Social MIT becomes first elite university to eliminate diversity statements

[Andy Capp]

So, fight racism with racism then? Now you're justifying something you said didn't exist?




Who gives a shit? What does that have to do with anything?

My point, exactly, you ignorant fool. You don't even understand the issue you're complaining about. GTFO.

Better yet, how about you set to getting the answer to that question and then you might actually learn something.

 

[HereticBD]

Who gives a shit? What does that have to do with anything?

It has to do with his devotion to wokeness. Unless it's 50/50, the women are bring screwed.

He's the kind of the guy that will question why the NBA is vastly more successful than the WNBA, and then blame it on sexism.

 

[Confucamus]

My point, exactly, you ignorant fool. You don't even understand the issue you're complaining about. GTFO.

Better yet, how about you set to getting the answer to that question and then you might actually learn something.

You came up with the question as a dumb deflection. It wasn't even what we were originally discussing. You think everyone is as stupid as you and will fall for those tricks.

It has to do with his devotion to wokeness. Unless it's 50/50, the women are bring screwed.

He's the kind of the guy that will question why the NBA is vastly more successful than the WNBA, and then blame it on sexism.

It's mind numbing when discussing an issue with someone who has nothing more than vague talking points.

 

[HereticBD]

It's mind numbing when discussing an issue with someone who has nothing more than vague talking points.

In fairness, it's really all they got, and unfortunately it's one hell of tactic. Although, I think people are finally coming around to the bullshit they spew.

 

[Andy Capp]

You came up with the question as a dumb deflection. It wasn't even what we were originally discussing. You think everyone is as stupid as you and will fall for those tricks.




It's mind numbing when discussing an issue with someone who has nothing more than vague talking points.

In fairness, it's really all they got, and unfortunately it's one hell of tactic. Although, I think people are finally coming around to the bullshit they spew.

Get back in your clown car, bitch tits.

 

[HereticBD]

Get back in your clown car, bitch tits. Evidence or GTFO.

Evidence of what, spastic?

 

[Andy Capp]

Evidence of what, spastic?

Disregard. I edited that part out of my post (see above). It's a separate aspect to this discussion and it's not relevant until it is demonstrated you lot have any understanding of the actual issue. Mean time, get bent.

 

[HereticBD]

Disregard. I edited that part out of my post (see above). It's a separate aspect to this discussion and it's not relevant until it is demonstrated you lot have any understanding of the actual issue. Mean time, get bent.

Put the beer down, Andrew.

 

[Andy Capp]

Put the beer down, Andrew.

LOL I thought I already told you to fuck off back to your clown car, bitch tits.

 

[HereticBD]

LOL I thought I already told you to fuck off back to your clown car, bitch tits.

Bottoms up, buddy!

 

[Yorick]

 

[Fox by the Sea]

It's evidence that their qualifications were not the primary reason they were hired. Sheila Jackson may very well be qualified to be on the SC. She has quite an impressive resume. But she can never escape the fact that her race was the primary reason she was even considered in the first place.

I must warn you you're interacting with an imbecile. Guy is legit the dumbest poster currently in the war room. He's wasting your time and is not equipped to understand any explanation you will offer.

 

[panamaican]

Sweet. Now please get work to stop having meetings strongly insinuating we should use pronouns even if we don't care about our pronouns or anyone else's

"If you normalise sharing your pronouns it doesn’t make an already alienated group of people feel more alienated when they share their's.
If everyone adopts the practice then it's neutralized and no longer puts some people in an unwanted spotlight."

Mandatory meetings about this stuff. And they stressed "mandatory"

Well...if you work for an employer and they care, you're kind of stuck with your employer. You might not care but your employer does. And that leaves you with a decision - stay working at a place that cares about things you don't care about or leave that place for an employer who only cares about what you care about.

You're a grown up. You know how this works. I think it's inane when adults who live in a world where they know that they are beholden to the positions and wishes of other people pretend that they're free to ignore other people's wishes but still reap the benefit of the relationship.

I don't care about wearing a tie to court but every judge does care. So, if I want the benefit of the judge's goodwill, I adhere to the judge's preferences, regardless of my personal feelings. If I really feel strongly about the tie thing...I stop taking cases that require me to go to court.

If you don't like what someone else likes, that's fine. But you don't get to keep the benefit of the relationship and ignore their preferences. No one is forced to associate with others. Even if the choice is a tough one, the choice still exists. It ends up being a matter how much you really don't care.

Back to the workplace, if you don't care and your employer does, it shouldn't bother you to follow through on their wishes...you don't care either way, right?

 

[filthybliss]

Here's my take on the diversity thing. It needs to be all in and all out if people truly believe in it beyond virtue signaling. I don't see any pushes for Men studying literature but Women in STEM is a movement that is plastered everywhere. We need to be consistent if we truly believe in diversity.

That being said, I think the idea of seperating people in groups and trying to have pickings of applicants as colors and data points is very dehumanizing. It undermines the hard work of minority students that worked their asses to get into MIT as just being "diversity" acceptees....Its also frustrating for the non-minority candidates that don't get in because they feel its over things out of their control...Its a colossal fuck up everywhere

 

[Halifax]

Well...if you work for an employer and they care, you're kind of stuck with your employer. You might not care but your employer does. And that leaves you with a decision - stay working at a place that cares about things you don't care about or leave that place for an employer who only cares about what you care about.

You're a grown up. You know how this works. I think it's inane when adults who live in a world where they know that they are beholden to the positions and wishes of other people pretend that they're free to ignore other people's wishes but still reap the benefit of the relationship.

I don't care about wearing a tie to court but every judge does care. So, if I want the benefit of the judge's goodwill, I adhere to the judge's preferences, regardless of my personal feelings. If I really feel strongly about the tie thing...I stop taking cases that require me to go to court.

If you don't like what someone else likes, that's fine. But you don't get to keep the benefit of the relationship and ignore their preferences. No one is forced to associate with others. Even if the choice is a tough one, the choice still exists. It ends up being a matter how much you really don't care.

Back to the workplace, if you don't care and your employer does, it shouldn't bother you to follow through on their wishes...you don't care either way, right?

Problem is i am under contract for the provincial government, whomever is in power(my contract continues when a new government takes power).

If you want to get into the debate about compelled speech or else by a government entity we can gravitate in that direction.

As far as I am concerned, they can legislate what I can't say(I'm fine with legislation against hate speech like the N word, etc) , but I cannot be compelled into what I have to say exactly how they want it by government. Attempts are being made to call it "hate speech" if you don't follow their doctrine and give in to being forced to say what the government wants you to say.

Everyone HAS to see the slippery slope there.

 

[High Test With da Best]

Problem is i am under contract for the provincial government, whomever is in power(my contract continues when a new government takes power).

If you want to get into the debate about compelled speech or else by a government entity we can gravitate in that direction.

As far as I am concerned, they can legislate what I can't say(I'm fine with legislation against hate speech like the N word, etc) , but I cannot be compelled into what I have to say exactly how they want it by government. Attempts are being made to call it "hate speech" if you don't follow their doctrine and give in to being forced to say what the government wants you to say.

Everyone HAS to see the slippery slope there.

Additionally @panamaican pretends to care about the tie for the judges' sakes, much as corps may pretend to care about pronouns for their benefactors'/shareholders'/owners' sakes.

A @panamaican or an employee may very well be right to believe it (a tie or required pronouns in email footers) is just window dressing.

 

[ermac88]

funny how you chuds pretend to care about science when its convenient. but you will dismiss science on climate change, Covid, Hormone therapy for transgender patients and when the science of an issue conflicts with the goals of the corporate donors.

The "chuds" as you call them, are actually conservatives who are-

• anti-science
• anti-academia
• anti-progress

They simply hate people of a specific skin pigment and hate even more the thought they might participate in these institutions they are fundamentally opposed to.

From Anti-Government to Anti-Science: Why Conservatives Have Turned Against Science​

From Anti-Government to Anti-Science: Why Conservatives Have Turned Against Science

Abstract. Empirical data do not support the conclusion of a crisis of public trust in science. They do support the conclusion of a crisis of conservative trust in science: polls show that American attitudes toward science are highly polarized along political lines. In this essay, we argue that...

direct.mit.edu