Why have you chosen diversity to be solely based on skin colour, gender and sexual preferences in specific? Can you show me the evidence that these are the most important features that improve diversity of thought in an organisation? If the purpose instead is to decrease social disparities, other important attributes have been completely ignored and downplayed e.g class background (class of parents), education level of parents, diversity of personality traits etc.
Wrong. It is not based on their skin colour, gender or sexual preferences but that they can be chosen despite those characteristics and be evaluated by their proven capacity. In the past they had capacity but were rejected because of their skin, gender or sexual preferences. You can change your background if you have a good job. That's a good starter.
@@daniels.os. you have not addressed my questions on why those characteristics were chosen. There’s no question certain groups in every society have been at a disadvantage for as long as we can document history. Why not try to help all people that come from a working class background, regardless of gender and race?
im a POC / muslim. this is BS. force diversity / inclusion is RACISM / DISCRIMINATION. period. you hire a person on merit. you promote someone based on merit. PERIOD
The problem is that a lot of whites are chosen for their skin color predominantly instead of their capacity. Diversity & inclusion is exactly choose those who can perform better despite their skin color.
@@daniels.os. i understand your point. then target discriminatory/bias hiring practices. you dont fight discrimination with more discrimination. thats just pouring more fuel to the fire
Why have you chosen diversity to be solely based on skin colour, gender and sexual preferences in specific? Can you show me the evidence that these are the most important features that improve diversity of thought in an organisation? If the purpose instead is to decrease social disparities, other important attributes have been completely ignored and downplayed e.g class background (class of parents), education level of parents, diversity of personality traits etc.
Wrong. It is not based on their skin colour, gender or sexual preferences but that they can be chosen despite those characteristics and be evaluated by their proven capacity. In the past they had capacity but were rejected because of their skin, gender or sexual preferences. You can change your background if you have a good job. That's a good starter.
@@daniels.os. you have not addressed my questions on why those characteristics were chosen. There’s no question certain groups in every society have been at a disadvantage for as long as we can document history. Why not try to help all people that come from a working class background, regardless of gender and race?
im a POC / muslim. im totally with you on this. you hire a person on merit. you promote someone based on merit. Period
im a POC / muslim. this is BS. force diversity / inclusion is RACISM / DISCRIMINATION. period. you hire a person on merit. you promote someone based on merit. PERIOD
The problem is that a lot of whites are chosen for their skin color predominantly instead of their capacity. Diversity & inclusion is exactly choose those who can perform better despite their skin color.
@@daniels.os. i understand your point. then target discriminatory/bias hiring practices. you dont fight discrimination with more discrimination. thats just pouring more fuel to the fire