DEI is a dog whistle in that for conservatives it means woke. They want companies to continue oppressing non white, non-cis, non-hetero people. Or at the very least, not actively elevate them.
Yes! I want to see data somewhere. I hear all the time that DEI puts less qualified people in positions but I think I’ve only read one article about this being found out and provable (no idea if it was even fact, it was so many years ago) though I have not researched the data or anything. I think it’s similar to the “welfare queen” screeching. Because one shit person took advantage of a system meant to help, does not mean that all who are a part of that system have the same goal.
And the recent news of Elon wanting to hire from overseas because Americans are too dumb. Assume by race and location of person that they are the most qualified… hmmm. Their bigotry doesn’t even make sense consistently.
The data is available but data doesn’t make a fucking difference here. The people pushing anti-DEI policies are racists and they don’t care if it’s good for the company.
The idea that there is an objectively “most qualified” candidate is a fairy tale for people who have never done high level professional hiring at any scale. The idea is that if you have two candidates with similar credentials, diversity itself can be a value added item for a bunch of reasons which are not easily reflected on resumes.
I literally just went through this in a job interview. I was told very clearly that every person they interviewed was able to do the job they wanted with their eyes closed and it was not going to be an easy decision for them and in the end would be about very tiny details. I didn’t get the position, but when it’s put to you that way, it also makes you a lot less unhappy when you don’t get it.
Oh, for sure. I agree with you that this is not dogwhistling; I was just quibbling a little over your description of what dogwhistling is. MAGAs use a wide variety of dishonest rhetorical tactics: there’s lying for the purpose of outright deception, dogwhistling to signal intent while maintaining deniability, and then whatever this tactic is called – euphemizing, maybe? – to state their idea plainly but spin it as less bad than it actually is.
Ah, fair, yeah coded language was what I was getting at rather than lying, but you’ve put it better. Honestly, I think this is just saying the quiet part out loud, they don’t seem to care any more.
No. It means implying something from something more tame. For example, in this case, it’s an objection to any support for gay, trans etc. Rather than saying that outright, they’d say DEI is over the top. Which is attending to sound subtle and against a policy or practice when it’s against minorities. Its a dog whistle. Like anti-immigration is usually used in as a racist dog whistle.
It needs to have a coded element to it, some people hear what’s really being said, some do not, like an actual dog whistle. There is no coded element here, it’s explicitly attacking gay, trans, women, basically any minority group because that’s expressly what DEI is about.
Questions against it is usually bigoted. It seemed to be the popular MAGA dogwhistle this election.
It’s not really a dogwhistle, DEI is diversity, equity and inclusion - they’re outright saying they don’t want diversity equity and inclusion.
DEI is a dog whistle in that for conservatives it means woke. They want companies to continue oppressing non white, non-cis, non-hetero people. Or at the very least, not actively elevate them.
But we can hear the whistle too. Being against diversity, equality, and inclusion is pretty blatant mask-off stuff.
Yes! I want to see data somewhere. I hear all the time that DEI puts less qualified people in positions but I think I’ve only read one article about this being found out and provable (no idea if it was even fact, it was so many years ago) though I have not researched the data or anything. I think it’s similar to the “welfare queen” screeching. Because one shit person took advantage of a system meant to help, does not mean that all who are a part of that system have the same goal.
And the recent news of Elon wanting to hire from overseas because Americans are too dumb. Assume by race and location of person that they are the most qualified… hmmm. Their bigotry doesn’t even make sense consistently.
The data is available but data doesn’t make a fucking difference here. The people pushing anti-DEI policies are racists and they don’t care if it’s good for the company.
They just want to hurt people.
The idea that there is an objectively “most qualified” candidate is a fairy tale for people who have never done high level professional hiring at any scale. The idea is that if you have two candidates with similar credentials, diversity itself can be a value added item for a bunch of reasons which are not easily reflected on resumes.
I literally just went through this in a job interview. I was told very clearly that every person they interviewed was able to do the job they wanted with their eyes closed and it was not going to be an easy decision for them and in the end would be about very tiny details. I didn’t get the position, but when it’s put to you that way, it also makes you a lot less unhappy when you don’t get it.
It’s why they only use the initials.
Dog whistling normally means saying one thing while meaning another, this is not that.
Dogwhistling is less about lying and more about coded language.
My point here is there’s no coded language - DEI is expressly about promoting minority groups. They are explicitly attacking that.
Oh, for sure. I agree with you that this is not dogwhistling; I was just quibbling a little over your description of what dogwhistling is. MAGAs use a wide variety of dishonest rhetorical tactics: there’s lying for the purpose of outright deception, dogwhistling to signal intent while maintaining deniability, and then whatever this tactic is called – euphemizing, maybe? – to state their idea plainly but spin it as less bad than it actually is.
Ah, fair, yeah coded language was what I was getting at rather than lying, but you’ve put it better. Honestly, I think this is just saying the quiet part out loud, they don’t seem to care any more.
No. It means implying something from something more tame. For example, in this case, it’s an objection to any support for gay, trans etc. Rather than saying that outright, they’d say DEI is over the top. Which is attending to sound subtle and against a policy or practice when it’s against minorities. Its a dog whistle. Like anti-immigration is usually used in as a racist dog whistle.
It needs to have a coded element to it, some people hear what’s really being said, some do not, like an actual dog whistle. There is no coded element here, it’s explicitly attacking gay, trans, women, basically any minority group because that’s expressly what DEI is about.