This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Out of curiosity, why are you calling him an "affirmative action double diversity hire?"
EDIT: To clarify why I'm asking that question: I'm not psychic, I don't know your motives or desires. But it just seems like a mocking sneer to me, as though of course a black gay guy wouldn't get a job on his own merits. It's a claim without evidence and brings down the rest of your post, at least in my view.
IMO it meets the standard of least inflammatory way to communicate the idea. @No_one does not believe we should take this reveal from a seemingly impressive source as seriously as "Pfizer Director, Research & Development Strategic Operations for mRNA scientific planning" implies.
Any company that engages in DEI practices loses the benefit of doubt in this regard. By their own admission, they disavow meritocracy in hiring practices, so I'll take Pfizer at their word that hires are not by merit.
The way he talks makes me think he's not very smart, that in addition to his double-minority status suggests he wasn't hired strictly on merit.
More options
Context Copy link
This is as good a time as any to think about what the following statement means in practice.
The reality of this is that there are many likely hundreds if not thousand's of staff or managers going up for a limited number of promotion spots who will likely get deferred in favor of the minority groups. I dont really feel bad for Phiser employees, however this exact type of 2025 mission seems to exist at most professional companies. Its likely going to directly affect tens of thousand or hundreds of thousands of people over the next few years.
That does however assume there are tens or hundreds of thousands of black/hispanic/latino candidates who even exist at these companies. I suspect anyone with a pulse is going to be promoted given the numbers here.
You're missing the weasel words. They're separately going to double urm representation and increase minority representation. The former group is tiny, blacks and Hispanics, the latter is Asians and gays and probably Jews and Armenians if they need them.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Is there even formal affirmative action for LGBT+ people in firms like this?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link