DEI has nothing to do with this. DEI is about putting people in roles/positions that they didn’t necessarily deserve (as simple a description as you can get for why people oppose it). ie promoting someone because they’re a minority over people who are better qualified.
This is about adding another exclusion to the list of conditions that exclude people from military service eligibility. DEI isn’t even remotely relevant here.
Good job with the name calling though. Really gets across how intelligent and well reasoned your arguments are.
First of all, DEI includes things like posting job offerings in spaces that are frequented by lower income or minority populations.
It’s rejection includes an assumption that the most qualified person for any given position is a white straight man.
People in this Admin have called the former secretary of defense a DEI hire. She was a Black General.
This admin has consistently called any minority a DEI hire and has tried to blame accidents on said “DEI” hires.
DEIs rejection does not include that assumption at all. It means that you think the best person for the job should get the job, not just the person who ticks the most diversity boxes. Policies like “50% of all board positions need to be women” assumes that 50% of the best people for the position are women, which isn’t the case a lot of the time, especially in male dominated industries.
If the best person for the position is a gay black woman then she should get the job. Likewise if a straight white male is the most qualified and best fit, he should get it. Merit wins.
Calling people a DEI hire has definitely been weaponised, but the fact that champions of dei see that as an insult kinda proves that DEI is what its opponents say it is - unfair.
This EO is nothing to do with DEI though, in any way.
I don’t see it as an insult, it is used as one. Especially by this admin.
It’s the idea that some is only there because of DEI and without it, their capabilities wouldn’t have been enough. Which is wrong.
Before DEIA was implemented, minorities were often not hired, because of their background, even though they were the more capable candidate. And this admin is a perfect example, that “DEI hire”" is projection.
Is Hegseth more capable than his predecessor? Gods no. His signal escapades are enough to prove this.
Is RKJ more capable than his predecessor? Is anyone in this majority white, majority male admin better suited for their job than the more diverse admin before it? No. But still, that admin gets labeled as DEI Hires, not because anyone could prove that DEI prevented a more deserving candidate from filling that position, but because they belong to minorities.
I’m not going to argue that the best person for the job always gets the job, even without DEI, because they clearly don’t. Unfortunately in the real world most of getting a job is who you know not what you know.
My original point was that this EO has nothing to do with DEI, and that still stands.
You’re gonna ignore all the other anti “dei” stuff being done? Pretend like this is just off in the corner all alone?
You’re full of shit. We’re done. I won’t hit my head against a wall.
DEI has nothing to do with this. DEI is about putting people in roles/positions that they didn’t necessarily deserve (as simple a description as you can get for why people oppose it). ie promoting someone because they’re a minority over people who are better qualified.
This is about adding another exclusion to the list of conditions that exclude people from military service eligibility. DEI isn’t even remotely relevant here.
Good job with the name calling though. Really gets across how intelligent and well reasoned your arguments are.
First of all, DEI includes things like posting job offerings in spaces that are frequented by lower income or minority populations. It’s rejection includes an assumption that the most qualified person for any given position is a white straight man.
People in this Admin have called the former secretary of defense a DEI hire. She was a Black General.
This admin has consistently called any minority a DEI hire and has tried to blame accidents on said “DEI” hires.
DEIs rejection does not include that assumption at all. It means that you think the best person for the job should get the job, not just the person who ticks the most diversity boxes. Policies like “50% of all board positions need to be women” assumes that 50% of the best people for the position are women, which isn’t the case a lot of the time, especially in male dominated industries.
If the best person for the position is a gay black woman then she should get the job. Likewise if a straight white male is the most qualified and best fit, he should get it. Merit wins.
Calling people a DEI hire has definitely been weaponised, but the fact that champions of dei see that as an insult kinda proves that DEI is what its opponents say it is - unfair.
This EO is nothing to do with DEI though, in any way.
I don’t see it as an insult, it is used as one. Especially by this admin.
It’s the idea that some is only there because of DEI and without it, their capabilities wouldn’t have been enough. Which is wrong.
Before DEIA was implemented, minorities were often not hired, because of their background, even though they were the more capable candidate. And this admin is a perfect example, that “DEI hire”" is projection.
Is Hegseth more capable than his predecessor? Gods no. His signal escapades are enough to prove this.
Is RKJ more capable than his predecessor? Is anyone in this majority white, majority male admin better suited for their job than the more diverse admin before it? No. But still, that admin gets labeled as DEI Hires, not because anyone could prove that DEI prevented a more deserving candidate from filling that position, but because they belong to minorities.
I’m not going to argue that the best person for the job always gets the job, even without DEI, because they clearly don’t. Unfortunately in the real world most of getting a job is who you know not what you know.
My original point was that this EO has nothing to do with DEI, and that still stands.