The "woke" witchhunt turning on its own.

[lewisnotmiller]

I generally agree with the above, especially because I think there's a lot of nuance that varies from case to case.

My main objection to some notions of "ethical corporate behavior" (and behavior of other organizations that may not necessarily be corporations) comes in when said notions are selective, arbitrary, and sometimes even seemingly based in prejudice rather than consistent and genuine concern for ethics. I would classify a lot of the backlash against hosting the World Cup in Qatar as such, for multiple reasons, although I also recognize that a lot of it was genuine, consistent, and necessary. There were many different critics with different levels of consistency, fairness, and awareness in that situation.

That's a very complicated issue, though, and it would probably require its own thread if one were to do it justice in terms of addressing its various facets and details.

Yep, generally agree.
Even where there are genuinely good natured attempts to uniformally and consistently address an issue, it can be problematic.

Some of the carbon reporting requirements put on certain industries in Australia back 10-15 years ago remind me of this. Semi-government bodies having to spend money with external consultancies to meet fairly onerous reporting requirements that never seemed directly connected to behavioural change or incentive. Somewhat about reporting for reporting sake at that stage.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Apologies if I've missed context here...I read back over some posts, but not the entire thread.

Are you suggesting the alternative to DEI programs is vilification of minority groups?

Not an alternative. But the reason such programs were created in the first place is because it was once (not so very long ago) quite acceptable to treat minorities with significant disrespect. People were fired for being gay -- or often enough just because the fact of their being gay upset the amicable atmosphere of the workplace. Minorities of all kinds were refused housing and other ordinary accommodation.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Not an alternative. But the reason such programs were created in the first place is because it was once (not so very long ago) quite acceptable to treat minorities with significant disrespect. People were fired for being gay -- or often enough just because the fact of their being gay upset the amicable atmosphere of the workplace. Minorities of all kinds were refused housing and other ordinary accommodation.

You're identifying a historical problem (and one that persists to a degree now). I have no issues agreeing with everything you've said there, although honestly I think you're being polite.

Things like the Lavender Scare aren't exactly ancient history.

However, my issue isn't with agreeing there is a problem, at least at some places of business, and in some individuals minds. I can even agree that well meaning individuals and corporations can be part of the problem without realising it.

My issue is more around trying to find the right answer for modern issues.

This BBC article is a couple of years old, but is somewhat analogous with my thinking, if you can spare the time to read. Totally understand if not.

Why ineffective diversity training won't go away

Research has long shown that corporate training on diversity and sensitivity doesn't work. Why are workers still required to take it, job after job?

www.bbc.com

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/02/business/chick-fil-a-fake-controversy/index.html

Thoughts?

"Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children."

Jacques Mallet du Pan

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're identifying a historical problem (and one that persists to a degree now). I have no issues agreeing with everything you've said there, although honestly I think you're being polite.

Things like the Lavender Scare aren't exactly ancient history.

However, my issue isn't with agreeing there is a problem, at least at some places of business, and in some individuals minds. I can even agree that well meaning individuals and corporations can be part of the problem without realising it.

My issue is more around trying to find the right answer for modern issues.

This BBC article is a couple of years old, but is somewhat analogous with my thinking, if you can spare the time to read. Totally understand if not.

Why ineffective diversity training won't go away

Research has long shown that corporate training on diversity and sensitivity doesn't work. Why are workers still required to take it, job after job?

www.bbc.com

Yeah, it has in effect taken me 25+ years to learn that I am biased and in effect it hasn't removed that. It has just made it so, that I on a good day can tell you when and how I am biased both in favor of and against. In effect I am just rational about when I am irrational.

And that say nothing about the ideal of objectively better for humanity. Because that is even more complex.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because the current witchhunt against the LGBT community, particularly transgendered folks, has witless dopes riled up.

What has happened is that the pushback is about transgenderism if that is a word not pushback against anyone else in thge LGBT+ community but all others are lumped in claiming these bills are against them. They are not. What people are against in general is transitioning children and an appropriate age to talk about these issues in the schools or at all.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What has happened is that the pushback is about transgenderism if that is a word not pushback against anyone else in thge LGBT+ community but all others are lumped in claiming these bills are against them. They are not. What people are against in general is transitioning children and an appropriate age to talk about these issues in the schools or at all.

There certainly are different bills and social movements explicitly targeting gay, lesbian and bisexual people. The current "groomer" panic, for example, is not limited to trans people, but to almost any mention of issues relating to gay, lesbian or bisexual people in education. There certainly is a pushback against all people under the LGBT umbrella, it's just very much worse currently for the "T".

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You're identifying a historical problem (and one that persists to a degree now). I have no issues agreeing with everything you've said there, although honestly I think you're being polite.

Things like the Lavender Scare aren't exactly ancient history.

However, my issue isn't with agreeing there is a problem, at least at some places of business, and in some individuals minds. I can even agree that well meaning individuals and corporations can be part of the problem without realising it.

My issue is more around trying to find the right answer for modern issues.

This BBC article is a couple of years old, but is somewhat analogous with my thinking, if you can spare the time to read. Totally understand if not.

Why ineffective diversity training won't go away

Research has long shown that corporate training on diversity and sensitivity doesn't work. Why are workers still required to take it, job after job?

www.bbc.com

Interesting article, and I agree with most of it. In fact, part of my professional life in managing resources in the IT sector has been about ensuring hiring diversity, rather than trying to train people. (Although, truth be told, the Bank of Montreal used my skills a great deal at their "Institute for Learning," a purpose-built facility for training of all kinds, complete with hotel and spa, to actually do training -- but mostly about leading with vision and values.)

As the article says, diversity training can in fact be helpful for those with little exposure to a wider world of diversity. But I agree, focusing more on acquiring diversity than "training" for it would do a lot more. But, of course, it would also cost more, and that's always a concern for business.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What has happened is that the pushback is about transgenderism if that is a word not pushback against anyone else in thge LGBT+ community but all others are lumped in claiming these bills are against them. They are not. What people are against in general is transitioning children and an appropriate age to talk about these issues in the schools or at all.

There certainly are different bills and social movements explicitly targeting gay, lesbian and bisexual people. The current "groomer" panic, for example, is not limited to trans people, but to almost any mention of issues relating to gay, lesbian or bisexual people in education. There certainly is a pushback against all people under the LGBT umbrella, it's just very much worse currently for the "T".

And don't forget the multiple bills against drag performances (Ban Mrs. Doubtfire, and all those Shakespeare plays where women masquerade as men! Merchant of Venice, As You Like it Twelf Night spring quickly to mind.)

No, the right has felt beaten up on since same-sex marriage became reality, and are determined to push it all back into the closet, where they deem it belongs.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

There certainly are different bills and social movements explicitly targeting gay, lesbian and bisexual people. The current "groomer" panic, for example, is not limited to trans people, but to almost any mention of issues relating to gay, lesbian or bisexual people in education. There certainly is a pushback against all people under the LGBT umbrella, it's just very much worse currently for the "T".

People have always disagreed with LBGT lifestyles. But where are laws being enacted to hinder their freedoms? All I see is laws to protect children from being transitioned and protecting women's sports. What rights are being taken away from LGBTQ people?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

And don't forget the multiple bills against drag performances (Ban Mrs. Doubtfire, and all those Shakespeare plays where women masquerade as men! Merchant of Venice, As You Like it Twelf Night spring quickly to mind.)

No, the right has felt beaten up on since same-sex marriage became reality, and are determined to push it all back into the closet, where they deem it belongs.

They are pushing back against public drag performances where children can see them. Drag shows are not being banned.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

They are pushing back against public drag performances where children can see them. Drag shows are not being banned.

Would you allow children to see a show in which a man dresses up as, say, a clown? Why would you? Men don't dress like clowns. How about 2 men dressing up as a horse? Or a Chinese New Year parade with men dressed as fire-breathing dragons? Are you going to ban the under 18s from seeing Shakespeare's "As You Like It" or "The Merchant of Venice" or "Twelfth Night?" All feature women dressing as men (and even hinting at possible romantic issues between them and other men). (See, Shakespeare knew even then that nobody would pay any attention to a mere woman. To be paid any heed as if you were worth anything required that you be a male.)

Or, on Hallowe'en, do you allow children to put on costumes and dress up as something or someone other than themselves? Why would you even permit such a thing, it's just "pretend," and we don't want our children pretending, now, do we?

Drives me crazy that children have less trouble with drag than adults do. Time the adults grew up, I think. (Or at least drop the religious mumbo-jumbo that so addles their perceptions.)

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What has happened is that the pushback is about transgenderism if that is a word not pushback against anyone else in thge LGBT+ community but all others are lumped in claiming these bills are against them. They are not. What people are against in general is transitioning children and an appropriate age to talk about these issues in the schools or at all.

No, that's just saying you should be entitled to make the healthcare decisions that are rightfully, ethically and exclusively for the patient and the patient's healthcare providers to make, amd it suggests you perhaps view it as something more like a tattoo than a medical ailment receiving medical treatment.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

People have always disagreed with LBGT lifestyles. But where are laws being enacted to hinder their freedoms? All I see is laws to protect children from being transitioned and protecting women's sports. What rights are being taken away from LGBTQ people?

Laws that delay trans kids from transitioning take rights away from them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What has happened is that the pushback is about transgenderism if that is a word not pushback against anyone else in thge LGBT+ community but all others are lumped in claiming these bills are against them. They are not.

Do you sincerely believe this?

The people and groups trying to hurt trans kids and drag performers now are the same people trying to stop same-sex marriage and enshrine the right to discriminate against gay people a few years ago.

In the short term, they focus their efforts on where they think their efforts are more likely to be successful - where they see the other side as weak - but make no mistake: they don't support anything other than the cishet standard that their religion prescribes.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Drives me crazy that children have less trouble with drag than adults do. Time the adults grew up, I think. (Or at least drop the religious mumbo-jumbo that so addles their perceptions.)

What drives me crazy is, despite the risks, if little John gets applauded and no one challenges the decision if he wants to play football. If he wants to join the military people won't tell him he has to put decision off until he's 18. But if he puts on a dress and comes out as Sally, then she can't know that for sure, tbings must wait because of possible risks, and in some states she can't get medical treatment for a certain condition.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What drives me crazy is, despite the risks, if little John gets applauded and no one challenges the decision if he wants to play football. If he wants to join the military people won't tell him he has to put decision off until he's 18. But if he puts on a dress and comes out as Sally, then she can't know that for sure, tbings must wait because of possible risks, and in some states she can't get medical treatment for a certain condition.

Right. And they only freak out about puberty blocking medications when a trans kid wants to take them. When it's a cis kid starting precocious puberty or any of the other cases where cis kids get prescribed puberty blockers, nobody bats an eye or suggests we should change the laws to stop those kids from taking them.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Would you allow children to see a show in which a man dresses up as, say, a clown? Why would you? Men don't dress like clowns. How about 2 men dressing up as a horse? Or a Chinese New Year parade with men dressed as fire-breathing dragons? Are you going to ban the under 18s from seeing Shakespeare's "As You Like It" or "The Merchant of Venice" or "Twelfth Night?" All feature women dressing as men (and even hinting at possible romantic issues between them and other men). (See, Shakespeare knew even then that nobody would pay any attention to a mere woman. To be paid any heed as if you were worth anything required that you be a male.)

Or, on Hallowe'en, do you allow children to put on costumes and dress up as something or someone other than themselves? Why would you even permit such a thing, it's just "pretend," and we don't want our children pretending, now, do we?

Drives me crazy that children have less trouble with drag than adults do. Time the adults grew up, I think. (Or at least drop the religious mumbo-jumbo that so addles their perceptions.)

This is not what they are objecting to. This is what the pushback is about:

Pennsylvania School Hosts Drag Show for Kids Without Parent's Permission

A Lancaster, Pennsylvania school is in hot water for allowing its LGBTQ club to stage a drag show on school property without parents permission.

townhall.com

Over $200K being spent on drag queen shows at NYC schools, records show

New York is showering taxpayer funds on a group that sends drag queens into city schools — often without parental knowledge or consent.

nypost.com

What is the purpose of having a drag show in public schools? Why would anyone support them doing this without parents permission? If parents want to teach their kids about trans issues and take them to a drag show then whatever, no one is stopping them. But parents that think their kid is too young or they are not appropriate for their child should not have to have them subjected to this without their knowledge.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

No, that's just saying you should be entitled to make the healthcare decisions that are rightfully, ethically and exclusively for the patient and the patient's healthcare providers to make, amd it suggests you perhaps view it as something more like a tattoo than a medical ailment receiving medical treatment.

A child cannot make these life altering decisions and when it harms children the parents should not be able to make the decision for them either. Why are the detrans voices ignored and rejected from the conversation?

https://twitter.com/detrans_voices

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This is not what they are objecting to. This is what the pushback is about:

Pennsylvania School Hosts Drag Show for Kids Without Parent's Permission

A Lancaster, Pennsylvania school is in hot water for allowing its LGBTQ club to stage a drag show on school property without parents permission.

townhall.com

Over $200K being spent on drag queen shows at NYC schools, records show

New York is showering taxpayer funds on a group that sends drag queens into city schools — often without parental knowledge or consent.

nypost.com

What is the purpose of having a drag show in public schools? Why would anyone support them doing this without parents permission? If parents want to teach their kids about trans issues and take them to a drag show then whatever, no one is stopping them. But parents that think their kid is too young or they are not appropriate for their child should not have to have them subjected to this without their knowledge.

Well, goodness, if the PA school is large enough to have an LGBTQ club, then I would say that is a part of that school's culture, since the club is included within the culture.

And I'd ask how much money is spent in NYC schools putting on Gilbert and Sullivan operettas, with casts dressed as Japanese folks (The Mikado) or fairies (Iolanthe) or pirates (Pirates of Penzance)? Surely operettas from over 100 years ago in England have little to do with American culture.

What is the point of doing those shows with parental permissions? What if parents don't like Japanese people, or pirates (even if they are truly just caricatures of the Japanese and pirates)?

Humans have been dressing in the costumes of other cultures, other races and other species -- as well as other sexes -- for thousands of years of recorded history. What is that makes it so especially terrifying just now, and only when it is men dressing as (caricatures of) women?