Oh you mean the useless eaters? They’re taking good jobs from hardworking abled Americans. /s
But seriously, disability rights are not as uncontroversial as she thinks.
They don’t give a shit. Stop acting like they care.
Thats why when talking to conservatives you gotta target them, like if a pregant womans trying to make you agree with her on conservative points say hell yeah cant wait for them to get rid of all these pregnant woman that get paid for not working and just pop out babies to avoid work, if they’re old make sure you talk about how you hope they get rid of social security, etc. Fully commit especially when they try to act like it should be kept, call them libreral snowflakes.
the only time their brain processes anything is when it effects them so hold up a mirror basically
Was this supposed to convince anybody?
A lot of these Republicans secretly hate that their disabled neighbor gets government assistance. They hate having to deal with the bagger with down syndrome, or the autistic barista. They think their pregnant friend should be married, a stay-at-home-mom, and it should be her husband making the money. They don’t want everybody to have an equal opportunity, they only want “people who deserve it” to have an opportunity. Where, of course, “people who deserve it” is conservative straight white men from rural areas, or whatever.
Honestly, how could you watch nearly 10 years of hateful rhetoric and think “oh, I just need to explain DEI better, then they’ll support it!”
Upvotes for correctness. But don’t forget the centrists.
The people you describe are a minority. And they convinced the centrists that DEI is just rich people keeping out working class people from top jobs.
These same centrists who did vote for Obama, did support abortion rights and marriage equality, just not as strongly as the left.
It all boils down to taking back the narrative and OP is trying to do that.
It does point out how much I and others will miss those Autistic SOBs that are actual madlads at their jobs.
I can not wait for this DEI stuff to be over with.
The terminology is the problem because they twist the words to fit the narrative they want.
In order for common sense to prevail you need to use common words that cannot be singled out. The terminology is triggering them, so use terms that implement the same shit in the general policy that aligns to these goals, and fold the “DEI department” into the various HR functions that they’re doing.
I don’t think DEI should ever been a standalone department or even a sub-group for HR. Talent Acquisition/Recruitment can do a great deal of what they were doing for hiring. The compensation team covers equity. Inclusion is probably spread between those two as well as HR business partners.
The term needs to go away so they think they won and we need to change how we’re approaching things to make sure people are treated fairly. DEI is just common sense… so the principles need to be just how HR is run from a common sense perspective. It’s the law to not discriminate anyway.
They are already looking at changes under the microscope to make sure that "DEI’ isn’t implemented under another name, so i’m truly not kidding, the terminology all has to go. The language needs to be grade school language because when you put it in simple terms the objections stop because the meaning isn’t spun.
What’s the alternative? I’m just trying to get the best outcome for everybody. They seem afraid of everything related to higher education anyway.
What they want is to go back to no equity in government. They want to go back to being able to break up communities with zoning, redlining, and physical roads. They want to put their factories that no longer have environmental regulations into communities that can’t complain.
In the first 20 years of the highway administration, 1 million people were displaced. Economic centers that developed and began to empower the “wrong” communities were slated for “highway improvements”, removing buildings and disrupting economic viability. In some cases towns no longer existed or completely changed in demographics.
Equity means that everyone is considered for the impact of these kinds of “development” programs. No equity means they get to do what ever they want, as long as it isn’t in their back yard.
Why do you people think talking will help? You are so far past the point of honest discussion it’s mind-blowing.
THERE IS NO EUREKA MOMENT COMING FROM RHETORIC.
Starting a revolution without articulating the cause is just a mob. People need to know what they are fighting for which will bolster unity and resilience.
I hear you, understand, and agree with you.
(Thought you might need to hear that from someone)
Eh?
They don’t care.
Unless it happens to them, and then it’s not really DEI. /s
Or it’s the Dems’ fault.
Optimistic to believe that Republicans care about the disabled or differently abled. Them getting caught in the crossfire is a feature, not a bug.
Hello I have a lot of those. I haven’t had a job in 10 years because nobody will hire me because I’m unable to “pass” as able bodied neurotypical. I require a service dog with me.
I’m pretty much fucked where I live as I’m in a heavy republican state.
Let’s see how long it takes for my public housing, medical and food stamps are taken away.
It pretty much just did get taken away. Trump didn’t even need the republicans in congress to help.
That’s been stopped in court, for now.
It also includes type I and type II diabetes too so remember that when filling out those self identification forms
“Don’t care, these are not issues for rich people.”
–Republicans
I would argue that even if it was just about ethnicity, it’s the right thing to do to ensure that biases aren’t excluding people and that if you are now giving consideration to DEI policies simply because it might include people with lighter skin tone too, then you are a fucking racist asshole.
But maybe that’s just me.
This is why being infected with the Woke Mind Virus is the best plague imaginable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llci8MVh8J4&t=156s
Edit: I want to know who the fuck downvoted this. I’m not mad about it for me, I’m mad for her.
