be true above all else. I don't waste time getting into details with people who base their reasoning that way.

DEI is a simple concept that has no one specific form or policy, and focusing on cherry picked examples that support a biased argument is a waste of time and a logical fallacy. I don't waste time debating logical fallacies, I just point them out.

A serious person doesn't use logical fallacies in their arguments. I don't put much effort into debating non-serious people.

 

[Arthurik_jan]

Your impression is wrong.

Squid has no real stance that's worth discussing because his opinions are not based on reality but simply a preconceived idea and agenda for what he wants to be true above all else. I don't waste time getting into details with people who base their reasoning that way.

DEI is a simple concept that has no one specific form or policy, and focusing on cherry picked examples that support a biased argument is a waste of time and a logical fallacy. I don't waste time debating logical fallacies, I just point them out.

A serious person doesn't use logical fallacies in their arguments. I don't put much effort into debating non-serious people.

There comes a time when a conversation becomes so convoluted that looking for who was right and who was wrong becomes truly counter-productive and this, what you are saying, is exactly that time.

Anyway, I am not looking to get into this debate. All I wanted to say was - you could've actually had a really nice conversation there with Squid and you blew it

 

[BogdanR]

Long story short, all of the appointees of this Administration MUST be DEI.
I say this because anyone looking at their qualifications can't possibly reach any other conclusion.

When things like the validity of vaccines or Jan.6 features prominently on the list of questions asked, it surely means the Administration is low on their "conspiracy theorist" quota and would fill those positions with the most competent people they can find within those parameters.

So DEI is alive and well ladies and gentleman, why waste any more breath on the subject.

 

[maxxcool7421]

Look how scared republikkkans are of brown people....

 

[Kirby1]

There comes a time when a conversation becomes so convoluted that looking for who was right and who was wrong becomes truly counter-productive and this, what you are saying, is exactly that time.

Anyway, I am not looking to get into this debate. All I wanted to say was - you could've actually had a really nice conversation there with Squid and you blew it

I guarantee a "nice conversation" based on facts and reality with someone like squid was never in the rhelm of reasonable possible outcomes.

If you're looking for a right or wrong, those of us who subscribe to reality are clearly right. Those of us who bash DEI based on current political rhetoric and not facts are clearly wrong.

All and all, I haven't really made any serious claims about it on way or the other here. I have just maintained that baseless opposition to what is a broad concept is wrong, disingenuous, and stupid.

If I have a claim, it's that DEI is supposed to be a measured reaction to facts that show equally qualified POC get hired less often. Most businesses that initiate a DEI policy benefit from it, but there are a few outliers that just messed it up in some small way, or more likely just didn't see a measurable benefit, and biased people like to use those as out of context examples against DEI as a whole concept.

But this is less a claim by me and more just a description of reality in th context of DEI.

 

[Kirby1]

Look how scared republikkkans are of brown people....

Freudian slip.

 

[GFitzpatrick47]

It discredits my real accomplishments as just "dei" practices. You're so busy defending DEI that you're ignoring a real concern that hardworking people of color have.

Maybe of I stop talking like I'm white it'll make more sense.

This lazy n***** comes in and doesn't do a damn thing, but they had to meet a DEI quota. We'll he gets fired, but I didn't. Did I get hired because of DEI and I just barely did enough to keep the job? Or, did I just work harder than that lazy mofo and build some real success for my self? So instead of people looking at me like a hardworking black man, I'm just some DEI hire that did the bare minimum to keep his job. Those decades of working harder than the white people in my industry are worthless. Having to work twice as Har as a white guy to get the same job? That accomolishment is taken away from me. 4 years into DEI and I have lost most of credibility that I built up over the previous 20 years.

The stupid white people **** of "everything is racist" completely wiped clean 2 decades of being that hard working black guy. 20 years of hard work gone in 4 just because a bunch of white people wanted to decided what was racist for us. Stop telling us what we need to be offended by. Seriously, **** off. We're perfectly capable of deciding what is and is not racist for ourselves and we don't need a bunch of bleeding heart white people telling us how and why we are oppressed.

Before DEI was a thing, I never assumed someone was in a position because of the colour or heritage, instead, I thought they belonged there because how else did they get there without merit. Now DEI has turned capable people into poster boys because the looney left think so little of people who aren't white... It has literally created a situation that now if they aren't white that they'll be a question, did they get here on merit or just because of a quota...

DEI is stupid and divisive to say the least. If you are good at something, you will get hired, regardless of what you look like or where you came from. There might be fringe businesses that don't hire because of those things, but like they cared about DEI policy in the first place. You just ****ed it up for the people who actually deserve to be in that job.

The issue with this thinking is that some form of DEI has existed for decades, and frankly put, it was racists who used the mere existence of it as a cudgel to not only continue to be openly racist, but convince less-qualified, less-intelligent, and less-capable non-people of color (or other beneficiaries of DEI, Affirmative Action, and other programs) that it was the "others" who took what was rightfully theirs.

Point in fact, the majority of social services spending goes to poor, uneducated white people in rural areas, yet the concept of a "Welfare Queen" was applied specifically to black women. Affirmative action programs was loudly decried as discriminatory, even though statistically the largest share of college admissions that don't take into account actual high school academic performance go to legacies, children of donors, and athletes (and the majority of those athletes get an additional backdoor in by playing sports which are overwhelmingly played by non-people of color). Nary a peep, yet many Asian students are seeing the whiplash now that Affirmative action policies are verboten, and many of the spots they though were being taken by black and brown kids are now being filled by white legacies, children of donors, and athletes.

Frankly put, if the barometer of whether a program should be in place or not is merely whether or not it's "divisive", then none of the progress we've made as a country would've been made, and the status quo of the turn of the 19th century would've been in place. It's a lazy goddamn argument made by people who are satisfied with going along to get along. You think that kowtowing to these abject fools are going to make things less divisive? You think they're satisfied with what they currently have? Never. You give right-wing cryptofascists an inch, and they will take a mile and more, and they salivate when people who know better would rather accept temporary comfort and avoid confrontation instead of actually putting some thought into things and run the risk of actual standing up for something morally and ethically right, even if it's uncomfortable in the short term.

And let's be clear, the notion that a colleague is able to make a determination as to whether or not you "deserve" a job is purely the refuge of an economy that was legally and structurally built around the presence of white men at all levels, and with media reinforcing that understanding for generation after generation after generation. If you feel like it's necessary to take the time to "wonder" if your colleague got their job because of DEI or any other reason, you're being a goddamn ******* off the bat unless you have some qualitative (that is, work performance) evidence that they simply shouldn't be there.