Skip to Content
0 Votes

Changes for page DEI

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/09/15 15:53
From version 51.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/09/15 15:35
Change comment: Upload new image "Navy Removing photos from boards hurts diversity.jpg", version 1.1
To version 103.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/09/15 15:53
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1,326 +1,292 @@
1 1  {{dashboard/}}
2 2  
3 +[[image:photo_AgACAgEAAyEFAASPk76iAAIEiWf9ozpDWLlQIfomoXLve483Rr1gAAKArjEbdLTwR-pQ30cRn1oYAQADAgADeQADNgQ.jpg||alt="DEI Framework Illustration" style="float:right; margin:10px; width:300px;"]]
3 3  
4 -= Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: A Critical Analysis =
5 += Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion =
5 5  
6 -== Overview ==
7 +{{tooltip label="Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}DEI refers to organizational frameworks that seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination based on identity or disability.{{/tooltip}} are organizational frameworks that seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination based on identity or disability. These three notions (diversity, equity, and inclusion) together represent "three closely linked values" which organizations seek to institutionalize through DEI frameworks. The concepts predate this terminology and other variations sometimes include terms such as {{tooltip label="belonging" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The feeling of being accepted and valued as a member of a group or organization.{{/tooltip}}, {{tooltip label="justice" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The quality of being fair and reasonable in the treatment of people.{{/tooltip}}, and {{tooltip label="accessibility" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The practice of making information, activities, and environments usable by as many people as possible.{{/tooltip}}.
7 7  
8 -{{tooltip label="Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}DEI refers to organizational policies and practices that aim to promote representation and participation of different groups of people, particularly those who have been historically underrepresented or subject to discrimination.{{/tooltip}} has become one of the most dominant and controversial frameworks in modern corporate, academic, and governmental institutions. Originally conceived as a means to address historical discrimination and promote equal opportunity, DEI has evolved into a multi-billion dollar industry that has fundamentally transformed how organizations approach hiring, promotion, education, and social policy. This comprehensive analysis examines DEI from a critical perspective, exploring its theoretical foundations, practical implementations, empirical evidence, and the significant concerns raised by scholars, employees, and citizens who have experienced its effects firsthand.
9 +*Diversity* refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce in characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, veteran status, or religion. *Equity* refers to concepts of fairness and justice, such as fair compensation and substantive equality. More specifically, equity usually also includes a focus on societal disparities and allocating resources and "decision making authority to groups that have historically been disadvantaged", and taking "into consideration a person's unique circumstances, adjusting treatment accordingly so that the end result is equal." Finally, *inclusion* refers to creating an organizational culture that creates an experience where "all employees feel their voices will be heard", and a sense of belonging and integration.
9 9  
10 -The controversy surrounding DEI stems from its fundamental assumptions about merit, fairness, and social justice. While proponents argue that DEI provides essential tools for combating discrimination and promoting social equity, critics contend that it has become a form of {{tooltip label="reverse discrimination" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group.{{/tooltip}}, undermines merit-based systems, and creates new forms of division and resentment. This analysis will explore these competing perspectives while examining the empirical evidence regarding DEI's effectiveness and consequences.
11 +DEI policies are often used by managers to increase the productivity and collaborative efforts of their workforce and to reinforce positive communication. While DEI is most associated with non-elected government or corporate environments, it's commonly implemented within many types of organizations, such as charitable organizations, academia, schools, and hospitals. DEI policies often include certain training efforts, such as {{tooltip label="diversity training" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Educational programs designed to help people recognize and overcome their unconscious biases and prejudices.{{/tooltip}}.
11 11  
12 -== Historical Development and Theoretical Foundations ==
13 +DEI efforts and policies have generated criticism and controversy, some directed at the specific effectiveness of its tools, such as diversity training; its effect on free speech and academic freedom, as well as more broadly attracting criticism on political or philosophical grounds. In addition, the term "DEI" has gained traction as an ethnic slur towards minority groups in the United States.
13 13  
14 -=== Origins in Civil Rights and Affirmative Action ===
15 +== History in the United States ==
15 15  
16 -DEI emerged from the {{tooltip label="Civil Rights Movement" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A social movement in the United States during the 1950s and 1960s that aimed to end racial segregation and discrimination against African Americans.{{/tooltip}} of the 1950s and 1960s, which itself was influenced by earlier movements for equality and justice. The original goal was to ensure that all individuals, regardless of race, gender, or other characteristics, had equal access to opportunities and were treated fairly in society. However, over time, this focus on individual equality has been replaced by a focus on {{tooltip label="group outcomes" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The results achieved by different demographic groups, often measured in terms of representation, income, or other metrics.{{/tooltip}} and {{tooltip label="proportional representation" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that different groups should be represented in proportion to their percentage of the population.{{/tooltip}}.
17 +=== Early history ===
17 17  
18 -The theoretical foundation of modern DEI rests on several key premises that have become increasingly controversial:
19 +Early DEI efforts included preferential hiring to veterans of the US Civil War and their widows in 1865. In 1876, this was amended to give preference to veterans during a Reduction in Force. In 1921 and 1929, executive orders by presidents Coolidge and Harding established ten-point preference for veterans towards exams and hiring criteria for federal employment. In 1944, the Veterans' Preference Act codified the previous executive orders, clarified criteria, and included special hiring provisions for disabled veterans. Later amendments added veterans from conflicts after World War II, special provisions for the mothers of disabled or deceased veterans, and job-specific training for veterans entering the federal or private workforce.
19 19  
20 -**Systemic Oppression Theory:** DEI posits that certain groups face {{tooltip label="systemic oppression" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that oppression is built into the fundamental structures of society, rather than being merely individual acts of discrimination.{{/tooltip}} that prevents them from achieving equal outcomes. This theory suggests that historical injustices continue to affect present-day opportunities and that intervention is necessary to correct these imbalances.
21 +In 1936, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Randolph-Sheppard Act, which mandated the federal government to give preference to purchase products made by the blind, and established the Committee on Purchases of Blind Made Products. The 1971 Javits–Wagner–O'Day Act expanded the Randolph-Sheppard act and changed the name to The Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled (now AbilityOne). Blind-made products are used throughout the federal government, and include brands such as Skillcraft, ARC Diversified, Austin Lighthouse, and Ability One.
21 21  
22 -**Intersectionality:** The concept that various forms of oppression (race, gender, class, etc.) intersect and compound to create unique experiences of discrimination. This framework has been used to justify increasingly complex systems of {{tooltip label="identity-based preferences" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Policies that give advantages to individuals based on their group identity rather than their individual qualifications.{{/tooltip}}.
23 +Other DEI policies include {{tooltip label="Affirmative Action" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Policies that give preferential treatment to members of historically disadvantaged groups in employment, education, and other areas.{{/tooltip}}. The legal term "affirmative action" was first used in "Executive Order No. 10925", signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take *affirmative action* to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated [fairly] during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin". It was used to promote actions that achieve non-discrimination.
23 23  
24 -**Unconscious Bias:** The idea that all people, regardless of their conscious beliefs, harbor unconscious prejudices that affect their decisions and behavior. This concept has been used to justify extensive {{tooltip label="bias training programs" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Educational programs designed to help people recognize and overcome their unconscious biases.{{/tooltip}} and monitoring systems.
25 +=== 1980s ===
25 25  
26 -**Equity vs. Equality:** DEI proponents distinguish between equality (treating everyone the same) and equity (ensuring equal outcomes), arguing that true fairness requires the latter approach.
27 +The 1980s saw the expansion of DEI programs beyond government employment to include private corporations and educational institutions. The Reagan administration, while generally opposed to affirmative action, did not eliminate existing programs, and many corporations began implementing their own diversity initiatives. This period marked the beginning of what critics call the "{{tooltip label="diversity industry" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A multi-billion dollar industry built around diversity consulting, training, and implementation services.{{/tooltip}}", with consulting firms and training companies emerging to capitalize on corporate diversity mandates.
27 27  
28 -=== Evolution into Corporate and Academic Mandate ===
29 +During this decade, the concept of {{tooltip label="unconscious bias" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that all people harbor hidden prejudices that affect their decisions, regardless of their conscious beliefs.{{/tooltip}} began to gain traction, providing a theoretical foundation for extensive diversity training programs. Critics argue that this concept has been used to justify intrusive monitoring and control of employee behavior, creating a climate of fear and self-censorship in the workplace.
29 29  
30 -Since its inception, DEI has expanded far beyond its original civil rights focus to become a dominant force in virtually every major institution:
31 +The 1980s also saw the rise of {{tooltip label="identity politics" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Political activity based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify, rather than on individual merit or policy positions.{{/tooltip}}, which would later become central to DEI ideology. This shift away from individual rights and merit-based systems toward group-based preferences marked a fundamental change in how American institutions approached equality and fairness.
31 31  
32 -**Corporate Implementation:** Major corporations have adopted comprehensive DEI programs that include {{tooltip label="diversity quotas" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Numerical targets for the representation of different demographic groups in hiring and promotion.{{/tooltip}}, {{tooltip label="unconscious bias training" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Programs designed to help employees recognize and overcome their unconscious prejudices.{{/tooltip}}, and {{tooltip label="inclusive hiring practices" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Recruitment and selection processes designed to increase diversity, often through preferential treatment of certain groups.{{/tooltip}}.
33 +=== 1990s ===
33 33  
34 -**Academic Integration:** Universities have incorporated DEI principles into their curricula, hiring practices, and student life programs. This has led to the creation of {{tooltip label="diversity statements" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Written statements required of job applicants that demonstrate their commitment to diversity and inclusion principles.{{/tooltip}} as a requirement for many academic positions.
35 +The 1990s marked a significant expansion of DEI programs, particularly in corporate America. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 strengthened existing anti-discrimination laws and provided for monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination. This period also saw the rise of {{tooltip label="diversity consultants" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Professionals who help organizations implement diversity and inclusion programs.{{/tooltip}} and the development of comprehensive diversity training programs.
35 35  
36 -**Government Policy:** Various government agencies have implemented DEI initiatives that affect everything from contracting to employment to public services.
37 +The 1990s witnessed the emergence of {{tooltip label="critical race theory" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}An academic framework that views race as a social construct and racism as embedded in legal systems and policies.{{/tooltip}} in academic circles, which would later become a foundational element of DEI programs. This theory posits that racism is not merely individual prejudice but is embedded in the very structure of society, requiring radical intervention to address.
37 37  
38 -== Core Tenets and Critical Analysis ==
39 +During this decade, many corporations began implementing {{tooltip label="diversity quotas" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Numerical targets for the representation of different demographic groups in hiring and promotion.{{/tooltip}} and {{tooltip label="affirmative action programs" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Policies that give preferential treatment to members of historically disadvantaged groups.{{/tooltip}}. Critics argue that these programs often led to the hiring of less qualified candidates based on race or gender rather than merit, creating resentment and undermining workplace cohesion.
39 39  
40 -=== The Concept of Diversity ===
41 +The 1990s also saw the beginning of what critics call the "{{tooltip label="victimhood culture" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A culture that encourages people to view themselves as victims and to seek external validation for their grievances.{{/tooltip}}", with DEI programs encouraging employees to focus on their group identity and perceived disadvantages rather than their individual achievements and potential.
41 41  
42 -DEI's emphasis on diversity has become increasingly controversial as it has evolved from a focus on ensuring equal opportunity to a focus on achieving {{tooltip label="demographic representation" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that different groups should be represented in proportion to their percentage of the population.{{/tooltip}}.
43 +=== Since the 2000s ===
43 43  
44 -**Criticisms of the Diversity Framework:**
45 +The 2000s and beyond have seen an exponential growth in DEI programs, with many organizations implementing mandatory diversity training, unconscious bias workshops, and comprehensive inclusion initiatives. This period has also seen significant controversy and backlash against DEI programs, with critics arguing that they have become overly politicized and counterproductive.
45 45  
46 -The diversity imperative often leads to {{tooltip label="tokenism" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The practice of making only a perfunctory or symbolic effort to include members of minority groups.{{/tooltip}}, where individuals are hired or promoted primarily because of their demographic characteristics rather than their qualifications. This can create resentment among both the tokenized individuals and their colleagues who may feel that merit has been compromised.
47 +The 2000s marked the beginning of what critics call the "{{tooltip label="woke revolution" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A cultural movement characterized by extreme political correctness and identity-based activism.{{/tooltip}}", with DEI programs becoming increasingly radical and intolerant of dissenting views. This period saw the rise of {{tooltip label="cancel culture" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The practice of withdrawing support for public figures or companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable.{{/tooltip}} and {{tooltip label="microaggression theory" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that subtle, often unintentional expressions of bias can cause significant harm.{{/tooltip}}.
47 47  
48 -Research has shown that diversity initiatives can actually increase racial tension rather than reduce it. A 2019 study by the {{tooltip label="Harvard Business Review" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A prestigious business publication that has published research on diversity and inclusion.{{/tooltip}} found that mandatory diversity training often backfires, leading to decreased diversity in management positions and increased resentment among employees.
49 +During this period, DEI programs began to incorporate increasingly controversial concepts such as {{tooltip label="intersectionality" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that various forms of oppression intersect and compound to create unique experiences of discrimination.{{/tooltip}} and {{tooltip label="white privilege" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The idea that white people have unearned advantages in society simply because of their race.{{/tooltip}}. Critics argue that these concepts have been used to justify discrimination against white people and to create a climate of guilt and self-hatred among white employees.
49 49  
50 -The focus on demographic diversity often comes at the expense of {{tooltip label="viewpoint diversity" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The inclusion of different perspectives, opinions, and ways of thinking in an organization or institution.{{/tooltip}}, which may be more important for organizational success. Studies have shown that organizations with high demographic diversity but low viewpoint diversity often perform worse than those with the opposite profile.
51 +The 2010s and 2020s have seen DEI programs become increasingly mandatory and punitive, with employees facing termination for expressing dissenting views or questioning DEI orthodoxy. This period has also seen the rise of {{tooltip label="diversity statements" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Written statements required of job applicants that demonstrate their commitment to diversity and inclusion principles.{{/tooltip}} as a requirement for many positions, effectively screening out candidates with conservative or dissenting views.
51 51  
52 -=== The Equity vs. Equality Debate ===
53 +==== United States government purge ====
53 53  
54 -DEI's emphasis on equity over equality has been one of its most controversial aspects. The equity framework suggests that equal treatment is insufficient and that unequal treatment is necessary to achieve equal outcomes.
55 +Recent years have seen a significant backlash against DEI programs, particularly in government and educational institutions. Several states have passed laws restricting or banning DEI programs in public institutions, and there has been growing criticism of the effectiveness and necessity of these programs.
55 55  
56 -**Critical Analysis of the Equity Framework:**
57 +The backlash against DEI programs has been particularly strong in states with Republican leadership, where lawmakers have argued that these programs are discriminatory, counterproductive, and a waste of taxpayer money. Florida, Texas, and other states have passed laws banning DEI programs in public universities and government agencies.
57 57  
58 -The equity approach often leads to {{tooltip label="reverse discrimination" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group.{{/tooltip}}, where individuals are treated differently based on their group membership rather than their individual characteristics or qualifications.
59 +Critics of DEI programs have pointed to numerous examples of waste and abuse, including {{tooltip label="diversity officers" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}High-paid administrators whose primary job is to promote diversity and inclusion initiatives.{{/tooltip}} earning six-figure salaries while producing little measurable benefit, and {{tooltip label="diversity training programs" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Educational programs designed to promote diversity and inclusion.{{/tooltip}} that cost millions of dollars but have been shown to be ineffective or even counterproductive.
59 59  
60 -Equity-based policies can undermine merit-based systems, leading to the hiring or promotion of less qualified individuals in the name of achieving demographic balance. This can have negative consequences for organizational performance and individual morale.
61 +The backlash has also been fueled by high-profile cases of DEI programs gone wrong, including incidents where employees have been fired for expressing dissenting views, and cases where DEI initiatives have led to reverse discrimination against white employees.
61 61  
62 -The equity framework often assumes that all disparities in outcomes are due to discrimination or systemic bias, without considering other factors such as individual choices, cultural differences, or personal preferences.
63 +== Rationale ==
63 63  
64 -=== The Inclusion Mandate ===
65 +The rationale for DEI programs typically centers on several key arguments, though critics have raised serious questions about the validity and effectiveness of each:
65 65  
66 -DEI's inclusion component has evolved from ensuring that all individuals feel welcome and valued to requiring that all individuals actively support and promote DEI principles.
67 +**Moral Imperative:** Proponents argue that DEI is morally necessary to address historical injustices and ensure fair treatment for all individuals. However, critics point out that this rationale often leads to {{tooltip label="reverse discrimination" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group.{{/tooltip}} against white people and other groups that are not considered "diverse" enough. The moral imperative argument also fails to address the question of how long such preferences should continue, and whether they should be based on current demographics or historical injustices that occurred decades or centuries ago.
67 67  
68 -**Concerns About Mandatory Inclusion:**
69 +**Business Case:** Many organizations implement DEI programs based on the belief that diverse teams perform better and are more innovative. However, research on this topic is mixed, with some studies showing benefits and others showing no significant difference or even negative effects. Critics argue that the business case for diversity is often based on cherry-picked data and ignores the costs and negative consequences of DEI programs, including increased workplace tension, decreased trust, and the hiring of less qualified candidates.
69 69  
70 -The inclusion mandate often leads to {{tooltip label="compelled speech" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The requirement that individuals express certain beliefs or viewpoints, often in violation of their freedom of conscience.{{/tooltip}}, where employees are required to express support for DEI principles or participate in activities that may conflict with their personal beliefs.
71 +**Legal Compliance:** DEI programs are often implemented to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws and regulations. However, critics argue that many DEI programs actually violate these same laws by discriminating against certain groups. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has received numerous complaints about DEI programs that discriminate against white employees, and several lawsuits have been filed challenging the legality of these programs.
71 71  
72 -Inclusion requirements can create a {{tooltip label="chilling effect" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The suppression of speech or behavior due to fear of negative consequences.{{/tooltip}} on free expression, as employees may fear retaliation for expressing dissenting views.
73 +**Social Justice:** DEI is seen as a tool for promoting social justice and reducing inequality in society. However, critics argue that DEI programs often increase rather than decrease inequality by creating new forms of discrimination and by focusing on superficial characteristics rather than addressing the root causes of inequality, such as differences in education, family structure, and cultural values.
73 73  
74 -The focus on inclusion often leads to {{tooltip label="groupthink" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A psychological phenomenon where group members conform to the dominant viewpoint, often suppressing dissenting opinions.{{/tooltip}} and the suppression of alternative perspectives that might be valuable for organizational success.
75 +== Methods and arguments ==
75 75  
76 -== Empirical Evidence and Research ==
77 +=== Corporate ===
77 77  
78 -=== Studies Questioning DEI Effectiveness ===
79 +Corporate DEI programs typically include several key components, each of which has been criticized for its effectiveness and unintended consequences:
79 79  
80 -**Psychological Harm Research:**
81 +**Diversity Training:** Mandatory training programs designed to help employees recognize and overcome unconscious bias. However, research has consistently shown that diversity training is often ineffective or even counterproductive. A 2019 meta-analysis found that diversity training programs had no significant effect on workplace diversity or employee attitudes, and some studies have found that they actually increase bias and resentment among employees.
81 81  
82 -A 2019 meta-analysis by Forscher et al. published in the *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology* found that diversity training programs often have limited or no lasting effect on implicit bias and may actually increase defensiveness among participants. The study analyzed 426 studies involving over 72,000 participants and found that many interventions designed to reduce bias were either ineffective or counterproductive.
83 +**Hiring Practices:** Modified recruitment and selection processes designed to increase diversity, often through preferential treatment of certain groups. Critics argue that these practices often lead to the hiring of less qualified candidates based on race or gender rather than merit, creating resentment among other employees and potentially harming organizational performance.
83 83  
84 -**Corporate Performance Studies:**
85 +**Affinity Groups:** Employee resource groups based on shared characteristics such as race, gender, or sexual orientation. Critics argue that these groups often promote division and tribalism in the workplace, encouraging employees to focus on their differences rather than their common goals and shared humanity.
85 85  
86 -Research by the {{tooltip label="Manhattan Institute" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A conservative think tank that has conducted research on DEI and its effects.{{/tooltip}} (2021) found that companies with the most aggressive DEI programs often performed worse than those with more moderate approaches. The study examined 500 companies over a five-year period and found that those with mandatory diversity training had lower productivity and higher turnover rates.
87 +**Mentorship Programs:** Programs that pair employees from underrepresented groups with senior leaders. While these programs can be beneficial, critics argue that they often exclude white employees and other groups that are not considered "diverse" enough, creating resentment and feelings of exclusion.
87 87  
88 -**Academic Outcomes:**
89 +**Performance Metrics:** Systems for tracking and measuring diversity and inclusion outcomes. Critics argue that these metrics often lead to a focus on superficial characteristics rather than actual performance and contribution, and that they can create perverse incentives that harm organizational effectiveness.
89 89  
90 -A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="National Bureau of Economic Research" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A private, non-profit research organization that conducts economic research.{{/tooltip}} found that universities with the most aggressive DEI policies had lower academic performance and higher levels of student dissatisfaction. The study examined 200 universities over a ten-year period and found that those with mandatory diversity training had lower graduation rates and higher dropout rates.
91 +**Diversity Quotas:** Numerical targets for the representation of different demographic groups in hiring and promotion. Critics argue that quotas often lead to reverse discrimination and the hiring of less qualified candidates, and that they can create a climate of resentment and division in the workplace.
91 91  
92 -=== Case Studies of DEI Implementation ===
93 +**Unconscious Bias Training:** Programs designed to help employees recognize and overcome their unconscious prejudices. However, research has shown that these programs often backfire, leading to increased bias and resentment among employees. Critics argue that the concept of unconscious bias is often used to justify intrusive monitoring and control of employee behavior.
93 93  
94 -**Google's DEI Program:**
95 +**Inclusive Language Policies:** Guidelines for using language that is considered inclusive and non-offensive. Critics argue that these policies often lead to excessive political correctness and self-censorship, and that they can create a climate of fear and intimidation in the workplace.
95 95  
96 -Google's implementation of DEI principles has been particularly controversial. The company has faced numerous lawsuits alleging discrimination against white and Asian employees. In 2018, Google engineer James Damore was fired for writing a memo questioning the company's diversity policies. Damore's memo cited research suggesting that biological differences between men and women might explain some of the gender gap in technology fields.
97 +== Political and public reaction in the U.S. ==
97 97  
98 -The company's DEI program has also been criticized for creating a hostile work environment for employees who disagree with its principles. Several former employees have reported being subjected to harassment and discrimination for expressing dissenting views.
99 +=== Higher education ===
99 99  
100 -**Harvard University's Admissions Policy:**
101 +DEI programs in higher education have been particularly controversial, with many universities implementing comprehensive diversity and inclusion initiatives. These programs often include mandatory diversity training, bias reporting systems, and curriculum changes designed to promote inclusion.
101 101  
102 -Harvard University's use of race as a factor in admissions decisions has been the subject of numerous legal challenges. The university has been accused of discriminating against Asian American applicants in favor of other minority groups. A 2019 study by the {{tooltip label="Center for Equal Opportunity" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A conservative think tank that studies civil rights issues.{{/tooltip}} found that Asian American applicants needed significantly higher test scores than other groups to gain admission to Harvard.
103 +Critics argue that these programs have led to a decline in academic freedom and free speech on college campuses, with faculty and students reporting self-censorship due to fear of being accused of bias or discrimination. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has documented numerous cases of students and faculty being punished for expressing dissenting views on diversity and inclusion issues.
103 103  
104 -**Corporate Board Diversity Mandates:**
105 +DEI programs in higher education have also been criticized for their impact on academic standards and intellectual diversity. Many universities have implemented {{tooltip label="diversity statements" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Written statements required of job applicants that demonstrate their commitment to diversity and inclusion principles.{{/tooltip}} as a requirement for faculty positions, effectively screening out candidates with conservative or dissenting views. This has led to a lack of ideological diversity in academia and has been criticized for undermining the pursuit of truth and knowledge.
105 105  
106 -Several states have implemented laws requiring corporate boards to include a certain percentage of women and minority members. California's {{tooltip label="AB 979" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A California law requiring corporate boards to include members from underrepresented communities.{{/tooltip}} requires publicly traded companies to have at least one director from an underrepresented community by 2021. Critics argue that these mandates lead to tokenism and may result in less qualified board members.
107 +The cost of DEI programs in higher education has also been a source of controversy. Many universities now employ dozens of {{tooltip label="diversity officers" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}High-paid administrators whose primary job is to promote diversity and inclusion initiatives.{{/tooltip}} and other DEI staff, with salaries often exceeding $100,000 per year. Critics argue that this money would be better spent on academic programs and student services.
107 107  
108 -== Psychological and Social Impact ==
109 +DEI programs in higher education have also been criticized for their impact on student life and campus culture. Many universities have implemented {{tooltip label="bias reporting systems" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Systems that allow students to report incidents of bias or discrimination, often anonymously.{{/tooltip}} that allow students to report incidents of bias or discrimination, often anonymously. Critics argue that these systems can be abused to target students with unpopular views and that they create a climate of fear and self-censorship on campus.
109 109  
110 -=== Effects on Workplace Dynamics ===
111 +=== Entertainment and media ===
111 111  
112 -**Increased Tension and Division:**
113 +The entertainment and media industries have been at the forefront of DEI implementation, with many companies implementing diversity quotas and inclusion initiatives. This has led to significant controversy, with critics arguing that these programs have led to a decline in quality and creativity.
113 113  
114 -DEI programs often create increased tension and division in the workplace. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Society for Human Resource Management" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A professional association for human resource professionals.{{/tooltip}} found that 60% of employees reported feeling uncomfortable discussing diversity issues at work, and 40% reported that diversity training had made their workplace more divisive.
115 +The entertainment industry has been particularly aggressive in implementing DEI programs, with many studios and production companies now requiring that a certain percentage of their content feature diverse characters and storylines. Critics argue that this has led to forced diversity that often feels artificial and contrived, and that it has resulted in the hiring of less qualified actors and writers based on race or gender rather than talent.
115 115  
116 -**Reduced Trust and Collaboration:**
117 +The media industry has also been criticized for its implementation of DEI programs, with many news organizations now requiring diversity in their hiring and coverage. Critics argue that this has led to a decline in journalistic standards and that it has created a climate where certain viewpoints are excluded or marginalized.
117 117  
118 -The emphasis on group identity and the constant focus on differences can undermine trust and collaboration among employees. A 2019 study by the {{tooltip label="Harvard Business School" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A prestigious business school that has conducted research on workplace dynamics.{{/tooltip}} found that teams with high demographic diversity but low psychological safety often performed worse than more homogeneous teams.
119 +DEI programs in entertainment and media have also been criticized for their impact on creativity and artistic freedom. Many artists and creators have reported feeling pressured to include diverse characters and storylines even when it doesn't serve the story, and some have been criticized or even fired for expressing dissenting views on diversity issues.
119 119  
120 -**Chilling Effect on Free Expression:**
121 +=== Politics ===
121 121  
122 -The requirement to support DEI principles can create a chilling effect on free expression, as employees may fear retaliation for expressing dissenting views. A 2021 survey by the {{tooltip label="Cato Institute" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A libertarian think tank that studies civil liberties.{{/tooltip}} found that 62% of Americans are afraid to express their political views at work, with many citing fear of being accused of discrimination or bias.
123 +DEI has become a highly politicized issue, with conservative politicians and commentators arguing that these programs are discriminatory and counterproductive, while liberal politicians and commentators defend them as necessary for social justice.
123 123  
124 -=== Effects on Academic Freedom ===
125 +The political debate over DEI has been particularly heated in recent years, with many Republican-led states passing laws restricting or banning DEI programs in public institutions. Florida, Texas, and other states have taken aggressive action against DEI programs, arguing that they are discriminatory and a waste of taxpayer money.
125 125  
126 -**Suppression of Dissenting Views:**
127 +Democratic politicians and liberal commentators have generally defended DEI programs, arguing that they are necessary to address historical injustices and promote social equity. However, even some liberal commentators have begun to question the effectiveness and necessity of these programs, particularly in light of their high costs and mixed results.
127 127  
128 -DEI programs in universities have been criticized for suppressing dissenting views and creating a hostile environment for faculty and students who disagree with their principles. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Foundation for Individual Rights in Education" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A non-profit organization that defends free speech on college campuses.{{/tooltip}} found that 60% of students reported self-censoring their speech due to fear of being accused of bias or discrimination.
129 +The political debate over DEI has also been fueled by high-profile cases of DEI programs gone wrong, including incidents where employees have been fired for expressing dissenting views, and cases where DEI initiatives have led to reverse discrimination against white employees.
129 129  
130 -**Reduced Academic Rigor:**
131 +=== Military ===
131 131  
132 -The emphasis on diversity and inclusion can sometimes come at the expense of academic rigor. A 2019 study by the {{tooltip label="American Council of Trustees and Alumni" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A non-profit organization that promotes academic excellence.{{/tooltip}} found that universities with the most aggressive DEI policies often had lower academic standards and less rigorous curricula.
133 +The military has implemented various DEI programs, including diversity training and modified recruitment practices. This has led to controversy, with some arguing that these programs may compromise military effectiveness and readiness.
133 133  
134 -**Political Bias in Hiring:**
135 +DEI programs in the military have been particularly controversial because of concerns about their impact on unit cohesion and combat effectiveness. Critics argue that focusing on diversity rather than merit and competence can compromise the military's ability to defend the nation.
135 135  
136 -DEI programs often lead to political bias in hiring, as candidates are evaluated not only on their academic qualifications but also on their commitment to diversity and inclusion principles. A 2021 study by the {{tooltip label="National Association of Scholars" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A non-profit organization that promotes academic freedom.{{/tooltip}} found that 80% of job postings in the humanities and social sciences required diversity statements, and that these statements were often used to screen out candidates with conservative views.
137 +The military has also been criticized for its implementation of {{tooltip label="gender integration" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}The practice of integrating women into combat roles and other traditionally male-dominated areas of the military.{{/tooltip}} policies, with some arguing that these policies have led to a decline in physical standards and combat readiness.
137 137  
138 -== Economic and Practical Considerations ==
139 +DEI programs in the military have also been criticized for their cost and effectiveness. The military spends millions of dollars on diversity training and other DEI initiatives, and critics argue that this money would be better spent on equipment, training, and other resources that directly support military effectiveness.
139 139  
140 -=== Cost of Implementation ===
141 +=== Public boycotts ===
141 141  
142 -**Financial Costs:**
143 +Several companies have faced public boycotts and criticism for their DEI programs, with consumers expressing frustration over what they see as excessive political correctness and discrimination against certain groups.
143 143  
144 -Implementing comprehensive DEI programs can be extremely expensive. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Society for Human Resource Management" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A professional association for human resource professionals.{{/tooltip}} found that the average company spends $1.4 million annually on diversity and inclusion initiatives. For large corporations, this figure can be much higher, with some companies spending tens of millions of dollars each year.
145 +High-profile boycotts have targeted companies that have implemented particularly aggressive DEI programs, including Disney, Nike, and other major corporations. These boycotts have been organized by conservative groups and individuals who argue that DEI programs are discriminatory and counterproductive.
145 145  
146 -**Opportunity Costs:**
147 +The boycotts have been particularly effective in some cases, with companies facing significant financial losses and pressure to modify or abandon their DEI programs. This has led to a growing awareness of the potential costs and risks of implementing DEI programs.
147 147  
148 -The resources spent on DEI programs could be used for other purposes, such as improving employee training, developing new products, or investing in research and development. A 2021 study by the {{tooltip label="Manhattan Institute" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A conservative think tank that has conducted research on DEI and its effects.{{/tooltip}} found that companies that reduced their DEI spending and invested in other areas often saw better performance improvements.
149 +=== Public opinion ===
149 149  
150 -**Legal Costs:**
151 +Public opinion on DEI is deeply divided, with surveys showing significant disagreement over the effectiveness and necessity of these programs. Many Americans express concern that DEI programs have become overly politicized and may actually increase rather than decrease discrimination and division.
151 151  
152 -DEI programs often lead to increased legal costs due to discrimination lawsuits and the need for legal compliance. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Equal Employment Opportunity Commission" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A federal agency that enforces civil rights laws in the workplace.{{/tooltip}} found that diversity training programs were the leading cause of workplace discrimination complaints.
153 +Recent polls have shown that a majority of Americans are concerned about the impact of DEI programs on free speech and academic freedom, and that many believe these programs have gone too far. A 2023 poll by the Cato Institute found that 62% of Americans believe that DEI programs have made workplaces more divided rather than more inclusive.
153 153  
154 -=== Effectiveness and Outcomes ===
155 +The public debate over DEI has also been fueled by high-profile cases of DEI programs gone wrong, including incidents where employees have been fired for expressing dissenting views, and cases where DEI initiatives have led to reverse discrimination against white employees.
155 155  
156 -**Lack of Evidence for Effectiveness:**
157 +== Criticism and controversy in the United States ==
157 157  
158 -There is limited evidence that DEI programs actually achieve their stated goals. A 2019 meta-analysis by the {{tooltip label="Academy of Management" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A professional association for management scholars.{{/tooltip}} found that diversity training programs had no significant effect on workplace diversity or employee attitudes. The study examined 200 studies over a 20-year period and found that most diversity interventions were either ineffective or counterproductive.
159 +=== Diversity training ===
159 159  
160 -**Potential Harm:**
161 +Diversity training has been one of the most controversial aspects of DEI programs. Research has consistently shown that mandatory diversity training often backfires, leading to increased tension and decreased trust among employees. A 2019 meta-analysis by Forscher et al. found that diversity training programs had no significant effect on workplace diversity or employee attitudes, and some studies have found that they actually increase bias and resentment among employees.
161 161  
162 -Some evidence suggests that DEI programs may actually increase discrimination and division rather than reduce them. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Journal of Applied Psychology" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A peer-reviewed journal that publishes research on applied psychology.{{/tooltip}} found that mandatory diversity training often led to increased racial tension and decreased trust among employees.
163 +The ineffectiveness of diversity training has been attributed to several factors. First, mandatory training often creates resentment among employees who feel they are being forced to participate in programs they don't believe in. Second, the training often focuses on guilt and shame rather than practical solutions, leading to defensive reactions rather than genuine change. Third, the training often relies on outdated or debunked psychological theories, such as the implicit association test, which has been criticized for its poor reliability and validity.
163 163  
164 -**Unintended Consequences:**
165 +Critics also argue that diversity training often creates a climate of fear and self-censorship in the workplace, with employees afraid to express their true opinions or ask questions for fear of being accused of bias or discrimination. This can lead to decreased communication and collaboration, ultimately harming organizational effectiveness.
165 165  
166 -DEI programs often have unintended consequences that can be harmful to the very groups they are designed to help. A 2021 study by the {{tooltip label="Harvard Business Review" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A prestigious business publication that has published research on diversity and inclusion.{{/tooltip}} found that employees from minority groups often felt stigmatized and tokenized by diversity initiatives, leading to decreased job satisfaction and higher turnover rates.
167 +The cost of diversity training has also been a source of controversy. Many organizations spend millions of dollars on diversity training programs that have been shown to be ineffective or even counterproductive. Critics argue that this money would be better spent on other initiatives that could actually improve workplace culture and performance.
167 167  
168 -== Legal and Constitutional Concerns ==
169 +=== Mandatory diversity statements within academia ===
169 169  
170 -=== First Amendment Issues ===
171 +Many universities now require job applicants to submit diversity statements as part of their application process. Critics argue that these statements are used to screen out candidates with conservative or dissenting views, leading to a lack of ideological diversity in academia.
171 171  
172 -**Compelled Speech:**
173 +Diversity statements typically require applicants to describe their commitment to diversity and inclusion, their experience working with diverse populations, and their plans for promoting diversity in their teaching and research. Critics argue that these statements are often used as a litmus test for political correctness, with candidates who express dissenting views on diversity issues being automatically rejected.
173 173  
174 -DEI programs often require employees to express support for certain viewpoints or participate in activities that may conflict with their personal beliefs. This raises serious First Amendment concerns, as the government and many private employers are effectively requiring individuals to express certain beliefs as a condition of employment.
175 +The use of diversity statements has been particularly controversial in STEM fields, where some argue that they are irrelevant to the actual work being performed. A 2023 study by the National Association of Scholars found that diversity statements are now required for 19% of faculty positions in top universities, up from just 2% in 2010.
175 175  
176 -**Viewpoint Discrimination:**
177 +Critics also argue that diversity statements often lead to self-censorship and conformity, with candidates feeling pressured to express views they don't actually hold in order to be considered for positions. This can lead to a lack of intellectual diversity and a climate where dissenting views are not tolerated.
177 177  
178 -DEI programs often discriminate against certain viewpoints, particularly conservative or traditional perspectives. A 2021 study by the {{tooltip label="Cato Institute" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A libertarian think tank that studies civil liberties.{{/tooltip}} found that 62% of Americans believe that their workplace is hostile to conservative viewpoints.
179 +The legal implications of diversity statements have also been questioned, with some arguing that they may violate anti-discrimination laws by requiring candidates to express specific political views as a condition of employment.
179 179  
180 -**Academic Freedom:**
181 +=== Equity versus equality ===
181 181  
182 -In universities, DEI programs often violate academic freedom by requiring faculty to support certain ideological positions. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Foundation for Individual Rights in Education" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A non-profit organization that defends free speech on college campuses.{{/tooltip}} found that 60% of faculty reported self-censoring their speech due to fear of being accused of bias or discrimination.
183 +The distinction between equity and equality has been a source of significant controversy. Critics argue that the equity approach often leads to reverse discrimination and undermines merit-based systems.
183 183  
184 -=== Equal Protection Concerns ===
185 +Equity proponents argue that treating everyone equally is not enough, and that true fairness requires ensuring equal outcomes for different groups. This often involves giving preferential treatment to members of historically disadvantaged groups, even if it means discriminating against others.
185 185  
186 -**Reverse Discrimination:**
187 +Critics argue that the equity approach is fundamentally flawed because it assumes that all differences in outcomes are due to discrimination or bias, ignoring other factors such as differences in effort, ability, and choice. They also argue that equity often leads to reverse discrimination against individuals who are not members of the preferred groups.
187 187  
188 -DEI programs often discriminate against members of majority groups in favor of members of minority groups. This raises serious equal protection concerns, as it treats individuals differently based on their race, gender, or other protected characteristics.
189 +The equity approach has also been criticized for its focus on group outcomes rather than individual merit. Critics argue that this approach undermines the principle of individual responsibility and achievement, and that it can lead to resentment and division among employees.
189 189  
190 -**Racial Quotas:**
191 +The practical implementation of equity policies has also been problematic, with many organizations struggling to define what "equal outcomes" means and how to measure it. This has led to arbitrary and inconsistent application of equity principles, often resulting in confusion and resentment among employees.
191 191  
192 -Many DEI programs effectively implement racial quotas, which are generally illegal under federal law. A 2021 study by the {{tooltip label="Equal Employment Opportunity Commission" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A federal agency that enforces civil rights laws in the workplace.{{/tooltip}} found that 40% of diversity programs violated federal anti-discrimination laws.
193 +=== Effects on free speech and academic freedom ===
193 193  
194 -**Stereotyping:**
195 +DEI programs have been criticized for their negative effects on free speech and academic freedom. Many faculty and students report self-censoring their speech due to fear of being accused of bias or discrimination.
195 195  
196 -DEI programs often rely on stereotypes about different groups, which can be harmful and discriminatory. A 2020 study by the {{tooltip label="Journal of Personality and Social Psychology" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}A peer-reviewed journal that publishes research on personality and social psychology.{{/tooltip}} found that diversity training programs often reinforced negative stereotypes rather than challenging them.
197 +The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has documented numerous cases of students and faculty being punished for expressing dissenting views on diversity and inclusion issues. These cases include students being suspended for questioning diversity policies, faculty being investigated for expressing conservative views, and administrators being fired for not being sufficiently committed to DEI principles.
197 197  
198 -== Alternative Approaches to Workplace Fairness ==
199 +DEI programs often include {{tooltip label="bias reporting systems" event="click" style="width: 320px; text-align: left;"}}Systems that allow students and employees to report incidents of bias or discrimination, often anonymously.{{/tooltip}} that allow students and employees to report incidents of bias or discrimination, often anonymously. Critics argue that these systems can be abused to target individuals with unpopular views and that they create a climate of fear and self-censorship.
199 199  
200 -=== Merit-Based Systems ===
201 +The impact of DEI programs on academic freedom has been particularly concerning, with many faculty members reporting that they avoid certain topics or express certain views for fear of being accused of bias. This can lead to a narrowing of academic discourse and a lack of intellectual diversity in higher education.
201 201  
202 -**Individual Merit:**
203 +DEI programs have also been criticized for their impact on classroom discussion, with many students reporting that they are afraid to express dissenting views or ask questions for fear of being accused of bias or discrimination. This can lead to a lack of genuine dialogue and debate, ultimately harming the educational experience.
203 203  
204 -A merit-based approach would focus on evaluating individuals based on their qualifications, performance, and potential rather than their demographic characteristics. This approach would ensure that the most qualified individuals are hired and promoted, regardless of their race, gender, or other characteristics.
205 +=== Antisemitism ===
205 205  
206 -**Equal Opportunity:**
207 +DEI programs have been criticized for their handling of antisemitism, with some arguing that these programs often fail to adequately address anti-Jewish discrimination while focusing heavily on other forms of bias.
207 207  
208 -Rather than focusing on equal outcomes, a merit-based approach would focus on ensuring equal opportunity for all individuals. This would involve removing barriers to advancement and ensuring that all individuals have access to the same opportunities and resources.
209 +The issue of antisemitism in DEI programs has become particularly controversial in recent years, with many Jewish students and faculty reporting that they feel excluded or marginalized by DEI initiatives. Some have argued that DEI programs often focus on certain forms of discrimination while ignoring or downplaying antisemitism.
209 209  
210 -**Performance-Based Evaluation:**
211 +The intersectionality framework used in many DEI programs has been particularly problematic for addressing antisemitism, as Jews are often seen as "white" and therefore not deserving of protection under diversity programs. This has led to situations where Jewish students and faculty are excluded from DEI initiatives or are even targeted by them.
211 211  
212 -A merit-based approach would evaluate individuals based on their actual performance and contributions rather than their demographic characteristics. This would ensure that rewards and recognition are based on merit rather than identity.
213 +DEI programs have also been criticized for their handling of anti-Israel sentiment on college campuses, with some arguing that these programs often fail to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and antisemitic attacks on Jewish students and faculty.
213 213  
214 -=== Colorblind Approaches ===
215 +The lack of attention to antisemitism in DEI programs has led to calls for reform, with some arguing that these programs need to do more to address all forms of discrimination, including antisemitism.
215 215  
216 -**Race-Neutral Policies:**
217 +=== Disability community ===
217 217  
218 -A colorblind approach would treat all individuals equally regardless of their race or other characteristics. This would involve eliminating race-based preferences and focusing on individual qualifications and performance.
219 +The disability community has expressed mixed views on DEI programs, with some arguing that these programs have been helpful in promoting inclusion, while others argue that they have not adequately addressed the specific needs of people with disabilities.
219 219  
220 -**Universal Standards:**
221 +Some disability advocates have argued that DEI programs often focus on visible forms of diversity, such as race and gender, while ignoring or downplaying the needs of people with disabilities. This can lead to situations where disability accommodations are not properly addressed or where people with disabilities are excluded from DEI initiatives.
221 221  
222 -A colorblind approach would apply the same standards to all individuals, regardless of their demographic characteristics. This would ensure that all individuals are evaluated fairly and consistently.
223 +The intersectionality framework used in many DEI programs has also been problematic for people with disabilities, as it often fails to account for the unique challenges and needs of this community. This has led to calls for more inclusive approaches that better address the specific needs of people with disabilities.
223 223  
224 -**Individual Responsibility:**
225 +DEI programs have also been criticized for their focus on identity-based diversity rather than functional diversity, with some arguing that these programs should focus more on including people with different abilities and perspectives rather than just different demographic characteristics.
225 225  
226 -A colorblind approach would emphasize individual responsibility and achievement rather than group identity. This would encourage all individuals to work hard and achieve their potential regardless of their background.
227 +=== "Diversity hire" label ===
227 227  
228 -=== Class-Based Approaches ===
229 +The term "diversity hire" has become a source of controversy, with some arguing that it stigmatizes employees who are hired through diversity initiatives, while others argue that it accurately describes the reality of many hiring practices.
229 229  
230 -**Economic Focus:**
231 +The "diversity hire" label is often used to describe employees who are believed to have been hired primarily because of their demographic characteristics rather than their qualifications. This label can be stigmatizing and can lead to resentment and division in the workplace.
231 231  
232 -A class-based approach would focus on economic disadvantage rather than racial or gender identity. This would address the root causes of inequality while avoiding the divisiveness of identity-based politics.
233 +Critics argue that the "diversity hire" label is often used unfairly to discredit qualified employees who happen to be members of underrepresented groups. They argue that this label can create a hostile work environment and can discourage qualified candidates from applying for positions.
233 233  
234 -**Universal Benefits:**
235 +However, others argue that the "diversity hire" label accurately describes the reality of many hiring practices, where candidates are given preferential treatment based on their demographic characteristics rather than their qualifications. They argue that this practice is unfair and can lead to the hiring of less qualified candidates.
235 235  
236 -A class-based approach would provide benefits to all individuals who meet certain economic criteria, regardless of their race or gender. This would ensure that assistance is provided to those who need it most.
237 +The controversy over the "diversity hire" label highlights the broader tension between diversity goals and merit-based hiring practices, and the need for more transparent and fair hiring processes.
237 237  
238 -**Merit and Need:**
239 +== Diversity issues in other countries ==
239 239  
240 -A class-based approach would combine merit-based evaluation with need-based assistance, ensuring that both individual achievement and economic disadvantage are taken into account.
241 +=== DE&I criteria ===
241 241  
242 -== International Perspectives ==
243 +Different countries have taken different approaches to diversity and inclusion, with some implementing more moderate programs and others avoiding them altogether. The effectiveness of these different approaches varies significantly.
243 243  
244 -=== DEI in Other Countries ===
245 +In Europe, many countries have taken a more moderate approach to diversity and inclusion, focusing on equal opportunity rather than equal outcomes. This approach has been criticized by some as insufficient, but it has also avoided many of the controversies and problems associated with more aggressive DEI programs in the United States.
245 245  
246 -**European Approaches:**
247 +In Asia, diversity and inclusion programs have been less common, with many countries focusing more on merit-based systems and individual achievement. This approach has been criticized by some as insufficiently attentive to discrimination, but it has also avoided many of the problems associated with identity-based preferences.
247 247  
248 -Many European countries have taken a different approach to diversity and inclusion, focusing more on individual rights and equal treatment rather than group-based preferences. This approach has often been more successful in promoting social harmony and reducing discrimination.
249 +The different approaches taken by different countries highlight the fact that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to issues of diversity and inclusion, and that the best approach may depend on the specific cultural and historical context of each country.
249 249  
250 -**Asian Approaches:**
251 +== Alternative approaches ==
251 251  
252 -Many Asian countries have emphasized merit-based systems and individual achievement over group-based preferences. This approach has often led to better economic outcomes and less social division.
253 +Critics of DEI programs often advocate for alternative approaches that focus on individual merit and equal opportunity rather than group-based preferences. These approaches include:
253 253  
254 -**Canadian Approaches:**
255 +**Merit-based hiring:** Evaluating candidates based on their qualifications and performance rather than their demographic characteristics. This approach focuses on individual ability and achievement rather than group identity, and it has been shown to be more effective at identifying the best candidates for positions.
255 255  
256 -Canada has implemented a more moderate approach to diversity and inclusion, focusing on equal opportunity rather than equal outcomes. This approach has been more successful in promoting social cohesion and reducing discrimination.
257 +**Colorblind policies:** Treating all individuals equally regardless of their race or other characteristics. This approach focuses on individual merit rather than group identity, and it has been shown to be more effective at promoting genuine equality and reducing discrimination.
257 257  
258 -=== Cultural Appropriateness ===
259 +**Class-based approaches:** Focusing on economic disadvantage rather than racial or gender identity. This approach addresses the root causes of inequality rather than just the symptoms, and it has been shown to be more effective at promoting social mobility and reducing poverty.
259 259  
260 -**Western Context:**
261 +**Viewpoint diversity:** Promoting diversity of thought and opinion rather than demographic diversity. This approach focuses on intellectual diversity rather than superficial characteristics, and it has been shown to be more effective at promoting innovation and creativity.
261 261  
262 -DEI programs were developed in a specific American context and may not be appropriate for other cultures or countries. The emphasis on American racial categories and history may not apply to other societies with different racial dynamics.
263 +**Individual responsibility:** Emphasizing personal responsibility and achievement rather than group victimhood. This approach encourages individuals to take control of their own lives and to work hard to achieve their goals, rather than relying on external assistance or preferential treatment.
263 263  
264 -**Universal vs. Particular:**
265 +**Equal opportunity:** Ensuring that all individuals have equal access to opportunities rather than equal outcomes. This approach focuses on removing barriers to success rather than providing preferential treatment, and it has been shown to be more effective at promoting genuine equality.
265 265  
266 -Some critics argue that DEI's focus on particular American racial issues may not be relevant to broader human concerns or other cultural contexts.
267 -
268 -**Cultural Sensitivity:**
269 -
270 -DEI programs often lack cultural sensitivity and may impose American values and assumptions on other cultures. This can lead to resentment and resistance in other countries.
271 -
272 -== Future Implications and Recommendations ==
273 -
274 -=== Long-Term Consequences ===
275 -
276 -**Social Cohesion:**
277 -
278 -The widespread adoption of DEI programs may have long-term consequences for social cohesion. The emphasis on group identity and the constant focus on differences may lead to a more divided society rather than a more integrated one.
279 -
280 -**Economic Competitiveness:**
281 -
282 -The emphasis on diversity over merit may have negative consequences for economic competitiveness. If the most qualified individuals are not hired or promoted, organizations may become less efficient and less competitive.
283 -
284 -**Individual Freedom:**
285 -
286 -The requirement to support DEI principles may undermine individual freedom and autonomy. If individuals are required to express certain beliefs or participate in certain activities, their freedom of conscience may be violated.
287 -
288 -=== Recommendations for Reform ===
289 -
290 -**Return to Merit-Based Systems:**
291 -
292 -Organizations should return to merit-based systems that evaluate individuals based on their qualifications and performance rather than their demographic characteristics.
293 -
294 -**Eliminate Quotas and Preferences:**
295 -
296 -Organizations should eliminate racial quotas and preferences that discriminate against certain groups in favor of others.
297 -
298 -**Focus on Equal Opportunity:**
299 -
300 -Organizations should focus on ensuring equal opportunity for all individuals rather than trying to achieve equal outcomes through preferential treatment.
301 -
302 -**Protect Free Expression:**
303 -
304 -Organizations should protect the right of employees to express dissenting views without fear of retaliation or discrimination.
305 -
306 -**Promote Viewpoint Diversity:**
307 -
308 -Organizations should promote viewpoint diversity and encourage the expression of different perspectives and opinions.
309 -
310 310  == Conclusion ==
311 311  
312 -Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs represent a significant departure from traditional merit-based systems and individual rights. While their proponents argue that they are necessary to address historical discrimination and promote social justice, critics raise serious concerns about their effectiveness, fairness, and impact on individual freedom and social cohesion.
269 +DEI programs represent a significant departure from traditional merit-based systems and individual rights. While their proponents argue that they are necessary to address historical discrimination and promote social justice, critics raise serious concerns about their effectiveness, fairness, and impact on individual freedom and social cohesion.
313 313  
314 314  The empirical evidence suggests that DEI programs often fail to achieve their stated goals and may actually increase discrimination and division rather than reduce them. The psychological impact on employees, the legal and constitutional concerns, and the economic costs all warrant careful consideration.
315 315  
316 316  As society grapples with issues of fairness and equality, it is important to consider alternative approaches that promote individual merit, equal opportunity, and social harmony. The goal should be to create a society where all individuals can thrive based on their individual abilities and contributions, rather than being defined primarily by their group identity.
317 317  
318 -The future of American society may depend on our ability to move beyond divisive identity-based frameworks and toward approaches that emphasize our common humanity while addressing real injustices. This requires honest dialogue, rigorous analysis, and a commitment to evidence-based solutions rather than ideological conformity.
275 +The controversy over DEI programs highlights the need for a more nuanced and balanced approach to issues of diversity and inclusion. Rather than focusing on superficial characteristics and group-based preferences, society should focus on promoting genuine equality of opportunity and individual achievement.
319 319  
320 -The stakes are high, and the choices we make today will shape the society that future generations inherit. It is our responsibility to ensure that we choose wisely, based on evidence and reason rather than ideology and emotion.
277 +The future of diversity and inclusion policy will likely depend on the ability of society to find a balance between addressing legitimate concerns about discrimination and avoiding the pitfalls of identity-based preferences and reverse discrimination. This will require careful consideration of the evidence, honest dialogue about the trade-offs involved, and a commitment to principles of individual rights and merit-based systems.
321 321  
322 -== Sources and Further Reading ==
279 +== See also ==
323 323  
281 +* [[Affirmative Action]]
282 +* [[Critical Race Theory]]
283 +* [[Identity Politics]]
284 +* [[Intersectionality]]
285 +* [[Reverse Discrimination]]
286 +* [[Merit-based Systems]]
287 +
288 +== References ==
289 +
324 324  1. **Forscher, P.S., et al. (2019).** "A Meta-Analysis of Procedures to Change Implicit Bias." *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, 117(3), 522–559.
325 325  
326 326  2. **Dobbin, Frank, and Alexandra Kalev. (2020).** "Why Diversity Programs Fail." *Harvard Business Review*.
ONQs4PwMGLNaA8Vg.mp4
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +6.6 MB
Content
Propaganda & Media-Anti-Dumping_Arguments,_The_Myth_of_the_Chinese_Model_of_Development..jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +707.7 KB
Content
Public university to host whites-only student retreat on ‘white privilege’ The College Fix.md
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4.3 KB
Content
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,49 @@
1 +---
2 +title: Public university to host whites-only student retreat on ‘white privilege’ | The College Fix
3 +source: https://www.thecollegefix.com/public-university-host-whites-student-retreat-white-privilege/
4 +author:
5 + - "[[Michael McGrady - CU Colorado Springs]]"
6 +published: 2016-08-17
7 +created: 2024-12-03
8 +description: Students will learn how to ‘take action against racism.’…
9 +tags:
10 + - clippings
11 + - education
12 + - hatred
13 + - whiteness
14 + - crt
15 + - privilege
16 +---
17 +![](https://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/WhitePrivilege.Shutterstock-370x242.jpg)
18 +
19 +The University of Vermont is slated to host a whites-only student retreat this November focused on teaching participants about their white privilege and how to they can help reverse the negative effect their white privilege has on their campus and the nation.
20 +
21 +The “Examining White Privilege: A Retreat for Undergraduate Students Who Self-Identify as White” is predicated on the notion that white privilege is real, and that it is and pressing problem facing this nation, as students who attend will learn how to understand “the impact of white privilege” and how to take “action against racism,” the university’s website [states](https://www.uvm.edu/~asc/?Page=whiteid-app.php&SM=eventsmenu.html).
22 +
23 +“It’s a new retreat specifically for white students to engage in building a stronger and inclusive campus community,” the University of Vermont’s website adds.
24 +
25 +***‘Blame the White Guy’***
26 +
27 +The retreat is relatively new. It was offered last year as well, when it made national headlines. Many conservative pundits criticized it at the time.
28 +
29 +“They should’ve just called it ‘Blame the White Guy 2015,’” [opined](http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/11/19/blame-white-guy-2015-university-group-hosts-white-privilege-retreat.html) *Fox News’* Todd Starnes. And Kimberly Ross on *RedState* [noted](http://www.redstate.com/kimberly_ross/2015/11/18/white-feel-bad-attend-retreat/) “it really is nothing but judging others based on their appearance and cultural upbringing, assuming things about both, and trying to correct them. And that sounds a lot like a wrong that has been done before.”
30 +
31 +Asked about the criticism, Enrique Corredera, director of university communications, defended the retreat in an email last week to *The College Fix.*
32 +
33 +“UVM’s Examining White Privilege Retreat (in 2015) was the second such gathering to explore issues of identity, diversity, and culture,” he said. “This non-credit bearing retreat was designed to engage white students who wanted to become more effective allies in confronting racism and supporting students of color at UVM. These students were seeking an educational opportunity for themselves to learn about and understand the issue of white privilege, its historical roots, and its current dynamics and impact.”
34 +
35 +***Taxpayer funded***
36 +
37 +Students are given full meals and an education on white privilege all for free, as the public university picks up the tab. Last year’s retreat cost $6,000, Corredera told *The Fix.*
38 +
39 +UVM’s program is not unique, either. Oregon State University [spent](https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/27209/) $11,500 on a series of similar retreats during the last school year.
40 +
41 +One such retreat, called “Examining White Identity in a Multicultural World,” gave white students a chance to examine their “white identity” and “white privilege,” as well as to discuss “strategies to dismantle oppressive systems,” the university’s website stated.
42 +
43 +Oregon State plans to host similar retreats again, slated to take place sometime in 2017, according to its website.
44 +
45 +Corredera said such retreats are all part of the higher education experience.
46 +
47 +“This retreat is an example of the varied programs available at many universities to assist students in their quest for better understanding of culture and history in order to become responsible global leaders,” he said. “It is a piece of a broad array of different offerings for students to facilitate meaningful and civil dialogue and expanded awareness and insights across a range of diverse backgrounds with respect to difficult and important societal challenges.”
48 +
49 +[Like *The College Fix* on Facebook](http://www.facebook.com/thecollegefix) / [Follow us on Twitter](http://www.twitter.com/collegefix)
Rachel_Spraker_is_a_DEI_administrator.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +111.9 KB
Content
Screenshot 20240606 075753 Brave.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +723.4 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_143037_Word [Discrimination_ candidates_ faculty_ image_ images_ practices_ search_ searches].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +614.8 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_143429_Word [Discrimination_ candidates_ criteria_ dropped_ image_ images_ someone_ your].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +609.3 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_143553_Word [Discrimination_ bias_ department_ faculty_ image_ images_ members_ which].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +557.1 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_143553_Word.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +557.1 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_143617_Word [Discrimination_ criteria_ different_ evaluation_ from_ image_ images_ will].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +564.9 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145337_Word [image_ images_ implementation_ steps].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +561.8 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145337_Word.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +561.8 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145450_Word [_ (e.g._ Discrimination_ image_ images_ people_ search_ those_ your].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +503.0 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145715_Word [Discriminat_ applicants_ diversity_ faculty_ image_ images_ research_ statement].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +722.1 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145715_Word.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +722.1 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145734_Word [Discrimina_ application_ candidates_ diversity_ image_ images_ statement_ their].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +425.9 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_145937_Word [Discrimination_ candidates_ criteria_ dropped_ evaluation_ image_ images_ which].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +546.4 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_150034_Word [Discrimination_ candidates_ committee_ does_ image_ images_ what_ your].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +493.6 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_150239_Word [Discrimination_ about_ candidates_ image_ images_ interviews_ questions_ than].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +527.9 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_150510_Word [Discrimination_ candidates_ department_ faculty_ image_ images_ them_ what].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +508.2 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_150948_Word [Discriminatio_ candidate's_ comment_ image_ images_ please_ potential_ research].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +572.7 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_150948_Word.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +572.7 KB
Content
Screenshot_20231208_195112_Brave.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +571.5 KB
Content
Screenshot_20240321_122215_Brave [Facts_ angry_ course_ image_ images_ male_ studies_ white].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +587.4 KB
Content
Screenshot_20240404_013207_Word.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1.2 MB
Content
Screenshot_20240925_191748_Brave.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +685.0 KB
Content
The_New_Iork_Cimes.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +157.1 KB
Content
V_lkZ9m7990.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +461.1 KB
Content
navy removing photos2.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +533.8 KB
Content
nba racial report card 1.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +678.7 KB
Content
nba racial report card.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +803.6 KB
Content
no white male policy.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +517.4 KB
Content
no white men policy.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +506.1 KB
Content
nonwhites payed more at microsoft.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +626.2 KB
Content
nrctp2eE3zmbLyme.mp4
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +67.3 MB
Content
oriIWgLXmHXQaX_g.mp4
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +9.6 MB
Content
overt_white_supremacy_socially_unacceptable_tines_auc_overs_nace_astaus.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +70.9 KB
Content
people_ops_google_confidential_proprietary_allyship_action_session_googlers_privilege.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +63.6 KB
Content
race_identity_police_the_text_discusses_a_police_officers_lawsuit.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +87.9 KB
Content
school dei Discriminatio_ help_ image_ images_ implicit_ microaggressions_ race_ resources.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +591.8 KB
Content
search_for_racial_equity_join_the_watch_party_friday_nights.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +30.4 KB
Content
subscribe_login_get_allaccess_for_93week_then_theres_racial_education.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +83.5 KB
Content
testimage_high_dpi.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +264.9 KB
Content
the_image_features_a_screenshot_of_a_website_displayed_on.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +46.1 KB
Content
the_image_presents_a_screenshot_from_an_electronic_device_showcasing.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +38.8 KB
Content
the_nonce_lets_sum_what_you_heard_the_stories_privilege.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +116.7 KB
Content
university bars straight white men from applying.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +691.2 KB
Content
wanting to hire fewer white men not discrimination.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +389.3 KB
Content
wheel of privilege[6_ image_ images].jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +641.3 KB
Content
white male new hires must be signed off on.jpg
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +634.9 KB
Content