… when a substantial portion of the alleged advocates start saying things like:
- This company doesn’t have enough Trump voters,
- We should make the office more welcoming for Evangelicals,
- We need to be sensitive to the feelings of people who believe in traditional, monogamous marriage,
- There should be a “men in leadership” initiative for every “women in leadership” initiative, ….
Actually, even then I won’t. Diversity is not a legitimate goal on its own.
And not quite along the same lines, but here’s more nutty woke news: Is Anheuser-Busch Drunk? The Beer Behemoth Is Forcing the Woke ‘Gender Unicorn’ on Its Employees
Unfortunately “diversity” no longer means, well, diversity. It’s instead code for “having sufficient Diversity Points(tm)”, and Trump voters, evangelicals, traditional marriage supporters, and men, all start out with enormous negative scores.
You get points by being in the right category, but the math is complicated. For example, you’d ordinarily gain points by being black, but if you’re a black Trump voter you actually lose points instead because you’re considered a race traitor (see the #uncletim controversy of late) and so you lose even more.
I think that’s why adding black conservatives from all around the world, or Chinese evangelicals of every occupation, to a group consisting entirely of secular white liberals from New York who work in gentry fields, doesn’t count as making the group more diverse.
Yes, it’s absolutely not about “diversity” in the ordinary sense of that word, and there’s definitely a lot of privilege involved. Certain groups are promoted in the name of diversity, while others are either ignored or positively repressed.