▲ 985 ▼ Python Foundation rejects $1.5M grant with no-DEI strings (www.theregister.com) submitted 1 year ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/opensource@programming.dev 121 comments fedilink hide all child comments Foundation says it won't compromise policy of inclusivity even if that cash would've really helped
[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago (4 children) Paying companies to be racist, what a world. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Cruel@programming.dev -38 points 1 year ago* (3 children) White women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI. So who's being racist by being against DEI exactly? The DEI people are against are policies that mandate discriminatory practices, making someone's race/gender a qualification. It's wild that people here actually support discrimination in hiring. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children) You have it backwards. DEI ensures it's not just the same good ol boy hired as usual (which is what the current good ol boy employer wants) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cruel@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is where everyone here is being disingenuous, or are just completely ignoring opponents of DEI. When have opponents of DEI called for overlooking meritorious minorities? When have they called for discrimination? Because they must have explicitly done so if DEI combats this. I know what the stated goals of DEI are, and it sounds good, but I also know how it's often implemented: quantitative goals and affirmative action. These are discriminatory practices. People routinely admit that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI, calculated from things such as their access to STEM jobs (eg. IBM setting a goal of 50% female engineers), then they go right back to saying that hiring based on gender is actually not DEI. Pure gaslighting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago All true. The problem is, remove DEI and you hand the reigns directly to the baked-in systemic advantage of white men(tall, attractive with hair specifically). It's like the ocean. DEI is a small seawall trying to make the slightest difference. It's not perfect and takes work but the alternative is a flood of self-affirming bias where you end up with products and services created by them but supposedly for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Cruel@programming.dev -38 points 1 year ago* (3 children) White women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI. So who's being racist by being against DEI exactly? The DEI people are against are policies that mandate discriminatory practices, making someone's race/gender a qualification. It's wild that people here actually support discrimination in hiring. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children) You have it backwards. DEI ensures it's not just the same good ol boy hired as usual (which is what the current good ol boy employer wants) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cruel@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is where everyone here is being disingenuous, or are just completely ignoring opponents of DEI. When have opponents of DEI called for overlooking meritorious minorities? When have they called for discrimination? Because they must have explicitly done so if DEI combats this. I know what the stated goals of DEI are, and it sounds good, but I also know how it's often implemented: quantitative goals and affirmative action. These are discriminatory practices. People routinely admit that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI, calculated from things such as their access to STEM jobs (eg. IBM setting a goal of 50% female engineers), then they go right back to saying that hiring based on gender is actually not DEI. Pure gaslighting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago All true. The problem is, remove DEI and you hand the reigns directly to the baked-in systemic advantage of white men(tall, attractive with hair specifically). It's like the ocean. DEI is a small seawall trying to make the slightest difference. It's not perfect and takes work but the alternative is a flood of self-affirming bias where you end up with products and services created by them but supposedly for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children) You have it backwards. DEI ensures it's not just the same good ol boy hired as usual (which is what the current good ol boy employer wants) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cruel@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is where everyone here is being disingenuous, or are just completely ignoring opponents of DEI. When have opponents of DEI called for overlooking meritorious minorities? When have they called for discrimination? Because they must have explicitly done so if DEI combats this. I know what the stated goals of DEI are, and it sounds good, but I also know how it's often implemented: quantitative goals and affirmative action. These are discriminatory practices. People routinely admit that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI, calculated from things such as their access to STEM jobs (eg. IBM setting a goal of 50% female engineers), then they go right back to saying that hiring based on gender is actually not DEI. Pure gaslighting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago All true. The problem is, remove DEI and you hand the reigns directly to the baked-in systemic advantage of white men(tall, attractive with hair specifically). It's like the ocean. DEI is a small seawall trying to make the slightest difference. It's not perfect and takes work but the alternative is a flood of self-affirming bias where you end up with products and services created by them but supposedly for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cruel@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is where everyone here is being disingenuous, or are just completely ignoring opponents of DEI. When have opponents of DEI called for overlooking meritorious minorities? When have they called for discrimination? Because they must have explicitly done so if DEI combats this. I know what the stated goals of DEI are, and it sounds good, but I also know how it's often implemented: quantitative goals and affirmative action. These are discriminatory practices. People routinely admit that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of DEI, calculated from things such as their access to STEM jobs (eg. IBM setting a goal of 50% female engineers), then they go right back to saying that hiring based on gender is actually not DEI. Pure gaslighting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago All true. The problem is, remove DEI and you hand the reigns directly to the baked-in systemic advantage of white men(tall, attractive with hair specifically). It's like the ocean. DEI is a small seawall trying to make the slightest difference. It's not perfect and takes work but the alternative is a flood of self-affirming bias where you end up with products and services created by them but supposedly for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago All true. The problem is, remove DEI and you hand the reigns directly to the baked-in systemic advantage of white men(tall, attractive with hair specifically). It's like the ocean. DEI is a small seawall trying to make the slightest difference. It's not perfect and takes work but the alternative is a flood of self-affirming bias where you end up with products and services created by them but supposedly for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent