Why does this flake make news still?. Oh, fox.
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Conservative
383 readers
3 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Help me out here: how is the crusade against diversity not racism and misogyny?
I will no longer allow my family to fly on your airline as you have clearly placed ‘diversity’ of pilot hiring above safety of passengers and crew."
The obvious implication is that diversity hires somehow negatively impact safety relative to non-diversity hires. Generally, in this exclusionary crusade, diversity is responsible for things going wrong.
And who is diversity supposed to help?
The CEO added, "One of the things we do is, for every job, when we do an interview, we require women and people of color to be involved in the interview process, bringing people in early in their careers as well and giving them those opportunities, uh, and creating a stronger bench."
So, without a shred of evidence, Schneider and the rest of the anti-DEI zealots decry the hiring of women and people of color as degrading the performance of everything from academia to airplane safety. It subtly asserts that the value of such people cannot rise to the level of...alternatives, whoever they may be (i.e., not women and people of color; who else is left??).
"Racism a form of prejudice that assumes that the members of racial categories have distinctive characteristics and that these differences result in some racial groups being inferior to others."
Misogyny is hatred or prejudice against women.
The subtle assertion conforms to the definitions of racism and misogyny because there is no evidence to support it, but the idea is believed wholeheartedly on faith or personal feelings. Whatever the unsubstantiated reason a person can believe that DEI as a practice is so detrimental must be racism and misogyny. It certainly not a reasoned position.
So where am I wrong? How is Rob Schneider not kinda racist and misogynistic?
If you are picking candidates based on something besides qualifications, you will be picking less qualified candidates.
Yeah, y'all keep insisting this. In this worldview, it's as if preferring anything other than qualifications must relegate quals to the last position.
But basic experience says otherwise. Kids can pick among friends for dodgeball both because they're friends and because they're good at dodgeball.
You and others seem to be adamant that this is simply impossible.
The kid's goal for picking at dodgeball is not solely to have the best team, it's to have fun too. If they picked for the best team they'd pick differently. It's not racism or misogyny to want the most qualified candidate when safety and lives are involved.
It’s not racism or misogyny to want the most qualified candidate when safety and lives are involved.
But that's not how the criticism works against diversity. Rob Schneider said he wouldn't fly United after a safety incident because they prioritize diversity overs safety, according to his view.
You're right, it's not racism or misogyny to want the most qualified candidate.
It is racism and/or misogyny to firmly believe safety issues arise because of diversity, as if the policy is the sole reason any safety issues could come about. The flow of logic is the opposite of what you're saying. It basically asserts that the only reason safety issues occurs is because of the demographic makeup of the crew.
But hey, feel free to correct me: what does diversity have to do with safety?
As with everyone else, I don't want to put words in your mouth.
It is racism and/or misogyny to firmly believe safety issues arise because of diversity, as if the policy is the sole reason any safety issues could come about. The flow of logic is the opposite of what you’re saying. It basically asserts that the only reason safety issues occurs is because of the demographic makeup of the crew.
Not at all. Since they are focusing on DEI more than safety, it is neither racist or misogynistic.
Since their ratings are dropping, it appears there is some credence to it.
You have a pool of candidates if they are ranked based on qualifications the order is not guaranteed to be the same as if you prioritize diversity. If you want the most qualified candidates the only way you can guarantee it if you only focus on qualifications.
As the second article i posted points out. There is just enough diversity in pilots that you can set a goal of 50%. That means to hit that goal, you have swap quality to get there.
Simple. If you're hiring based on diversity, you aren't hiring based on merit. The two are incompatible. And I, for one, would rather fly an airline where merit decides the pilot, not race
If you’re hiring based on diversity, you aren’t hiring based on merit. The two are incompatible.
So every woman and person of color hired based on diversity must not be qualified to do the job otherwise? Is that what you're saying?
Peepin my dude, that is not what he said. He said that you can't select for both. That doesn't strictly mean that a qualified queer black woman doesn't exist, it means that you can't hire for diversity and for merit at the same time.
Yeah, I get that's what he said. We got to that. And then I pressed him on why that's true.
Because if there's a group of queer black women, and one of them is qualified, it's like these folks believe diversity demands that you pick literally everyone else other than the qualified one. This would've been a good example of my question to Momo when I asked him "If demographics don’t matter, then what exactly is wrong with preferring someone of an acceptable race in the best of the best?"
He continued to say it's impossible to choose the qualified people if a company focused on DEI as if the two were mutually exclusive. It's just impossible. Period. Or so he apparently believes.
Why that's true continues to evade the both of us and remains unresolved.
as if the two were mutually exclusive
Because they are. If you're prioritizing one metric of judgement, you're inherently putting at least some metrics below it. And unless you're of the stance that there's a big stack of 100% identical in every way other than diversity qualities, those people are all going to have different levels of actually relevant qualifications.
Where did he say "every woman and person of color hired based on diversity must not be qualified to do the job otherwise"?
He didn’t. What he said is the focus should only be on skill. Schneider talks about similar topics in his dialogue. It’s not that he’s a “conservative”. The liberals have just want so far, crazy, he appears to be conservative.
That's just a straw man
I'm not even making an argument, let alone misrepresenting your position.
In fact, I'm trying to get you to clarify your position for me so I can better understand you.
So, again, are you saying that every woman and person of color based on diversity must not be qualified to do the job otherwise? Or are you saying something else?
If you're making selections based on diversity, you're fundamentally not focusing on hiring the best of the best. And for safety critical positions like pilots, I would much rather have the focus be 100% on quality.
If you’re making selections based on diversity, you’re fundamentally not focusing on hiring the best of the best.
Are there no women and people of color in the best of the best?
I mean, get what you're trying to say, but you're making unwarranted assumptions about the demographics of the cream of the crop. So, I'm trying to get you to either realize you're doing that and retract basically everything you've said so far, or to keep exploring what you think the best look like and why DEI is antithetical to picking people those meritorious looking people.
The best is the best, regardless of whatever bs diversity qualities. You'll get them without having to specifically look for shit like race and sex. Looking for those instead means you're no longer looking for the best, you're looking for whoever meets minimum standards and is also an acceptable race
If demographics don't matter, then what exactly is wrong with preferring someone of an acceptable race in the best of the best? (You still haven't said whether there are women and people of color in the best of the best or not...so let's assume there are.)
preferring someone of an acceptable race in the best of the best
All races are acceptable. You do know race is just a social construct right?
Do you know what a social construct is?
Yes, I do.
Because the moment you're preferring race, you're fundamentally not preferring something else, and if you ask me, race is pretty much the absolute bottom of the list of things to judge people on.
I said, let's assume that the best of the best is diverse in demographics.
You're saying that race preferences necessarily exclude other preferences. But what is not being excluded is whether any given person is the best of the best by our assumption.
So, sure, race can be the absolute bottom of the list of things to judge people on, but that's inconsequential. We're still highly qualified candidates.
It seems like I'm missing something: what other preferences should take precedence over race, then? We're already at the top of the top, the most whipped of the whipped cream. What other preferences might you prefer to take precedence over race at this level?
Or are you saying something else entirely?
But what is not being excluded is whether any given person is the best of the best by our assumption.
I mean if you want to work from a false premise, there's no point in further having this discussion
I literally asked you to correct me.
there’s no point in further having this discussion
That's where I'm at, too. Thx for the argument.
I literally asked you to correct me.
I did. Multiple fucking times. But it didn't fit whatever stupid strawman you wanted, so you just ignored it and acted stupid. Or more realistically, it wasn't an act
You've my permission to have the last word after this:
None of you that I've argued with so far have any idea what you're saying.
I can't press you on anything because, as far as I can tell, your beliefs are completely (or mostly, in Winter's case) divorced from reality and logic. I mean, you consider thought experiments as strawmen, for god's sake! Your "corrections" fail to correct me when I'm trying to be corrected. You make the same logical mistakes over and over and over with nary a hint of awareness. You're all unable to consider alternatives that might lead to the same consequences, and you can't see that you can't either.
Nonetheless, it was a good argument. So, again, thanks. But I definitely won't be doing this again with y'all.
Lmao I guess this is the shit we're stuck with when a perpetual troll gets brought on as a mod
Schneider isn’t white. His Filipino.
Since only white people can be racist according to the left, he can’t be racist.
Since only white people can be racist according to the left
Oh snap! You right.
He's discriminatory against other people of color then and misogynistic against women.
What he is saying is the most qualified person should be hired. Race, gender shouldn’t be considered for pilots.
I agree with him. I don’t care if my pilot is a gay drag queen as long hes the best pilot they could hire.
That's what he and other anti-DEI decriers claim they want.
If that's the case, then 1) How would you know any given person is the best of anything and 2) Why is a particular policy about intentionally helping women and people of color targeted as the culprit?
Schneider has no reason to believe that United is not hiring the best pilot. And there's even less reason to believe that diversity is the reason for any problems United might have. And yet, he evidently believes United is not hiring the best pilot because of their diversity policy. The diversity policy is the evidence that United is slacking on hiring well-qualified personnel for Schneider.
So, no, he's definitely not claiming he wants the most qualified person hired. It's more like he's saying he doesn't women and people of color piloting United's airplanes and has instead moved to another company with fewer women and people of color.
Schneider has no reason to believe that United is not hiring the best pilot
He gave an example. Pilot almost crashed the plane by a failure of piloting 101.
Right, but what's the relationship between almost crashing a plane, United's diversity hiring policy, and the race of the pilot?
Well United safety ratings have dropped since launching dei. It’s possibly they are not related but I think they should focus on safety as they are dropping.
United safety ratings have dropped since launching dei.
Have they? How do you know? I have more questions, but if you just link me to some source or something, I'll figure those out for myself...
...why do you do this?
Your link says:
“The U.S. carriers rankings are dragged down by the fleet age of their aircraft, however all have major replacement programs in place but it will take time for that to reflect in the rankings,” says Thomas.
That is, the people responsible for ranking airline safety, and in contrast to Rob Schneider and everyone who agrees with him, identify aging aircraft as the reason United's safety rating fell from 14 to 25.
Your link also said:
“This year we went for a top 25 because the margins were so small between these airlines,” Geoffrey Thomas, the editor-in-chief of AirlineRatings.com, told me in an interview.
So, the distance between United Airlines at 25 and American Airlines at 22 isn't that big.
But instead of taking Geoffrey Thomas's word for it, Schneider and anti-DEI company are like, "Aging aircraft? Maybe..but more likely it's women and people of color!" This is more evidence that they are racist and misogynistic.
Mmhmm, that just does what Schneider does.
While Bailey doesn’t believe diversity makes traveling safer, the two have frequently been tied together.
But this is such poor reasoning as to demand a cliché: correlation does not imply causation. And that it has been tied together by Emperor God King Musk and coincidentally only those with anti-left wing sentiments is hardly evidence of anything at all except their own biases against women and people of color.
Did you read below as to why there isn’t diversity in pilots? It sounds like that is where United could make a difference but they don’t. I wa shocked. I assumed most pilots came from the military. Most come from self training. That means low people struggle to become pilots. Many black people come from low income families. As such United should setup training in low income schools to provide the opportunity to people. That would be effective in hitting their goal but also making sure the pilots are qualified.
Yeah, but how United could make a difference isn't the issue. I mean, I agree....but...
It's that movement against diversity employs racism to make its case.
You can’t call a Filipino racist. Only whites can be racist according to the left.
view more: next ›