http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28105/

(07-11-2016 02:13 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28105/

Cincy trying to catch up to Houston again.

Houston #2

.

I just saved some more money that normally goes to the school. Silly SJW tripe.

I think we'll get to hear much more about how terrible white males have it these days despite them doing better than other groups in every conceivable measure. I think promoting diversity is a good thing. Happy to see it. I'll give more to the University this year though I doubt my giving will be enough to offset the losses from Rath.

Mark is a beard-o who wears skinny jeans. Of course he likes it.

Promoting diversity is wonderful. Promoting diversity of thought is even better. Forcing this crap on employees and the guy looking or the hourly janitor job is insane.

UC is in full on genuflection mode to the SJW crowd ever since the idiot cop shot Sam Dubose.

(07-11-2016 04:31 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I think we'll get to hear much more about how terrible white males have it these days despite them doing better than other groups in every conceivable measure. I think promoting diversity is a good thing. Happy to see it. I'll give more to the University this year though I doubt my giving will be enough to offset the losses from Rath.

How does writing some statement for a staff position or none faculty positions do anything? Other than set up a case where if you don't do this your get fired or demoted, etc. and establish a form of social control that is unnecessary. Why is not not based purely on merit. Best qualified gets the job/promotion?

Oh, nice logical fallacy while engaging in collectivism. White makes having so bad while doing better than everyone else. As if that statement applies to every individual with said group. And if you are talking average income you do know that people like Bill Gates will throw off that average quite a bit.

(07-11-2016 05:37 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Mark is a beard-o who wears skinny jeans. Of course he likes it.

Promoting diversity is wonderful. Promoting diversity of thought is even better. Forcing this crap on employees and the guy looking or the hourly janitor job is insane.

UC is in full on genuflection mode to the SJW crowd ever since the idiot cop shot Sam Dubose.

(07-11-2016 03:22 PM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  

(07-11-2016 02:13 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28105/

Cincy trying to catch up to Houston again.

Houston #2

.

But, Huston has a professor there that needs to go, so does Temple, we got a writer for the school paper that went full retard.

Houston
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28049/

ECU (speechless)
http://hypeline.org/student-newspaper-ed...-birthday/

My native southern heritage kept me from fully understanding equality until my late-20s, or about 40 years ago. That awakening didn't come as a result of government regulations, forced % of participation, or any other mandated guidance. That change occurred because of an inner change of heart; in my case it was an acceptance of Jesus as savior. I'm a very active member of a church that's probably the most diverse in a traditional southern city where Sunday morning is normally the most segregated time of the week.

I'm as enthused about inclusion and diversity as anyone can possibly be because I now understand how wrong the option is. However, I'm not enthused about the mandating of participation percentages. That only hardens the hearts further of those that the mandates are trying to change. I don't care how it's done or the correct intentions.....it comes off as more forced social baggage from big government, including schools. The problem is that I don't have a reasonable alternative to assist the average Joe understand the importance of full acceptance/inclusion/diversity.

Just a thought.......Perhaps requiring people to watch news videos from the last 2 weeks?????

I'm all for Diversity, as long as it doesn't come at the cost of academic standing. The best candidate should get the job, no matter of diversity.

Beverley Davenport has been interim-president here a month and I already don't like her.

I'm fine with it.

Most Univ Professors/staff love diversity...as long as it doesn't have to include having others with different political leanings as that is not encouraged.

Next we will have Race Commissars to enforce the pledge.

Asians cannot qualify for affirmative action as they are hired at a greater rate than the general population. Asians also, on average score much higher on standardized academic tests, even when it is in English (often their second language).
People who work hard and study hard will be rewarded without affirmative action mandates.

“Programmed” diversity by percentages is not the answer at all as it nothing more than “forced” diversity. It will only lead to even more discontent and unfairness than we already have.

People should be hired when they are the best and only the best available with no consideration being given to: Race, Religion, Sexual Orientation, etc.

(07-12-2016 10:53 AM)don41 Wrote:  “Programmed” diversity by percentages is not the answer at all as it nothing more than “forced” diversity. It will only lead to even more discontent and unfairness than we already have.

People should be hired when they are the best and only the best available with no consideration being given to: Race, Religion, Sexual Orientation, etc.

Quotas are illegal, as is "programmed" diversity by percentages. Encouraging diversity and openness to it has been repeatedly upheld and found to be a compelling interest.

The idea of "best" available has always been subjective. How many people get jobs, or get in the door with interviews, or find out about possible positions from connections / family? Isn't it harder for a minority that dealt with a history of oppression to have that opportunity?

When people have always hired and looked at things a certain way, they may believe they are race neutral but maybe that comfort isn't there with minority candidates that may be there with others. People aren't hired because of some objective standard of best. People bring their own experiences and prejudices both conscious and unconscious into it. The idea behind a diversity and inclusion statement is to get candidates thinking about what that means and those doing the hiring to think about their practices as well. Many studies have showed that an organization, business or school that is open about diversity and has a diverse environment is more productive and a more positive environment, this seems an interest that is relevant to explore in hiring.

Wth are you people on? separating a group of people and having different standards, quotas, etc. is NOT the way to diversity. All people are created equal, everyone should have an equal opportunity to to succeed of fail based on their desire, commitment, and abilities to perform the position they seek. It is just plain wrong to put someone into a position based primarily on skin color. That is the very definition of discrimination whether we call it discrimination, diversity, or affirmative action.

(07-12-2016 12:36 PM)nastar36 Wrote:  Wth are you people on? separating a group of people and having different standards, quotas, etc. is NOT the way to diversity. All people are created equal, everyone should have an equal opportunity to to succeed of fail based on their desire, commitment, and abilities to perform the position they seek. It is just plain wrong to put someone into a position based primarily on skin color. That is the very definition of discrimination whether we call it discrimination, diversity, or affirmative action.

NOBODY IS SAYING TO PUT SOMEONE IN A POSITION BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR. THAT'S A FAKE ARGUMENT.

The argument is that an environment that promotes diversity and inclusion is beneficial to a business, school, etc. The idea that we go purely on merit now is a false idea... There are plenty of subjective factors people use to evaluate candidates, many of which hurt the prospects of minority mobility. Nobody is arguing for different standards, nobody is arguing quotas.