# An argument against DEI **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2025, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954 "2025-02-06T15:42:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/423 "2025-02-27T18:35:43Z")
Which is why discussing what the words mean individually makes much more sense that using “DEI” as a vague term to mean “any and/or all attempts to bring fairness and equality into the equation.” ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/424 "2025-02-27T18:43:54Z")
Do you consider the affirmative action policies discussed in this quote to count as DEI? They long predate the use of the acronym, but they would seem to fit within the definitions usually used, and AFAIK are the kind of policies usually included in DEI efforts. > [@](#): > > Affirmative action programs also include action-oriented programs. **If women and minorities are not being employed at a rate to be expected given their availability in the relevant labor pool, the contractor’s affirmative action program includes specific practical steps designed to address this underutilization** ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/425 "2025-02-27T18:50:48Z")
Would you mind sourcing that quote? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/426 "2025-02-27T18:51:31Z")
As DEI is different, and that the framework was not there when the pointed scandals took place, you still have to show that the DEI groups and trainers where there to organize what they are accused of doing. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/427 "2025-02-27T19:11:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Would you mind sourcing that quote? It’s sourced in this earlier post: > [@An argument against DEI](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/406): > > From the second bit I bolded in the quote: ‘Placement goals’ = targets, which are based on the demographics of the labour pool, and the company is required to take action in an effort to reach those goals, without using quotas or even explicit preferences based on protected characteristics. Here’s what it says in the Code of Federal Regulations: [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-B/chapter-60/part-60-2/subpart-B/section-60-2.10](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-B/chapter-60/part-60-2/subpart-B/section-60-2.10) Interestingly, it appears contractors have no suc… ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2025, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/428 "2025-02-27T21:27:53Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Would you mind sourcing that quote? As posted, it comes from [eCFR :: 41 CFR 60-2.10 -- General purpose and contents of affirmative action programs. (FMR 60-2.10)](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-B/chapter-60/part-60-2/subpart-B/section-60-2.10) What is interesting is that a subsection points that indeed, the law does refer about hiring **qualified** minorities. > [@DemonTree](#): > > Do you consider the affirmative action policies discussed in this quote to count as DEI? As the quote I made showed, in general AA has a mandate component, AA looks for minorities or women who are **qualified** and the law says that one should then hire them when found. DEI is about increasing the pool of workers, having them apply as usual and the goals are **voluntary**. As pointed before, another difference from AA is that DEI is about training the staff about recommended ways for workers and management to deal with the minorities and women after the hire. Again, mostly a voluntary thing with DEI. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/429 "2025-02-28T09:43:04Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > Or do you disagree with the OP and think ‘DEI’ refers to something other than the literal meanings of the words? To the Right, they mean anything other than the systematic persecution of anyone who isn’t a cishet white Christian male. The _meaning_ of the words doesn’t matter to them, they are just indulging their bigotry. The OP was just being overoptimistic about shaming them about it. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/430 "2025-02-28T17:52:37Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Because, what seems to be happening is you have a couple of cherry-picked examples, No, they’re not cherry-picked, they’re _readily available_. They’re the example that’s been in the news recently and the (multiple) examples that took place at a company I worked at. > [@Mijin](#): > > which aren’t DEI That’s far from settled. Some people in this thread have certainly _claimed_ those examples aren’t DEI… on the grounds that, as they see it, No True ~~Scotsman~~ DEI is illegal, so anything that’s against the law must not be DEI. I think it makes a hell of a lot more sense to say that programs which are aimed at achieving diversity goals, sold to stakeholders as helping diversity, developed in response to criticism about diversity, etc.—in other words, _diversity programs_—obviously fall under the heading of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), even if they violate the law. > [@Mijin](#): > > a general anti-DEI conclusion I’d love to know exactly what conclusion you _think_ I’ve come to, because it doesn’t sound very much like what I thought I was saying. > [@Mijin](#): > > And it could not be clearer when it comes to google. All the data is suggesting that Google has been biased against women in particular, but other less represented groups too, but you just handwave it and continue with, essentially “So anyway, men are discriminated against”. You started out saying “no one is trying to put words in your mouth”, but here, three sentences later, you’ve done exactly that. You’re still putting words in my mouth. Please stop. There was no handwaving. I never said women weren’t discriminated against. You’ve seized upon something that I mentioned in _two sentences_, as an aside in a much larger post, and concocted some kind of boogeyman mythos around it in which I… did what, exactly? Did I say men were the real victims? No. Did I say DEI is bad _because_ Google once discriminated against men? No. Then what? All I can figure is you’re objecting to the fact that I _acknowledged_, even in passing, that this issue is more nuanced than “cishet white men are the oppressors.” > [@Mijin](#): > > But you don’t want to talk about the totality of data because it’s saying the opposite to your belief. Again, you seem to be under the impression that I was trying to argue some point about whether men or women are the bigger victims. I was not. Please focus on what I’ve actually said here, not on what you think someone who says those things might also secretly believe. I understand that some of what I’ve said here might remind you of things you’ve heard other people say, but please understand that I’m not those people. I don’t share their other beliefs. > [@Mijin](#): > > These are settled cases in the courts, with access to internal communications, and probably the best lawyers money can be on google’s side, and they ruled against google. But no worries, you have an ad hoc explanation of how it couldn’t have been discrimination against anyone other that white males. That beats the findings of a court. First, and least importantly: nearly all of the examples you gave were settled out of court, with no fault found by the court or admitted by the company. I’m not familiar with the details of those cases, what exactly they alleged, or what evidence they presented, but that was obvious just from clicking on them. More importantly: it doesn’t matter. Again, I’m not arguing the point you seem to think I am. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/431 "2025-02-28T17:56:58Z")
> **Hidden by Mod** > > > [@Ms2001](#): > > > > No, they’re not cherry-picked, they’re _readily available_. > > It’s “widespread” and they’re not cherry picked (a phrase I fear we’re gonna need to unpack) and yet I’m still waiting for those 25 examples that are not the FAA or Google. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/433 "2025-02-28T18:06:53Z")
**Moderating** : Drop the semantics sidebar/hijacks. Already noted earlier. I’ll hide your post. > [@An argument against DEI](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/391): > > Moderating: Both, please drop the side discussion about the meaning of the term, “widespread.” It’s clear you will reach no agreement on this point and it’s become a hijack to the main topic of discussion. Let’s return to that, please. This thread is verging on being closed for good. Everyone, try to stay focused and try not to attack other posters. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/435 "2025-02-28T18:28:00Z")
> [@Ms2001](#): > > Some people in this thread have certainly _claimed_ those examples aren’t DEI… on the grounds that, as they see it, No True ~~Scotsman~~ DEI is illegal, so anything that’s against the law must not be DEI. The talking points from the right are also willfully ignoring timelines, don’t fall for it. Now as for this, you then have to show that DEI was an illegal thing and… that experts on it where present in those few incidents like the FAA one. Really, so far, the evidence points to misguided Affirmative Action being there, not DEI groups or trainers. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/436 "2025-02-28T19:56:50Z")
> [@Ms2001](#): > > No, they’re not cherry-picked, they’re _readily available_. That is not what “cherry-picked” means at all. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/437 "2025-02-28T20:05:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That is not what “cherry-picked” means at all. “[to pick only the best people or things from a group, so that only people or things that are less good remain](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/cherry-pick)” “[To choose selectively (the most beneficial or profitable items, opportunities, etc.) from what is available.](https://www.oed.com/dictionary/cherry-pick_v?tl=true)” “[If someone cherry-picks people or things, they choose the best ones from a group of them, often in a way that other people consider unfair.](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/cherry-pick)” “[singled out from a number or group as more to one’s liking](https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/cherry-picked)” None of those describe the examples I gave. I didn’t choose those examples selectively in order to single out the best ones; they were the first ones that came to mind. Other than Google’s, Meta’s, and the FAA’s, I’m not sure I could even name another specific DEI program off the top of my head. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/438 "2025-02-28T20:09:09Z")
> [@Ms2001](#): > > they were the first ones that came to mind. That only tells us which ones first come to _your_ mind when it comes to supposedly legit examples of “DEI”. ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/439 "2025-02-28T20:11:22Z")
Okay…? Not sure what point you’re trying to make. I never said those were the only examples, nor that they were representative of DEI programs in general. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/440 "2025-02-28T20:12:02Z")
---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2025, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954/441 "2025-02-28T20:13:03Z")
**Moderating** : > [@Czarcasm](#): > > That is not what “cherry-picked” means at all. OK, enough. As this thread has devolved into semantics with even the OP getting into it now. It shall be closed as I said before. Way too many flags on this one. At least 12 flags we’ve had to handle for this one. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-argument-against-dei/1013954.md?page=21)