I so hate that trying to help historically disadvantaged groups some extra help is considered bad. Like I get not making a group extra powered, but to help women in tech or research into Black prenatal care just seems absurd.

▲

throw830373 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Lets not forget about female CEOs, they should be making 20x more.

▲

tbrownaw 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Path dependence causes problems, it's better to make sure you can just use current state instead.

▲

kenjackson 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Sorry to be dense. What does that mean?

▲

ithkuil 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I believe the meaning in plain English is:

Let's not focus too much on the past problems that a group of people had, but let's make sure that the situation is improved for that group right now.

Focusing too much on past and try to tip the scale _because_ the past was so bad may lead to bad outcomes today. It may be perceived as a search for grievances and retribution and not the equalization of outcomes that one claims it should seek.

▲

kenjackson 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Got it. I agree. If there is no modern negative consequences then no redress is needed.

▲

ithkuil 3 hours ago | parent [-]

and conversely, if there are modern negative consequences, let's focus on those and fix them!

	▲	kenjackson 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		100%

▲

zombocomvibes 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Look at the current admin's overt tipping of the scales for white heterosexual Christian (in name only) males to see evidence of DEI in action.

They just don't like it when it's other people

▲

ithkuil 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah it's horrible and blatant.

But they think they can do it because they can spin it as "you did it first".

This just makes the point that there is nothing to gain by framing the issue as a grievance.

There are real prejudices and real systemic disadvantages to fix and while it's important to understand the history of them, I believe we put too much focus on that and less on what we can do to put that past behind us instead of dwelling in it. I don't think this approach of grievances has done anybody any favour in practice.

▲

vkou 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> But they think they can do it because they can spin it as "you did it first".

They are happy to do whatever they want, and they don't worry about needing false-equivalence precedent to do it.

	▲	ithkuil 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		sure, but this still doesn't mean we should behave like them.