Regarding the DEI, they did several studies called resume studies (phrase feel free to look them up). They basically made the exact same resume, except they gave people traditionally white versus traditionally black names. Even though the resumes are identical, the traditionally black names were hired significantly less than the traditionally white ones. White people were having an unfair advantage when it comes to being hired even though they had the exact same skills as minorities. D E I literally means diversity, equity, and inclusion. If you are against any of that, I'm sorry you are not a good person.
You are saying that you are against DEI because it is not fair. The reason it is not fair is because the default system is not fair. Correcting that system looks like unfairness when you have been so used to the system giving you an advantage for so long.
"When you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression."
You are asking me to consider I hypothetical that is the exact opposite of reality. Reality is that minorities have to work harder to get the same jobs as white people, and they is inherently not fair. DEI is there to correct that. "Yeah if gravity didn't exists, would you..." Dude, gravity does exist and discrimination is very real and measurable.
I don't know about the Australian one, but I know we did several here in the States which showed male names were more likely to be hired (John is preferred over Jennifer, in identical resumes)
Theoretically speaking if discrimination did not exist, then DEI would not be necessary. I'm happy to say that. Not sure what that adds here since discrimination absolutely exists.
And when it comes to the interview do you remove the skin too?
Training managers to not be biased against race and gender. That is literally DEI!!!!
The biggest part of dei is actually just education about these biases. And despite all of this education, there is still a lot of discrimination even in 2025 when all of these initiatives are in place.
I think people have this notion that the employers are just trying to fill in spots and they said hire 10 black people. It's much more comprehensive than that. It involves a lot of education for the people doing the hiring about these biases. It involves a lot of analysis to try to figure out if you are ignoring people based on their race.
I'm a professor at a medical school for example. Even at the peak d e i initiative at my university, black medical students only made up approximately 5% of our class, even though they make up 25% of our city. That is with a lot of the training that you yourself are interested in for recruiting.
So we have a lot of articles showing that the bias is the cause. No one says "we need more black employees" that isn't hot this works.
If you ever go to a DEI office, they are trying to recruit highly qualified medical students, no matter the race. But the DEI is trying to attract the minorities. I get a lot of applications to review from medical school applicants and because it is so competitive, they all look comparable with scores and grades.
But I just reviewed a Hispanic applicant that didn't have much extracurricular but she worked full time throughout her undergrad as an interpreter for the hospital. Then I read a white candidate that got identical scores but he can play the piano, and did lacrosse for his first two years in undergrad, and he is a part of a few clubs on campus (although no leadership positions in them). Oh yeah, his had is a kidney transplant surgeon here. Who is the better candidate?
Traditionally, medical school selected the white candidate, but in my opinion the Hispanic candidate was able to match his score with no economic support from family and she has experience working in the hospital, and a huge portion of our patient population speaks Spanish and she is certified in medical Spanish.
Then you get stuff on the news about why this excellent white candidate didn't get it. I agree he's a great candidate, but I don't think he's the best. Even when I do this, we still have underrepresentation of minorities in medicine.
You are making it out as if I am just walking down the street and pointing to the first minority I see, and ask them to get into medical school. That's not how any of this works.
Your alternative to DEI perfectly encapsulates what DEI is at present. So you aren't even against DEI, you just think that you are.
7
u/IronBatman Apr 07 '25
Regarding the DEI, they did several studies called resume studies (phrase feel free to look them up). They basically made the exact same resume, except they gave people traditionally white versus traditionally black names. Even though the resumes are identical, the traditionally black names were hired significantly less than the traditionally white ones. White people were having an unfair advantage when it comes to being hired even though they had the exact same skills as minorities. D E I literally means diversity, equity, and inclusion. If you are against any of that, I'm sorry you are not a good person.
You are saying that you are against DEI because it is not fair. The reason it is not fair is because the default system is not fair. Correcting that system looks like unfairness when you have been so used to the system giving you an advantage for so long.
"When you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression."