#diversity officer

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: John Sailer

Published: Jul 5, 2024

In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), the Supreme Court held that colleges and universities couldn’t engage in racial discrimination in the name of diversity. The 45-year-old dispensation from civil-rights law that the court effectively overturned had never applied to employment decisions. But its end ought to provoke institutions to scale back “diversity, equity and inclusion” initiatives more broadly. Some appear to be doing so: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard said recently they would no longer require “diversity statements” from prospective hires.

Yet there is evidence that many universities have engaged in outright racial preferences under the aegis of DEI. Hundreds of documents that I acquired through public-records requests provide a rare paper trail of universities closely scrutinizing the race of faculty job applicants. The practice not only appears widespread; it is encouraged and funded by the federal government.

At Vanderbilt University Medical Center, a large hiring initiative targets specific racial groups—promising to hire 18 to 20 scientists “who are Black, Latinx, American Indian, and Pacific Islander.” Discussing a related University of New Mexico program, one professor quipped in an email, “I don’t want to hire white men for sure.”

Both initiatives are supported by the National Institutes of Health through its Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation program, or First. The program gives grants for DEI-focused “cluster hiring” at universities and medical schools, promising eventually to spend about a quarter-billion dollars.

A key requirement is that recipient institutions heavily value diversity statements while selecting faculty. The creators of the program reasoned that by heavily weighing commitment to DEI, they could prompt schools to hire more minorities but without direct racial preferences. That’s the rationale behind DEI-focused “cluster hiring,” an increasingly common practice in academia. The documents—which include emails, grant proposals, progress reports and hiring records—suggest that many NIH First grant recipients restrict hiring on the basis of race or “underrepresented” status, violating NIH’s stated policies and possibly civil-rights law.

In grant proposals, several recipients openly state their intention to restrict whom they hire by demographic category. Vanderbilt’s NIH First grant proposal states that it will “focus on the cluster hiring of faculty from minoritized racial and ethnic groups, specifically Black, Latinx, American Indian, and Pacific Islander scientists.” The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the University of Texas at Dallas jointly proposed hiring 10 scholars “from underrepresented groups,” noting that the NIH First program specifically identifies racial minorities and women as underrepresented.

Emails reveal candid discussions about the perceived aim of the program. In April 2023, a professor running the University of New Mexico’s cluster hire emailed Jessica Calzola, the NIH program official overseeing the First program, to ask whether Asian-Americans count as underrepresented. The professor later wrote, “I really need a response at least by tomorrow, because it is now holding up our search teams.”

In reply, Ms. Calzola reiterated the program’s official policy: “My confusion is how this information can hold up search teams since candidates are to be evaluated and considered based on their credentials and not race/ethnicity/gender, etc.—all hiring decisions are to be made following the law and avoiding any type of bias (as you have stated and acknowledged).”

Ms. Calzola’s seemingly straightforward response confused her correspondent. “I am now wondering if I am missing something in terms of what we are supposed to be doing,” the professor emailed other members of the leadership team. She wondered if she placed too much emphasis on minority status.

Yet she hesitated to take Ms. Calzola’s word at face value, citing earlier remarks: “My first thought is that Jessica has to write about hires in this manner (she’s hinted at that before on zoom).” (Ms. Calzola referred my inquiry to an NIH spokeswoman, who said in a statement: “Consistent with NIH practice and U.S. federal law, funded programs may not use the race, ethnicity, or sex . . . of a prospective candidate as an eligibility or selection criteria.”)

A colleague responded: “For me as long as we are diversifying our departments and go with what we wrote in the proposal I am happy.” She then made clear her intention to keep one specific group out of consideration: “I don’t want to hire white men for sure, we did a very good job in the grant with the tables and numbers and that’s what we should follow in my opinion.”

Yet the confusion at UNM makes sense. Records show a repeated tension between the NIH First program’s official nondiscrimination policy and how the funded projects have played out—which at times looks a lot like discrimination.

At its inception, NIH First was widely understood not to involve racial preferences. In 2020, shortly after the program was announced, Science magazine published an explanation: “Not all of the 120 new hires would need to belong to groups now underrepresented in academic medicine, which include women, black people, Hispanics, Native Americans, and those with disabilities, says Hannah Valantine, NIH’s chief diversity officer. In fact, she told the Council of Councils at its 24 January meeting, any such restriction would be illegal and also run counter to the program’s goal of attracting world-class talent.”

Yet multiple programs have stated their intention to limit hires to those with “underrepresented” status. One job advertisement, for a First role at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine, notes: “Successful candidates will be early stage investigators who are Black, Latinx, or from a disadvantaged background (as defined by NIH).”

Some grantees even admit such preferences in documents sent to and reviewed by the NIH. A joint proposal from the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the university’s Baltimore County campus states that all scientists hired through the program will meet the NIH’s definition of “underrepresented populations in science.” Drexel University’s program, which focuses on nursing and public health, provides its evaluation rubric in a progress report. Among its four criteria: “Candidate is a member of a group that is underrepresented in health research.”

This raises questions about compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits race discrimination in employment. The First program’s website highlights regulations requiring that federal agencies ensure grant recipients comply with nondiscrimination law. The most basic implication is that universities can’t refuse to hire someone, or prefer one candidate over another, because of race or sex. But emails show that this has been happening.

At the University of New Mexico, the First leadership team heavily scrutinized the race and sex of applicants. “Just to be sure: what was the ethnicity of Speech and Hearing’s first-choice candidate?” a UNM team member asked in an email.

“She identified as URM in her application, right? I am confused, maybe I am misremembering,” a team member wrote of a different candidate. Another responded, “It looks like she said she was a ‘native New Mexican.’ We checked, and she said she’s white.”

Another team member wrote about a third candidate: “He is LGBTQ so should fit NIHs definition of URM. In my opinion, women are more underrepresented in our department when you consider demographics.”

The team had veto power over the program’s job searches, which it took seriously. In one email, a math-and-statistics search committee sent a list of proposed finalists. The first candidate, a woman, was recommended without qualification, while the second candidate, a South Asian man, was recommended if the leadership team decided he was a “good fit for the program.” A third candidate, a woman, was recommended as a backup.

One leadership team member emailed her colleagues about the South Asian candidate, citing the NIH’s priorities: “Is this a second look person that NIH would like?” UNM’s grant proposal explains that “at each point in which the applicant pool is narrowed, all applicants from underrepresented groups are given a ‘second-look’ before they are eliminated.” The question, in other words, was whether the South Asian candidate counted as underrepresented. (A UNM spokeswoman said “the second look procedure is a longstanding UNM hiring process.”)

The team agreed the answer was no and nixed him. As one pointed out, “We’ve said that Math is really low on women.” Another chimed in, excited to interview the two remaining candidates, noting “their DEI statements are strong.”

UNM appears to have violated NIH First policy, which states that programs “may not discriminate against any group in the hiring process.” The UNM spokeswoman said in a statement that “the email correspondence among members of the UNM FIRST Leadership Team do [sic] not represent the University of New Mexico’s values nor does it comport with the expectations we have of our faculty” and that “as a result of this unfortunate circumstance,” the university is instituting a required “faculty search training/workshop for all . . . faculty search committee members.”

Yet other universities signaled to NIH that they also intended to engage in race and sex preferences. Northwestern University’s program, which focuses on areas like cancer and cardiovascular health, promises to hire faculty from “underrepresented groups.” Its grant proposal suggests this excludes one particular group: “Our faculty development programming intentionally seeks to elevate URG”—underrepresented group—“faculty to equal privilege with white men in academia.”

Records repeatedly show NIH First grantees following through on their promises. In a letter of support for Florida State University’s project, that university’s associate vice president for human resources declared, “I firmly believe in and reaffirm this project’s mission to create an under-represented minority faculty cohort.”

Hiring documents show that special attention was paid to job candidates’ minority status. In a survey on job finalists, one Florida State faculty member wrote, “Is the applicant a URM, as defined by the NIH? Relatedly, I’m not saying this is happening, but I believe consideration of self-reported sexuality in the hiring process would go against official FSU nondiscrimination policy.” An FSU spokeswoman said in an email that “the Florida FIRST program followed the guidelines set forth by the NIH.”

That search took place as the Florida legislature was beginning to curtail DEI at public universities. Other programs raise similar red flags regarding state law. California’s Proposition 209 prohibits preferential treatment by race in admissions, hiring and “the operation of public employment.” A San Diego State University proposal says nonetheless that it will require shortlists “to include at least 25% of applications from historically underrepresented groups.” The San Diego program even divvies up certain faculty duties by race: “Whenever possible, the chair of the hiring committees should be a faculty member of color”; “the hiring committees will be required to have at least two (50% recommended) faculty of color”; and so on.

A university spokesman said in an email that “SDSU relies on the Building on Inclusive Excellence (BIE) faculty hiring program,” that “BIE is compliant with both civil rights law and California Proposition 209,” and that “it is incorrect to state that ‘the SDSU program . . . divides certain faculty duties by race.’ ”

Taken as a whole, these documents shed new light on the practice of cluster hiring. They explain why some in academia seem to treat the practice as a form of legal racial quotas. In addition to the responses already noted, representatives of the University of Maryland, UT Dallas and UT Southwestern said that their institutions comply with civil-rights laws and don’t discriminate on the basis of race. Drexel, Northwestern, Mount Sinai and Vanderbilt didn’t reply to inquiries.

The documents I reviewed point to a large-scale sleight-of-hand in the application of the NIH First program. They give all the more reason to reconsider one of the most controversial practices in higher education, mandatory diversity statements, which provide a convenient smokescreen for discrimination. Lawmakers would be wise to investigate this practice closely—especially the NIH First program.

In a comment on her decision to end mandatory diversity statements, MIT president Sally Kornbluth noted that such statements “impinge on freedom of expression.” That’s true, but fails to capture the full extent of the problem. Diversity statements mask racial discrimination. The NIH has ensured that they’re widely used in medicine, where excellence should matter most.

Mr. Sailer is a senior fellow at the National Association of Scholars.

[ Via: https://archive.today/nZ42W ]

==

DEI is cancer.

[guzhufuren]

gmmtv diversely yours, huh. and is gmmtv 2023's diversity in the room with us right now?

[alwaysbewoke]

[secretmellowblog]

People always take the line “Javert was tempted to fling himself upon Jean Valjean, seize him, and devour him: that is, to say arrest him” out of context in order to make it seem gay. But when you read it in context, it’s actually a lot gayer.

My pet peeve is that people often act like this line represents Javert’s “usual” feelings about arresting Jean Valjean—-“See, Javert doesn’t want to arrest Jean Valjean because he’s a bootlicking authoritarian who enforces unjust laws, hes just homoerotically obsessed with him!” But Javert really isn’t obsessed with Jean Valjean in the novel. They reunite mainly by coincidence and chance, and Javert doesn’t think too much about him outside of doing his job…until after Jean Valjean saves his life at the barricades, and Javert suddenly begins to develop Emotions.

The “seize and devour him” line is from the scene where Javert is considering suicide, and reflecting on the new agonized complicated emotions he’s only just started to develop for Jean Valjean.

Here’s the full paragraph it’s from with the pieces people always leave out:

Twenty times, as he sat in that carriage face to face with Jean Valjean, the legal tiger had roared within him. A score of times he had been tempted to fling himself upon Jean Valjean, to seize him and devour him, that is to say, to arrest him. What more simple, in fact? To cry out at the first post that they passed:—“Here is a fugitive from justice, who has broken his ban!” to summon the gendarmes and say to them: “This man is yours!” then to go off, leaving that condemned man there, to ignore the rest and not to meddle further in the matter. This man is forever a prisoner of the law; the law may do with him what it will. What could be more just? Javert had said all this to himself; he had wished to pass beyond, to act, to apprehend the man, and then, as at present, he had not been able to do it; and every time that his arm had been raised convulsively towards Jean Valjean’s collar, his hand had fallen back again, as beneath an enormous weight, and in the depths of his thought he had heard a voice, a strange voice crying to him:—“It is well. Deliver up your savior. Then have the basin of Pontius Pilate brought and wash your claws.”

I feel like it’s important that this line is followed up immediately with the description “he had not been able to do it”— with Javert hesitating as he reaches for Jean Valjean’s collar and letting his hand fall, because he can’t bring himself to hurt him for reasons he doesn’t understand.

The reason this description is so visceral and feral isn’t because “this is how he usually feels about arresting Jean Valjean all the time” but because post-barricades Javert is in a frenzied desperate suicidal state, like an animal backed into a corner.

Javert is frequently compared to animals throughout the novel— he is the “watchdog” of the government, the domesticated wolf who is tolerated because he hunts down the wild wolves like Jean Valjean. But here finally feels shame and disgust at his own animalistic violence. He feels a tiger roar within him, is furiously certain that he is obligated to arrest Jean Valjean— but then he notices how animalistic and monstrous he is, and that his hands are “claws,” and he suddenly feels a deep confused shame.

I think you can also analyze this line through the layer of….Javert doesn’t actually know what he’s feeling, and so he is attempting to describe all of his emotions through the language of prisons and police. The only metaphors he has to explain his feelings to himself are the metaphors of are arrest, violence, and hunting. And I think in that context it’s also possible to read this paragraph as Javert’s confusion over wanting to touch Jean Valjean, but not wanting to hurt him— and not understanding what that means. He wants to seize him, which must mean he wants to arrest him— but he doesn’t actually want to arrest him. He keeps raising his hand to reach out to him and then letting it fall. What does it mean if he has a violent visceral emotional desire to touch someone, to seize and devour someone— but does not actually want to hurt them? Is someone whose hands are “claws” even capable of that?

Idk, I often see this line used to ‘prove’ how Javert’s weird vaguely homoerotic feelings for Jean Valjean are what make him predatory and violent —but to me actually it’s the opposite. Javert’s obsession with authority makes him predatory and violent, and the weird vaguely homoerotic emotions he develops for Jean Valjean are what finally make him hesitate, and ‘let his hand fall’ rather than hurt him.

[bluebelledmoon]

seriously godbless shows that have not just racial diversity but also facial diversity. lord knows i need more than just tiny button eurocentric noses on people of color too

[justablix]

Every time I hear a particularly out-of-touch take from an online leftist I want to subject that person to hearing just a little of what my colleagues talk about in the break room

[soft-girl-musings]

unfortunately i will become insufferable about the cop show once i finish s6, i've been watching the series back and ugh i miss network tv. things are worse now.

[puzzle-cat404]

doodle

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Adam B. Coleman

Published: May 17, 2024

The law of attraction dictates that you attract what you are, so it is by no coincidence that the Diversity Industrial Complex often attracts con artists.

It’s an industry predicated on siphoning phoning money from gullible corporations who are desperate to project themselves as societal changemakers.

This is how immoral people like ex-Facebook and Nike diversity program manager, Barbara Furlow-Smiles, were able to extract millions of dollars from resource abundant corporations.

Smiles, who led the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs for Facebook from January 2017 to September 2021, pleaded guilty in December to a wire fraud scheme that helped her steal more than $4.9 million from Facebook and a six-figure sum from Nike.

Atlanta US Attorney Ryan Buchanan lamented how Smiles was “utilizing a scheme involving fraudulent vendors, fake invoices, and cash kickbacks.”

“After being terminated from Facebook, she brazenly continued the fraud as a DEI leader at Nike, where she stole another six-figure sum from their diversity program,” Buchanan stated.

Smiles used her authority to approve invoices to pay for services and events that never occurred, funneling the money to several personal associates and pay Smiles in kickbacks.

She would later submit fake expense reports claiming her associates completed work for Facebook, such as providing marketing help and merchandise fulfillment.

Smiles’ lavish lifestyle will be replaced with a stiff punishment of five years imprisonment, three years of supervised release and an order to pay back the money she stole from both Facebook and Nike.

There is something apropos about a sham employee like Smiles being able to climb the ranks of a sham sector of corporate America.

Post-George Floyd’s death, business enterprises fell in love with — or were backmailed into — the idea of a marriage between capitalism and social philanthropy.

DEI job positions increased 123% between May and September of 2020, according to Indeed.

It was no longer enough to have financial success in the business environment, they now wanted to become adored by the public — or at least not be accused of white supremacy.

But when you’re desperate for an outcome, there will always be fraudsters waiting to exploit you.

DEI is a sham because you can’t quantify if it’s succeeding. There are never enough programs or seminars or representation — it just keeps expanding.

Smiles likely was able to get away with what she was doing for years at Facebook because DEI is treated like a new romance; constantly given the benefit of the doubt despite their red flags.

Falling for a scam has nothing to do with intelligence or experience; literally anyone can get scammed.

We fall for scams when we become so desperate for an outcome that we’re willing to suspend belief and overlook common sense.

The problem is that ego prevents industry leaders from hearing our warnings about the falsehoods they’re being fed.

People who believe they’re always the smartest ones in the room won’t conceive how they’re being played by ideological nitwit college graduates who are motivated by ending capitalism.

They’re scared of being accused of being racist, and thus surround themselves with con artists who enjoy manipulating their empathy to drain their wealth.

Corporate America loves chasing love; DEI loves their money.

Adam B. Coleman is the author of “Black Victim to Black Victor” and founder of Wrong Speak Publishing. Follow him on Substack: adambcoleman.substack.com.

--

See:

==

DEI is inherently fraudulent. It's premised upon fraudulent grievance "scholarship," it's unquantifiable, untestable and unfalsifiable, and will accuse you of istaphobism for expecting that its objectives should be quantifiable, testable and falsifiable. Much like traditional religion.

In practice, it's like doing phrenology or dowsing for hidden "bigotry," and "curing" it with more identity homeopathy.

So, it's unsurprising that a fraudulent industry is rife with frauds. We've seen non-stop academic fraud and plagiarism from DEI academics, so we should expect comparable fraud from DEI practitioners.

Interesting how these DEI types are usually raging anti-capitalists, though.

[obstinaterixatrix]

I was commenting about how being in jp in the summer was starting to further contextualize office work culture because as hot and humid as it was, I still saw office workers in full suits, jackets and all (INSANE???) and my friend was like ‘oh yeah but recently some companies have started doing a ‘cool biz’ thing where in the summer the dress code for men is less strict, they’re allowed to wear short sleeves. because companies wanted to spend less on air conditioning’ not moved by the suffering of your fellow man but moved by cost-cutting huh… and a chunk of them are still out in jackets

[officerresponding]

will you mad even more if I start swearing in "commie" language?

by the way we have word that means both cop and trast

Commies speak a whole lotta' languages. Ain't just one.

[heartsdefine]

gonna try to do some writing this weekend since i'm not sure when i'll have the time/energy combo again once the semester starts lmao.

[mikichko]

Okay concerning walkthrough: as someone who's now been dating a former manager for nearly four years, that little guy ofc caught my attention lmao so: was it inspired by an actual hot boss perchance?

-gouge💛

gougie hi!!! walkthrough!!! the sleeper hit!!

sadly, it was not inspired by an actual hot boss 😭

the inspiration for the story was sort of an amalgamation of a bunch of things. firstly there's this one leader that my team collaborates and somehow that man has found shirts that are not only professional but he fills out nicely. then there's another guy who leads an entire department who just so happened to have spent like 9 years in the navy and that got the worms wiggling away. the thing that set me off was another department head coming by during our staff appreciation day to individually thank all the teams working under her for what they've accomplished. that, coupled with how angry my team was making me, just set me off to write walkthrough 💀

i've yet to meet someone at work i'd shack up with, though the odds are in my favour considering the percentage of people at work that have found their partners at this company :')

[quatregats]

Okay while I would definitely like to watch the Hornblower TV series/movies I did forget that for the only episode I watched (The Duchess and the Devil) I spent the entire time being distracted by the phonetics of Ioan Gruffudd's speech

[peachybeins]

After reading SHWD, I've come to the realisation that the reason I don't give two shits about most yuri is because I hate reading about kids/teens & femmes.

So yeah more of this please.