[akimbostrawman]

If these people where actually sincere and not just hiding behind a ideological smokescreen that only benefits them they would be for this same as with DEI in other men dominated jobs like sewage cleaning, road building or other physically taxing but underpaid jobs.

It really makes you think that all the "men and women are the same and sometimes women are even better" always starts at the silicon valley jobs and stops right at enlistment which would be actual equality.

[gcanyon]

I'm a white male, there is zero chance DEI benefits me directly. But I think we all benefit from a diverse society, with female plumbers and electricians, minority software developers, etc. etc.

[ModernMech]

Disability accommodations are a cornerstone of DEI. As an able-bodied individual, you may not feel you would benefit from those today; but if you are blessed enough to grow old, one day you will likely be disabled in one way or another. When that day comes, you'll be asking for accommodations to get into public areas, and if those accommodations are not available to you, you will likely find how that limits your ability to participate in public life very unfair.

[gcanyon]

> if you are blessed enough to grow old, one day you will likely be disabled in one way or another

Oh for sure, for sure. It's hard to predict exactly how the secondary effects play out. But I was referring to the primary intended effects, which I think is what the person I was replying to was talking about.

[throwawaypath]

>Disability accommodations are a cornerstone of DEI.

You missed the memo, they're not pushing this narrative any longer. The poor attempt to launder DEI via the disabled is twisted and transparent. The ADA predates DEI by decades, and has broad support from both sides of the aisle.

[ModernMech]

I am not saying disability law originated in the DEI movement of today, I'm pointing at the through line between the passage of the ADA and the modern DEI movement. From the civil rights era in the 60s, to women's rights in the 70s, to the ADA in the 90s, to gay rights in the 00s, to DEI today. The principles behind disability accommodations -- access, fairness, inclusion -- are foundational to DEI as a broader movement. The ADA was an early expression of those principles in law; DEI later extended them into other social and organizational contexts.

And yeah, the ADA has received broad bipartisan support in passage because it's well understood even by partisans that disabilities affect everyone, so it's important to have protections in place.

What's not so understood by partisans is how those disabilities manifest, so since the passage of the ADA there has also been widespread pushback on what qualifies as a disability, and what accommodations are reasonable. THAT is a whole different conversation which, as someone who is disabled and covered under the ADA, I will say can be like pulling teeth to get protections guaranteed under the law. For example, businesses are often loathe to make physical accommodations like ramps and elevators, and there is often resistance to providing accommodations for mental health conditions or neurodiversity.

But DEI itself is about creating equitable access and participation for everyone. This includes people who are disabled, and at no point in time has DEI not included disabled people. Maybe for the terminally online right, who only focus on gender and race, but that's not what it's all about in the real world. Notably, DEI also has been a driving force for veteran employment (having dedicated veteran hiring pipelines is absolutely DEI). It's very common for people to do what you're doing now -- "All the accommodations I like and/or benefit me are sound law and not DEI; all the accommodations I don't like are DEI and must be outlawed"

[throwawaypath]

>The principles behind disability accommodations -- access, fairness, inclusion -- are foundational to DEI as a broader movement.

No they're not. Fairness is antithetical to DEI.

>But DEI itself is about creating equitable access and participation for everyone.

DEI is specifically designed to exclude those who rank low on the oppression Olympics rankings, access and participation are antithetical to DEI.

>Notably, DEI also has been a driving force for veteran employment (having dedicated veteran hiring pipelines is absolutely DEI).

These existed before DEI.

>It's very common for people to do what you're doing now -- "All the accommodations I like and/or benefit me are sound law and not DEI; all the accommodations I don't like are DEI and must be outlawed"

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

[akimbostrawman]

It's not only not benefitting you but actively putting you at a disadvantage because of the way you where born.

Why do you think that? Because it makes you feel good or because there is an actual measurable benefit? And no you don't need to have a specific skin color or sexual orientation to be considered diverse/different. If you think "all white dudes are/think the same" maybe change white to black and say that in front of a mirror.

[rectang]

(Not gp but...) I believe it because diversity is not a zero sum game, where every gain for a demographic other than mine means a loss to my demographic which must be fought tooth and nail.

First, we are all enriched by having a variety of experiences and perspectives available to draw upon.

Second, I feel stronger bonds with historically marginalized humans than with humans who happen to belong to my own demographic.

> If you think "all white dudes are/think the same"

Ha, we definitely do not all think alike.

[klipt]

> diversity is not a zero sum game

The moment HR rejects a candidate for being "insufficiently diverse" that's a zero sum game isn't it?

[rectang]

Considering how many of your posts are focused on purported overwhelming discrimination against men, I’m pretty sure that no matter what I say you will continue to see a workplace not dominated by men in only negative terms.

[gcanyon]

What makes you think I think "all white dudes are/think the same"? Did I say anything to suggest that?

The difference, I think, is that I'm not blind to the advantages I receive every day for being a white male. In the words of Louis CK, "If you're a white male and don't admit that it is thoroughly awesome, you're an asshole."

[cutemonster]

Reading your other comments, I was just thinking that you seemed to group everyone who look the same, together, and think about them as if they were 1 type of person you could generalize about. For example, white men, or black men, or women. - So, yes I suppose you did.

For example, if your country gets attacked, primarily the men go and defend their country and people. Is that "thoroughly awesome"? Anyway have a nice day

[akimbostrawman]

>advantages I receive every day for being a white male

Really like what? There are many concrete examples of how "white dudes" are statistically are disadvantaged.

Higher rate to being victim of a violent crime, suicide, homelessness, harsher sentences, dying at work, dying younger, dying in a war, white guilt