I have looked and I can't find it. I would have thought we had one already. Maybe I just didn't look hard enough.

It sorta just goes without saying around here. But, if you've got an interesting story please feel free to share.

Isn’t it remarkable how the benign political correctness of the 80s metastasized into the destructive DEI?

Diversity
Inclusion
Equity

You're spelling it wrong!

That rearrangement about sums it up right there.

Well the DIE shrink at my company announced that all written electronic references using the word "Stakeholder" must be re-written with more appropriate wordage.

So we need to come up with something more appropriate, so if it's word games we're playing, maybe something like "Skate Holder" could serve as an equally effective substitute.

https://www.amazon.com/Skatebo...1&smid=A3KVIXE82IG5C

WTF is wrong with "stakeholder"? Offensive to vampires?

May I suggest “Van Helsing”?

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
Diversity
Inclusion
Equity

You're spelling it wrong!

I like:

Inclusion
Equity
Diversity

and there is no risk of anyone thinking you just got it wrong by accident.

Because it wrecks everything with the added benefit of annoying people you want to annoy

Steak Eater maybe?

The BRICS countries don't have the DEI shackles and are cutting into Western business, as their costs are lower without. Some financial minds are suggesting that DEI constraints be dropped because of this. We'll see.

Democrats say they hate capitalism until the donor money dries up.

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Isn’t it remarkable how the benign political correctness of the 80s metastasized into the destructive DEI?

When you say it has "metastasized", I think that's a pretty good way to look at it.
The "benign political correctness" of the 80s was an avoidance of uncomfortable truth which has become the outright lies of DEI.

It's part of a larger, ongoing spiritual battle that we've been losing ground to, certainly since the 80's, but slowly since at least the 60's.

Remember, Satan is the prince of darkness, the father of lies.

Countercultural Christianity
By Whitson G. Waldo, III

Continuing their two-hundred-year infatuation with racism (see here, here), progressives endorse racist, hateful, divisive Critical Race Theory, which posits that racism is entrenched, oppression of minorities precludes escape, and there is no atonement for white privilege but rather only unending oblation of apologies. Against this, the apostle Paul taught, “He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.” Embracing Christian teaching, which opposes CRT tenets, Martin Luther King, Jr., shared, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Progressives recently buried the Defense of Marriage Act to raise up the abominable Respect for Marriage Act. This is one of the latest progressive actions celebrating LGBT behaviors. Thinking children to be little animals, there is progressive inclination to groom children for sexual exploitation.

In opposition, science, statistics, and the Bible indicate that LGBT behaviors are unnatural, abnormal, and immoral, respectively. Proscriptions against immoral sexual behaviors are extant because God has said, “I do not change.” Having created man and woman, God ordained the sanctity of marriage for the natural, normal, and moral behaviors of a man and a woman (see here, here). Knowing that children are made in the image of God, Christians want to protect childhood innocence as long as possible.

In its original description of tenets, Black Lives Matter aimed to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.” Disregarding consequences, an intact nuclear family is disparaged as white supremacy. There is no belief that children have the right to be raised in a family with both a father and a mother. In whatever the family structure, there is equality between partners, without a head of the family.

Against this, the Bible teaches that God ordained the nuclear family headed by the father as the first governmental structure (see here, here, here). Christian families have thrived for two thousand years, but progressives consider this family structure to be something between bizarre and reprehensible.

https://www.americanthinker.co...al_christianity.html

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Isn’t it remarkable how the benign political correctness of the 80s metastasized into the destructive DEI?

Many of us saw it, then, as the camel's nose under the tent. This is what leftists do - incrementalism. Knowing full well that the American people would reject an outright jump from one point to another, they slowly rot the host. They are persistent, I'll give them that.

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:
I like:

Inclusion
Equity
Diversity

and there is no risk of anyone thinking you just got it wrong by accident.

Because it wrecks everything with the added benefit of annoying people you want to annoy

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Isn’t it remarkable how the benign political correctness of the 80s metastasized into the destructive DEI?

When you say it has "metastasized", I think that's a pretty good way to look at it.
The "benign political correctness" of the 80s was an avoidance of uncomfortable truth which has become the outright lies of DEI.

It's part of a larger, ongoing spiritual battle that we've been losing ground to, certainly since the 80's, but slowly since at least the 60's.

Remember, Satan is the prince of darkness, the father of lies.

Countercultural Christianity
By Whitson G. Waldo, III

Continuing their two-hundred-year infatuation with racism (see here, here), progressives endorse racist, hateful, divisive Critical Race Theory, which posits that racism is entrenched, oppression of minorities precludes escape, and there is no atonement for white privilege but rather only unending oblation of apologies. Against this, the apostle Paul taught, “He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.” Embracing Christian teaching, which opposes CRT tenets, Martin Luther King, Jr., shared, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Progressives recently buried the Defense of Marriage Act to raise up the abominable Respect for Marriage Act. This is one of the latest progressive actions celebrating LGBT behaviors. Thinking children to be little animals, there is progressive inclination to groom children for sexual exploitation.

In opposition, science, statistics, and the Bible indicate that LGBT behaviors are unnatural, abnormal, and immoral, respectively. Proscriptions against immoral sexual behaviors are extant because God has said, “I do not change.” Having created man and woman, God ordained the sanctity of marriage for the natural, normal, and moral behaviors of a man and a woman (see here, here). Knowing that children are made in the image of God, Christians want to protect childhood innocence as long as possible.

In its original description of tenets, Black Lives Matter aimed to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.” Disregarding consequences, an intact nuclear family is disparaged as white supremacy. There is no belief that children have the right to be raised in a family with both a father and a mother. In whatever the family structure, there is equality between partners, without a head of the family.

Against this, the Bible teaches that God ordained the nuclear family headed by the father as the first governmental structure (see here, here, here). Christian families have thrived for two thousand years, but progressives consider this family structure to be something between bizarre and reprehensible.

https://www.americanthinker.co...al_christianity.html

Lucifer was the first progressive. He leads that movement now.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Isn’t it remarkable how the benign political correctness of the 80s metastasized into the destructive DEI?

Many of us saw it, then, as the camel's nose under the tent. This is what leftists do - incrementalism. Knowing full well that the American people would reject an outright jump from one point to another, they slowly rot the host. They are persistent, I'll give them that.

It takes an aware and principled person to recognize patterns of destruction. Progressivism is designed to obfuscate that recognition and provide cover for the complicit. When confronted, a progressive will isolate a pixel and focus attention on it rather than the portrait being created. This breaks up the pattern for the weak minded and weak willed. Progressivism is not an ideology. It is a strategy, a method. The ideology is satanic.

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:
references using the word "Stakeholder" must be re-written with more appropriate wordage

Here are some suggestions...
"Carbon-based Life Forms"?
"Ugly Bags of Mostly Water"?
"Potential Sources of Protein?"

Yesterday CNN aired a remarkable segment on the weekend’s Global Public Square with Fareed Zakaria. Not only did Fareed spend the entire segment making the case against higher education — and he framed the argument as well as Christopher Rufo might have — but Fareed also shattered a whole glass cabinet of precious lefty sacred cow creamers.

CLIP: Fareed Zakaria goes full steam conservative on CNN over academic and DEI distortion at public universities (6:11).
https://twitter.com/FareedZaka...927077085143263?s=20



In case you somehow missed it, late last week three woke, sexually-atypical Ivy League presidents at Harvard, U. Penn, and M.I.T., all testified before Congress and were unaccountably unable to adequately explain the apparent contradiction that their students can be expelled for calling a bearded male professor “he” — in a private conversation! — but at the same time it's also perfectly fine under the schools’ Orwellian speech codes to call for genocide against Jewish students using a bullhorn.

I’m still analyzing where the three extra-diverse academics went off the rails, and why the left has completely abandoned them in their time of need. The three ladies’ performances were a perfect storm of failure. But part of the explanation must be how smug and arrogant they were as they linguistically wielded messy bowls of word salad like they were medieval maces.

Grinning nearly to the point of shattering their botoxed cheeks, the three presidents seemed to revel in annoyingly refusing to answer sensible questions from attractive House Representative Elise Stefanik, who was in all ways their exact opposite making for a fascinating study in contrasts.

As evidence for how completely Mrs. Stefanik owned the three academics, not only has one of the three — Penn’s Liz Magill — already resigned, but here was Saturday’s New York Sun headline, starkly suggesting that the hearing may in fact lead to much more significant changes in higher education than just replacing a few woke presidents:
image 3.png

I covered this story more fully in yesterday’s post, but the difficult lesson the three academics are now learning is that while politicians may smugly not-answer questions, college presidents are expected to be sincere and give understandable answers, or evidently pay the price.

But, back to Fareed, and to the Sun’s predicted ‘earthquake in higher education.’ At one point early in his segment, soberly reflecting about how white male applicants might as well pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster as apply for an Ivy League professorship, Fareed flatly identified the actual, real-world problem — without even a little virtue-signaling or using any woke buzzwords — proving that after all, they do know how to speak plain English.

Fareed explained to CNN’s viewers that the universities are failing, badly, by pursuing diversity instead of merit:

“American Universities have been neglecting a core focus on excellence, in order to pursue a variety of agendas, many of them clustered around diversity and inclusion. It started with good intentions … but those good intentions have morphed into a dogmatic ideology, and turned these universities have turned these institutions into places where the pervasive goals are political and social engineering, not academic merit.”

You will miss the significance unless you notice what Fareed did not focus on. He did not complain about the free speech issue. He did not even complain about antisemitism. Instead, he aimed his rhetorical cannon right into the heart of the infection, at pervasive leftwing campus ideology and the excesses of D.E.I.

Listen to all six minutes of Fareed’s segment if you have time. Every bit of it was just as commonsense and direct as was the short part I quoted above.

There was nothing revolutionary about Fareed’s observations, of course, since conservatives have been ringing this alarm bell and even filing reverse-discrimination lawsuits over this issue for more than a decade. But what was revolutionary in that the segment was that it appeared on CNN at all, and that it was delivered by a “trusted (leftwing) news source” like Fareed Zakaria.

Think about this: What is happening in the culture to cause CNN — not to mention nearly everyone else — to side with conservatives against woke college culture as though it were common sense? Think about pendulums and how they swing back.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...7n3&utm_medium=email

The three Florida universities my son is considering all have goofy DEI statements, accommodations, make a point of pointing out how diverse they are, etc. My son is considering double majoring with engineering being one of the majors. Florida State’s engineering program is part of Florida A&M’s engineering program.

So I looked at FAMU’s website and see nothing about diversity. No Office of DEI, no goofy statements, no special housing arrangements, etc. I really had to dig and search to find the school’s demographics: 91% Blacks, 5% Hispanics, and 3% Whites.

I can see why FAMU doesn’t brag about how diverse they are.

Chellim1’s details about BLM are classically ironic. A substantial issue in the black community ( which has now to use that applicable term metastasized to Hispanic and lower socioeconomic status whites as well) is lack of nuclear families, contributing to many of the issues block people and communities struggle with. In other words, problems they created themselves and make worse through continued dysfunctional behavior patterns which have now come to be socially acceptable in those communities, and as time goes on, by society at large.
It would be very unpopular and immediately discredited by mainstream media and groups such as BLM, but I would make a safe bet if you studied black society and culture, that blacks which grow up in nuclear families have a substantially higher rate of graduating high school, going to college and being upstanding members of society versus those that did not.

Regarding metastasis, in my work place I work with a bunch of young ladies ( none black btw) and they do a great job and are great employees/ coworkers, but of the 5 of them that either have children or are currently expecting only one is actually married.

How quickly we have gone from the original premise (everybody should be treated equally) to the extreme (some social groups need to be given an advantage over other groups)!

I think most people would agree with the former, especially if exceptional individuals were allowed to excel, but I also suspect that those promoting the latter would lie in their teeth and deny it.