
In my deep blue city, our upper level jobs have DEI. You have to take an exam to determine eligibility to work in the city. If you’re eligible, you’re placed on a list for two years, and your placement is determined by your score relative to others who took the exam. Two groups receive 10 point curves on the exam: “Legacy” (child of a dead first responder) and Veterans…
“in the city” is kinda inaccurate. “for the city” is more accurate since it’s for city jobs, my bad. But it’s the fact that Republicans’ definition of DEI “lowering a bar” only happens for groups they’d support. Meanwhile, the real definition of DEI widens a door to find talent from other places.
Okay at first I thought you were trying to paint a picture of some fictional dystopian metropolis, that’s my bad. Only took a shot at you because I thought you were spreading misinfo, so my apologies. But yeah, that’s exactly what I’m talking about with white lower class men, especially those in extremely rural and poor areas. Colleges want to “recruit” them into farming tech and science studies so they can advance those careers and hopefully improve the economic situation back home
But without DEI, they’re obviously much less likely to get into those programs because they generally lack the academic qualifications necessary to be accepted into higher education institutions. They also lack the finances to attend, even if they do get accepted at all, because all those scholarships are being pulled. (Just explaining this for anyone who wasn’t aware of how DEI was benefiting white men)