HR Professionals - do you really believe in “diversity and inclusion,” or do you know it’s bullshit?

Diversify or die. Hiring non traditional candidates give companies greater workforce agility. And yes, some treat it as a box-checking exercise, but when it's done right it's a good thing. It also (theoretically) should hinder conscious and unconscious bias in hiring.

What R1 said. To me, the most important aspect is addressing unconscious bias during the hiring process.

It's pure bullshit!

[quote]. . . greater workforce agility.

That's some Meghan Marklesque argle-bargle word salad, r1

This thread already is a hate fest, have fun

^ you should work on your reading comprehension skills, R4.

[quote]I work for a tech company in the Silicon Valley

Sure, Jan.

How about hiring the right person for the job. If there are no Blacks or Indians that fit the bill, then so be it. Not every situation has to be inclusive. Just look at Madea's Family Reunion.

r2 which applies across the board of all races, religion/seculrism/atheism, backgrounds, sexes, sexualities, ages, politics, etc.

The problem many have with it

including minorities,

is that it's often weaponized and used as a way to subvert the system to reject qualified applicants of any identifier (ok, she wasn't black enough, like yo,yo, wazzup and not a single person in a white hood showed up to harassed her when she came to interview. I doubt she was authentically black. Besides what black woman chooses to learn to code) but I've got this friend that identifies as a feminist attack helicopter and doesn't know shit about video game design but a/he is actually autistic and not a self hating, fuck boy enabling, sellout and has reviewed games on buzzfeed for yearz

I am considering brining over a very high performing person over to my team at work. It will leave a hole in her current team but too bad for them. Her current team leader said that I only wanted her cause she's black! It was a slap in the face cause up to that moment I hadn't even noticed she was black or considered the "diversity" aspect of the hire. This is a good thing, I guess all the unconscious bias training has worked on me.

Attended a virtual work-related conference very recently. It was a “diverse” group in the sense that there were a lot of East Indians and Asians in tech/tech adjacent roles. Maybe 40% Indian, 40% Far East Asian, 20% white, no Hispanics (oddly) and one black person.

At one point a diversity and inclusion exec spoke and then then opened the session to comments and questions. Only the white people spoke up. You could interpret that as the white people being presumptuous, or as the white people wanting to help the group save face, because WTF wasn’t anyone else making like a good corporate citizen?

Either way, I suspect the exec in question has done this many times before and had similar experiences. So she probably figures her work is not yet done and she probably doesn’t think it’s all bullshit.

I’m the OP. Let me just say this, to add the thread. In my Masters program, I took a “managing and developing people” class, and my group did a presentation on unconscious bias in the workplace. It was actually quite an interesting topic, and we delved into the research we conducted about how unconscious bias can affect teams, and the assumptions that we make about women, various racial minorities, etc.

By contrast, the unconscious bias training we had to take at work felt like a really bad SNL skit.

Good luck making people change things in their unconsciousness.

What kind of Log Cabinette loser complains about inclusiveness on a gay board? How would you feel if they fired you for being gay?

Ask yourself why this bothers you so, OP. It doesn't affect your day-to-day quality of work, does it?

[quote] cause up to that moment I hadn't even noticed she was black

Is that really possible?

I think all resumes should be blind.

You clearly didn’t read my post R15. I didn’t say inclusion is a bad thing. I’m just making a point that HR departments don’t really mean it when they yammer on about it. At the end of the day, managers are going to hire the most qualified person, and all the lip service is fake.

Typical HR person looking at staff:

"Damn, we have A LOT of white faces up in here. We need to do something about that!

Then they go and hire "the best person for the job"....right.

Racists gonna racist.

Diversity and inclusion are important in a workplace, but HR twats like R1 and R2 don’t really mean actual diversity. They want a workforce that is visibly diverse, so that they can please upper management and the board. They don’t mean diversity in age or even encouraging hiring more gay and lesbian employees. They’re full of shit.

[quote] That's some Meghan Marklesque

That’s some truly embarrassing obsession, loser.

[quote] I am considering brining over a very high performing person

Why, are you able to steal some of a person’s success if you sprinkle pickle juice over them?

Hiring practices are so broken in so many ways across the board. Diversity is seldom more than a "must check off list" for any company, unless they have leaders who are diverse or who understand it.

[quote] Diversify or die.

What does that mean, R1?

Has somebody died? Has a company died?

It is a meaningless slogan designed to brainwash the gullible.

[quote] I think all resumes should be blind.

I think all employees should be blind. Less drama.

Ahem.

It is an interesting topic, but I’m sure the same person is starting the our monthly HR threads. I feel like I’m back working at the hospital full time. 🤢

Diversity, or lack of, impacts companies differently. In my professional services industry, we need to provide diversity stats to be hired for some projects. Once clients start asking for diversity stats, that’s when HR starts to really care about it. In the case of my company, I think management does sincerely value diversity. It’s just the jobs kind of suck (in spite of high salary) so turnover is high.

So, R30, high diversity means high turnover.

First of all, how do you know if someone is gay? Second, does diversity also mean hiring older candidates (55+)?

I've found that Indians are the most entitled and unpleasant assholes to work with.

[quote] At the end of the day, managers are going to hire the most qualified person, and all the lip service is fake.

I don't think so.

"where the staff is about 90% Indian"

This isn't done for inclusion, it's because the H1-B crowd works for generally (a lot) less money. This has absolutely nothing to do with diversity or any of the PC stuff.

[quote] greater workforce agility.

I can cross my ankles behind my head while getting fucked. Not sure if that helps you meet your objective or not.

Fucking triggers. You're fired.

[quote]This isn't done for inclusion, it's because the H1-B crowd works for generally (a lot) less money. This has absolutely nothing to do with diversity or any of the PC stuff.

Very true. They also put up with a lot of bullshit that American workers would not tolerate. The greedy scumbags in charge of companies are to blame for this.

I work for a Fortune 50 (no that's not a typo) company as a new hire trainer, teaching a monthly "Diversity at Company X" module. Let me say this: our company, a global brand, WALKED the TALK. Diversity is essential to us. We are a tech company. My primary job is with a team that works specifically on a very "particular" software suite that we support. Our team consists of people from several different countries and cultures. Here's the part they forget to mention with the word "diversity" is diversity of experience or learning. We have 22 people on our team. Here's how they got their jobs: - They helped build part of the suite decades ago, got bored during retirement. - Learned it through a community tech college in the US. - Learned through a university program in India. - Learned through internal support for a different company in Europe. - Learned through one of the parent company's online degree programs. - Learned through one of our internal certification programs. - Learned on their own (yes, he's one of those guys 😮)

Look, you gotta get the best to be the best. Our team is the best. The company doesn't fuck around with discrimination, harassment, intimidation. I have watched assholes get walked off the floor for causing shit on their team. It's never good to let that stuff slide. It's always bad for team morale. It causes divisions. Every month I tell a group of new hires this. People like me can see right through OP's divisiveness disguised as concern. I've had new hires like the OP. The ones with the endless "Well what about if I said this? Am I not allowed to EXPRESS myself in the WORKPLACE?" questions. They don't last long at our company 🤷‍♂️😘🤣

r39 what are the demographics of your company?

Delusional straight woman alert at R39. Keep drinking that Kool-Aid, honey.

I went into this blind, as a hiring manager, who works closely with HR. I'm a big D&I champion, as a gay, bi-racial (white, hispanic) person, and have one of the more diverse teams at my company. With that said, here are my new biases: Immigrants work harder than Americans. All of them. Whether they are Eastern European or from Africa - they work hard, take coaching well and appreciate the opportunities they can chase after. Black Americans are the hardest to hire and manage. They know you cannot fire them and take extreme advantages of doing no work, not showing up, missing deadlines, you name it - they won't do it. We've lost clients, had internal people have meltdowns over the lack of accountability, discovered one was working another full time job (they also were trying to fire this person because "work" was in name only for both companies). I was told by HR - sorry not sorry - you can't fire a black employee - you just have to outsource their work and deal with it.

We should set aside bias through resumes and interviews, but I am starting to think ALL employees should be on an interim basis for the first six months to ensure they do their work and do it well.

[quote] Diversity is essential to us

How is it essential? Why?

You claim your 'team is the best' but you haven't told us how and why.

Robin DeAngelo alert at R39.

Jesus.

At least try to reword some of the material you lifted straight off the 'About' section of your website next time.

I've found that about 85% of straight white women tend to be fucking useless in a professional office environment.

I wish people would just enjoy…or not…some posts and ignore others. If someone takes the time to write an interesting, thoughtful and honest response (thank you 39, 42) is it necessary to access them of lying? Or worse, being a frau? And, can we retire DL’s most overused snark “Sure, Jan.”

Well you can fuck right off R22.

You know nothing about my organization but thanks for the sweeping generalization. Perhaps if you worked with a more, I dunno, diverse group of people you would have developed the tools to express a more nuanced analysis.

HR and Professional.

Oxymorons make me laugh.

Age diversity never comes into play, does it. It's like ADEA doesn't exist.

My local council believes in The Diversity Doctrines.

They've got a blind man operating the phones and an inept Nubian at the reception desk (thankfully there's a capable person directly behind them who can answer 'the hard questions').

[quote]Black Americans are the hardest to hire and manage. They know you cannot fire them and take extreme advantages of doing no work, not showing up, missing deadlines, you name it - they won't do it. We've lost clients, had internal people have meltdowns over the lack of accountability...

So, just hire Africans for diversity points. You said yourself they work harder. No need to hire slacker AAs.

Speaking as an unprofessional HR whore, it's a nice to have except in certain settings where you WILL be "diverse". However, unless we can prove you are engaging in discrimination *shrug*. Our D&I chief is a queer, ADOS disabled persxn, natch.

We have pizza and pancit on Friday.

OP here again. Regarding the harsh comments about African-American workers, this may be true with lower level jobs like receptionists, I can’t say, but I can assure you this is NOT the case with professionals. I work with several African-Americans with masters degrees. They work their asses off and they are damn good at what they do.

[quote]I work with several African-Americans with masters degrees.

Sure Jan. How did you manage to hire so many of these unicorns?

R54 is a fucking asshole.

I work in health research and just had to hire two new staff. DE&I are very important to me, in hiring, in daily work, and in the research we do. Every single applicant that was screened for an interview was a white woman. We posted on IMdiversity and other sites. I asked HR to post to HBCU job boards. Unfortunately I just live a predominantly (overly) white area and we get zero minority candidates applying. It’s heart breaking because I lived in DC previously and like 75% of my hires were women of color. And this isn’t soft science. I’m hiring data analysts with the ability to code and manage a data warehouse. And in DC I would be able to hire women of color and they would BE the most qualified. I hardly ever get male applicants. If a guy has even the slightest ability to code, they want to work in Silicon Valley and not do a very hard, very important job at a not-for-profit.

HR people are full of crap when they say they embrace diversity. What they mean is skin color. Let's talk about age diversity. Not that is where HR is really hiding their bias. HR people HATE anyone over 50. They think you wont be creative, cost too much money, not move fast enough, or take all the bullshit hook line and sinker. It's a known industry fact only 10% over 50 who lose their job will ever get hired again. Not everyone needs to be a manager just because they are up there in age, some people sharpen their skills over time. Age discrimination is real. HR is the gate keeper of that.

So, R56, you discriminated against all those white women who applied?

[quote]If a guy has even the slightest ability to code, they want to work in Silicon Valley and not do a very hard, very important job at a not-for-profit.

I would much rather be in Silicon Valley raking in the $$$ instead of some not-for-profit. Not-for-profits tend to attract women with husbands who are the breadwinner so they can afford to work at places like that.

If you're over 40 and looking for an extra little retirement nest egg, then apply for a job that fits you well at Google and Facebook. Keep all the paperwork, including the letter that wishes you the best in your future endeavors.

Then wait a few years till the inevitable class action age discrimination suits are filed. Don't expect a quick payoff -- that's not how litigation of this sort works. But the tree you're planting now will someday bear fruit.

Unfortunately diversity initiatives can leave you stuck with incompetent or problematic people who see everything through the lens of their minority status. Although being mindful of being inclusive in the hiring process is a good thing, hiring someone just because they are a minority is objectifying a person and an inverted form of discrimination.

R61 Now you tell me.

In my company of 100, I am the only gay person.

We have one black person.

We have 50% women.

We have probably 10% Asian & Indian, and about 5% Latin.

There are 6 of us in the "Over 50 Club", and I'm one of them.

We do talk a lot about diversity, but it's true, we need talented people. This is an engineering and construction firm. We can't just hire people without experience, so we just do our best.

Tokens need a paycheck too

“ greater workforce agility.”

Oh God: classic HR hag comment. As if melanin ever made a company — BS buzz word ahead — ‘agile’: unless they’re into parkour! And the reply after that regarding ‘unconscious bias’ was equally hilarious. As if that’s going to be considered for a nanosecond by any HR hag with a pressing diversity quota to fill!

The reality disconnect in HR is off the fucking charts, and these are two examples of these deluded smug cows believing the steam they blow up their own arses.

R65, let's caucus together, over in my safe space!

The craziness in HR is demonstrated by the hymn book of diversity clashing with the hymn book of Team. Just for fucks sake don’t suggest there are any benefits in homogenity. That’s Nazism!

And of course, while singing the Diversity hymn book, none of them embrace diversity of age, should that age be over 40, because it’s important to have “Cultural Fit” — ie bashed down compliant homogenity of thought, and the exlusiion of Alpha Males in case the frighten the chickens.

[quote] t I hadn't even noticed she was black….I guess all the unconscious bias training has worked on me.

Did HR give you a gold sticker for tonguing their arse?!

R10 is too stupid and lying to live. They should go off and wave banners for a Putin cheer squad.

[quote] DE&I, HBCU, IMdiversity

Are they HR jargon/slogans used by the cognoscenti to exclude others, R56?

The biggest irony of all is that HR is the LEAST diverse corps of all — 99% fraus, mostly white, with a tiny sprinkling of emasculated males, so they’re not called out on their outrageous hypocrisy!. Who with an ounce of raw common sense would heed such flagrant frauds for a moment?

[quote]hiring someone just because they are a minority is objectifying a person and an inverted form of discrimination.

No need for all that blather. Just say what it is in far less words. Here you go:

[quote]hiring someone just because they are a minority is discrimination.

Fixed.

Slow clap for R71

From R42:

[quote]Black Americans are the hardest to hire and manage. They know you cannot fire them and take extreme advantages of doing no work, not showing up, missing deadlines, you name it - they won't do it. We've lost clients, had internal people have meltdowns over the lack of accountability, discovered one was working another full time job (they also were trying to fire this person because "work" was in name only for both companies). I was told by HR - sorry not sorry - you can't fire a black employee - you just have to outsource their work and deal with it.

If I was young (and not retired) right now I would just "identify" as black. Then I could get any job I wanted and do no work without fear of getting fired.

OP has been spamming us with anti-trans threads so I guess this trollbait isn't a surprise, since it was obviously meant to attract the "I'm white and oppressed, so I'll just identify as black to stick it to the wokes, and be showered with entitlements and perks and money like all blacks are now" crowd.

You trolls are aware that r56 never said they didn't hire a white woman for the job, right? They only said all the interviews they got for the job posting were with white women, NOTHING about not hiring any of them. In fact, they said they hired two new employees. Both must have been white women since those were the only applicants.

Is no one else embarrassed by these threads and the stupidity that's infecting the entire board these days?

Of course as much as possible should be done to minimise discrimination, both overt and unconscious. Once that's been done (not easy, I admit), there are very few cases where diversity as such is advantageous. Stuff like 'company agility' and 'different perspectives' are just argle-bargle without specific examples and evidence. There are certainly some activities and roles were varied representation is probably good overall, but hiring purely on that basis is not helpful.

He never said he hired them, R76. He kept searching.....scouring the earth, for anyone, ANYONE of color to hire instead.

You read it wrong, r78. He said he recently hired 2 people, and the only applicants were white women.

He didn't say "I kept searching and finally found non-white people to hire instead," he said the exact opposite.

Stop being an idiot, a troll, or an idiot troll.

LOL. HR doesn't need to concern about diversity. That's PR job. What HR need to do is to fire people and reaping employee benefit that they deserve.

"Human Resources" is getting a bad rep. What's going to be its new name?

"Inclusion" takes away the pride each group has for themselves. Now everyone is dumped into "The Melting Pot."

"Diversity", "inclusion" - New names for the same old racism/bigotry.

If you really want to test HR during an interview, put "Latino" on your resume. If they ask about it, simply say your family is from Argentina. If you dont get the job, you can sue for discrimination.

^That's a good one.

i know plenty of white latinos. why not?

I used to be a fan of diversity before it became “corporatized”. Company photos are carefully orchestrated to include every subset of people in the company.

I like how companies are aware of being inclusive, but it is so glaring and contrived, it loses its significance. It has also hobbled companies, because they are deathly afraid of a misstep with the wrong person of a minority status and having PR nightmare on their hands.

That's an interesting dilemma for companies r84. Many South Americans are white and many are not of Latino background. Giselle Bundchen, for example, is a native Brazilian whose native language is Portuguese and is just as culturally Brazilian as anyone else but her ethnicity is 100% German.

[quote]If a guy has even the slightest ability to code, they want to work in Silicon Valley and not do a very hard, very important job at a not-for-profit.

You mean most people don't want to work at some shitty non-profit that pays peanuts? Imagine that!

R1 Diversity in hiring is pure brainwashing except for jobs that don't matter. Look at all the best engineering teams. All Asian, Indian, and White men. Everyone who works in tech knows deep down that women are a liability.

[quote] Everyone who works in tech knows deep down that women are a liability.

Didn't they build Florida's "Diversity Bridge" which collapsed and killed innocent motorists?

Trying to achieve racial and gender equity in the increasingly information based work force is dragging America down. Sorry but the top 10,000 scientists, engineers, mathematicians we need to compete with China are never going to be ethnically or gender diverse. That's just how it is.

True r92. In a global tech economy it's white and Asian men. That's just reality.

I dated a Brazilian girl who was whiter than I'll ever be -- and I'm PA Dutch (100% German)! She was of Portuguese ancestry and was white as a sheet. But she had a Latino last name and a very heavy Brazilian accent, so there was no doubt she was "Hispanic," although she would always say, "I am not Hispanic -- I am Latina." The distinction, of course, was that she only spoke Portuguese.

OTOH, I went to college with a gay Cuban boy who looked much like Rubio and his last name was "Sandrock," and he was always worried that no one would ever believe he was Cuban. He didn't even speak Spanish!

My bff is Puerto Rican and she never learned Spanish either, and while she has a Hispanic last name, she pronounces it the way an English-speaking person would say it. My mother thinks she "looks white," whatever that means.

So I imagine that if you wanted to work it, almost anyone could "pass" as Hispanic.

The HR people seem to have run away. I'm curious their take on the age discrimination allegations. In my experience, likely very true.

About 20 years ago I was asked to prepare a series of slides describing our unit for a visit from the senior VP and his team. My boss is running the slide presentation and decides to stop and wax non-poetic right on the slide that illustrates our diversity as a team. 90% female and white. Of course Im sitting next to the VP's assistant, the only person of color in the room. My boss keeps droning on and on while she keeps staring at me. Finally he stops and she turns to me and asks why our demographics are the way they are.

My points back: We are located in a far suburb with no public transportation. Over half of our staff are part time working moms and we like to hire them for the flexibility. Finally we are a health related call center and that's not a job many people want. Went on to say if corporate would encourage diverse candidates thru advertising I would be happy to hire but diverse candidates aren't knocking on the door.

What bothers me about diversity and inclusion is it’s all based on skin color and these recruiters and all of a sudden “woke” HR people still practice ageism and god forbid they know you are LGBTQ . That’s just as bad . The company I work at has a 20 % rate for promotion from within the company and a 1% interview rate for people past fifty . Those figures are global too

Woke people love diversity

I like diversity, but not when it becomes all someone talks about—especially when people use their co-workers and the workplace to work out their identity issues. It you want to transition to another gender, be genderqueer, or identify as male after 2 pm, just do your job and make an effort to be friendly and everything will be fine.

[quote]I work for a tech company in the Silicon Valley, where the staff is about 90% Indian, as you can imagine. And the HR department just loves to send out these emails about diversity and inclusion, and how proud the company is of its diverse workforce.

I'm sure that's true. They also probably pay all those Indians workers much less money.

All that stuff is corporate virtual signaling. At first it was a sign of good faith, now it’s just a commodification of diversity. I am so sick of corporate culture and all how fake and pretentious it all is. The only color that really matters is the color of 💴.

[quote]In my professional services industry, we need to provide diversity stats to be hired for some projects.

Oh, so it's just box checking, performative showboating, and quotas.

There's no way this doesn't instantly devolve into what you describe.

I live in one of the most multicultural countries on earth (not the USA, btw).

I am white, male and middle aged - aka as “male, pale and stale”.

I’m also very good at what I do and have been job hunting.

I couldn’t get an initial interview to save my life until I started including my membership of the LGBTQI etc community in my cover letter and c.v., since when I have a 100% success rate in getting call backs for interviews from recruiters and for subsequent interviews from hiring companies.

It’s absolute bullshit but I will do what it takes.

R103, how exactly have you worked it in? I am in the same (sinking) boat. Thanks, diversity.

R104 I included it under interests outside of work, along with surfing, skiing, rugby and “volunteering and social justice in the LGBTQI+ community”.

It’s the truth but it’s also such bullshit, however as I said above - what ever it takes.

HR people are the WORST! They are typically subvert racist, sexist, ageist Fraus on a power trip, with a sprinkling of a prissy gay once and a while. All of then are cunts who will lie to your face to protect the company all with a cheerful smile and a themed coffee mug in hand. They are like a cross between a pushy car salesman and a Realtor. The worst part is, they all seem unhinged in some way. Even the ones I have never worked with but inevitably have a conversation with at a social event, nine times out of ten the nutjobs always end up telling me they work in HR.

Isn't female domination of HR sort of circular? What kind of guy would feel comfortable working in that kind of atmosphere?

In order to achieve diversity of our only white people office, we hired a black janitor. Equality bitch!

Great contribution, R108.

HR is a frau mecca.

Diversity = Dis-integration.

R107 A big ol’ queen.

I knew a gay man who was head of HR at one company I worked at. He was just as cunty as the Fraus. Even ran into him at a gay bar one time, lets just say he didn't leave the snotty cunty behavior at the office. It's a job that draws certain dysfunctional personalty types. It's a job most people don't aspire to. Have you ever heard a little kid say "when I grow up I want to be Human Resource worker".

By "Diversity" we mean some of you will enjoy reviving Vanilla scented Yankee Candles for the Secret Santa holiday party, while you more racy types with dark skin from the other side of the tracks will enjoy Cinnamon and Lace Yankee Candles.

Can we have a thread on a topic, any topic, where Meghan Markle isn't mentioned? Why in the fuck so many DLers are interested in that non entity is beyond me but we can we please keep her name out of threads not related to the royal family? Pretty please???

Be fair r115, you can't discuss diversity and inclusion without Markle

HR IS NOT YOUR FRIEND.

When you think about it, "human resources" is actually quite an ugly term, like we're all just another input into the production stream. Why not go back and call it the Personnel Department? Or "Personnel Management" if it has to be gussied up.

A "resource" is something to be used or exploited for personal or commercial gain. Think about that for a minute.

Which is why it’s now being renamed to People and Culture.

Nothing will change, of course - we’re all still resources.

What's "culture" got to do with keeping a steel plant running?

Culture sounds like a bad attempt at rebranding the "we are all like family" line of crap. Not going to work. Lipstick on a pig is lipstick on a pig. Everyone can see through that.

Fuck, R120. That's exactly what my company named their HR department when they decided to have it be more than one person.

There are at least 3 or 4 of them in the department now - I have no idea what they actually [italic]do[/italic] all day.... but, to be fair, it's not like I've cared enough to find out.

The whole concept of Human Resource departments is ripe for disruption. I have notice some smaller younger more progressive companies outsourcing it online for a fraction of the cost. You really don't need all those people as full time staff these days. It's like trying to hold onto a secretarial pool of typists.

Plus in my experience, HR tends to cause more legal problems for a company then they actually solve.

^Interesting.

[quote]When you think about it, "human resources" is actually quite an ugly term

Yes, now People and Culture. There was a brief period of the even uglier Human Capital. Though arguably at least it was honest. HR is not your friend.

R43, yes, I didn't quite get to my point on that,I agree.

The gist of it is, we have this team that understands and works on this behemoth of a program because they know it from every angle, have taught each other stuff that makes the team work really, really well. Our team is world renowned for our technical support of our programs.

I know where you & OP are coming from though. There's a lot of diversity "bullshit" that doesn't really do or mean anything. They don't (as I said earlier) walk the talk. They're trying to force it and it seems awkward. Like if a company with a history of racism that hasn't been dealt with decides to create some cheesy "Diversity Matters!" campaign with a bunch of smiling brown people. Later revealed that the campaign photos were from Shutterstock and were not of actual employees. Company still racist.

My company has a very long history of being ahead of any diversity trends, ensuring women, the disabled, POC could work for our company years or sometimes decades before any federal laws were passed barring workplace discrimination. So I'm not jumping on some new "woke" bandwagon. This is my work culture & it's been like this for years. It's why people from diverse backgrounds want to work for us, sometimes after enduring a workplace with harassment, intimidation, other things that would not get taken care of. As a gay man, I am thankful that they do not tolerate those types of workplace issues.

[quote]There was a brief period of the even uglier Human Capital.

More like human livestock.

Isn't if funny how they always have new ways to rebrand the same old shit idea? You know there was a time when businesses including large ones existed without Human Resource departments just fine. Not that long ago really.

The function should go back to “Personnel”. More honest about its uninterest in being human.

Move to white country such Poland, Romania, Russia. Diversity problem solved.

Diversity in Europe is not a good thing. It's destroying national identity. Globalism is the culprit though, not race.

R131 "It's destroying national identity. Globalism is the culprit though"

Then nuke America off the world map. Globalism problem solved.

R4 is a Klan Granny with 37 sock puppets.

Diversity or even a push for it is itself not a problem. It is annoying and fake only when it becomes clear that when HR or management say "diverse" they mean "Black".

This is what is happening at my current workplace. Constant spam emails from HR about diversity, inclusion, unconscious bias and microaggressions. But when it comes to actual recruitment we get told that we need to hire more black people because they are underrepresented as though we need to have a certain percentage for each group.

We have even fewer openly gay people than we do black people, probably no disabled employees I can think of and we never hire people over 45 in any role that isn't senior management. Apparently none of that matters and it isn't even discrimination but meanwhile anyone who is a hiring manager is "encouraged" to offer the job to a black applicant.

We've been "encouraged" to pick the black applicant even when he was probably the worst or the second worst of all the interview candidates. In other instances we have been told to go easy on black candidates during their probation review so that they pass probation even with sub-standard performance while the Asian and white staff are often told their probation period will be extended even if their performance has been significantly better.

Our HR and diversity teams are all made up of black women and we constantly get emails about BLM, Black History Month, underrepresented Black people in tech and whatever HR's current pet project is. It's obvious they don't care about true diversity. When a group of Asian and Indian colleagues wrote to them to also commemorate other celebrations or occasions important to their cultures the HR bitches replied to them refusing the request with the reason being that the company "does not have the bandwidth or the resources to cater to every such request".

The HR cunts in my workplace are definitely taking advantage of the current political climate to further their own agenda. I wonder how long this will last before the good people start to quit in droves and management realize that the tokens are useless.

R134 BS, Your post reek of white tears self entitlement.

I’m a divorced woman. Please help me!

I do not have the bandwidth to accommodate diversity in the workplace. As such, leave you Meghan Marklesque ideals behind.

R137 Then start packing and go home. Most European countries and other offer Jus sanguinis citizenship. Problem solved!

R134. Go work somewhere else. I'd never put up with that annoying crap. You don't have to either if you have marketable skills. Or start your own company and hire whoever you want. That's what I did. If you keep it small----under 50 employees, you don't have to deal with diversity bullshit.

As said, HR is usually called People now.

It attracts women because it's a professional field with easy qualifications. In the course of my training work, I've met a lot of women studying business administration who can barely manage the hard numbers stuff and plan to go into personnel management.

I work for a large, multinational financial company. We "champion" D&I even though the top tier of US management is as white as the driven snow. D&I is promoted via employee resource groups, "ERGs", which are employee driven teams for various diverse groups, e.g., blacks, hispanics, lgbtqia, etc. (Of course, nothing for ageism). They are meaningless, performative efforts. They post articles, have occasional speakers, etc., but do nothing of true consequence.

The main sponsor for these ERGs was previously my skip level boss. She once threatened my job because I observed that a black employee was being chastised for making too many personal calls (her mom was hospitalized) when a white woman of the same position who sat right next to her was scrolling Instagram 7 hours a day and received no similar admonition.

So, color me jaded about corporate D&I efforts. I feel like most corporations are run by sociopathic weasels.

[quote]we constantly get emails about BLM, Black History Month, underrepresented Black people in tech and whatever HR's current pet project is.

Oh God yes! I did some work for a Bank for a couple of months, and was gobsmacked how much staff time was wasted on trivialities like this. How did people ever manage to achieve anything before it!

As a funny aside, some years before I worked at another company that made a big deal of hiring a mentality challenged dwarfish person as an "office assistant". He was a happy smiley thing that required so much instruction for the simplest tasks, one ended up just doing them ones self, so in the end he spent his days just walking back and forth mostly. We got an all-staff email saying he was to be treated with respect without use of a nickname. (The nickname behind his back was R2D2.) Come the Recession, like half the office, he was 'let go'. Except, as with the rest of his instructions, he didn't absorb it, and kept turning up for work, until they had to spend a low time explaining things very very slowly. Well, even more slowly. Possibly with dolls.

Entitled people should never be included in anything.

Soon there will be a requirement to hire men dressed as woman

In terms of race diversity, what is the goal? I work in high tech, where this is constantly shoved down our throat. But they never say what the ultimate desirable state is. What is the distribution of races that they want at Google, Facebook etc?

Is it to match the distribution of races in society? Which society? Bay area? California? USA? World? Because depending on what you pick, you're going to get different results.

Also, Asians dominate (~50%) in my company. So if I need to hire more Blacks, should I reduce the representation of Asians? Is that ok?

[quote] The nickname behind his back was R2D2

That is fucking hilarious. Hence, why I could never work in HR.

R143 Exactly, that's why the great replacement is wonderful thing.

145 You work in tech but you're shitposting basic questions on Datalounge?

Washed up, under performing or self entitled losers crying about the darkies taking over here is hilarious.

I’m wondering if anyone misses the days before diversity in the workplace?

R150 No one misses mediocrity/boomers.

Everyone does, R150.

As much as we all wish it was koombya…it’s not. Business is based on how well you perform and your critical thinking without your hand being held. You also need to be able to get on with co workers and outside sources while having no agenda. Many businesses give into the diversity hires checked box yet it rarely works out. I was in HR for too many years to admit, many varied companies and the ones that were successful and had the best atmosphere, lack of complaints and longevity were the ones where hiring was based on intelligence, personality and experience. If you weren’t there to make me tick off the box to appease some social group, than you were the one we were more than likely hiring. When we got the squeeze to hire X amount of this group and X amount of that group, it was ALWAYS a cluster fuck of racism, harassment, sexism and of course the hires who couldn’t figure out the basics of the job crying it’s everyone else’s fault they can’t come to work on time or complete their duties. I wanted to hire based on resume and eyes closed speaking to a candidate to ensure it wasn’t biased on their race , age or gender. Let’s just say, I can count how many “diversity hires” we hired actually stayed on. And it’s on one hand out of HUNDREDS of people I’ve hired.

How dare you speak the truth, R153.

R10, you should have said something like "Good to hear. If that's how you think of her, then her talent is obviously better utilized on my team. I was feeling bad about taking her but no longer. "

R10's virtue signaling is about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

[quote] Soon there will be a requirement to hire men dressed as woman

I expect this legacy to get me on Mount Rushmore

R43, seriously? Diversity means different lived experience. It means different backgrounds. The way different types of people approach a problem varies because of this. It means you get stronger outcomes when everyone isn't operating out of the same frame of reference.

R113, HR departments are known for inflating their grades or titles with the concomitant inflated salaries. They can also have a lot of power depending on the company.or agency.

Meaningless word salad from the HR jargon book, R158. No-one ever provides examples of 'stronger outcomes' from a 'different frame of reference;.

R12, the bias training we get usually sucks from inside our agency. One of the components had unconscious bias training from an outside well-known expert in the field that was excellent. The Agency must have decided to get its money's worth from this training because it finally trickled down to us. He discussed a number of studies, provided a lot of information in an interesting way. It was definitely some of the best training we've had.

HR = Mean girl central

R19, not so. I've seen a lot of hires in my 23 years with my current agency. Much of the time here the "best fit" standard applied, which means that if the office head hiring liked the way someone looked or hit it off with the candidate, that person was hired. I had a very canny office head for a number of years, who, if he didn't hit it off with a candidate, would hire a minority or woman, just so when he later promoted his friends over others, his office would look diverse and he'd get away with it.

[quote]The function should go back to “Personnel”. More honest about its uninterest in being human.

Back when HR was called "Personnel" it was just two or maybe three people and their only duties were making sure paychecks went out on time each week, getting employees to sign whatever forms were necessary, and ordering office supplies and keeping the break room stocked. That was pretty much it. Those were the days!

I don't need HR. The FX network already raised my consciousness.

It's not BS, R103, unless you are lying. Why are you acting like it is insignificant or not worth noting? People with differing backgrounds and experiences approach problems in different ways. That difference is more likely to result in successful solutions. You are letting them know you have a background that could add to the business repertoire in terms of getting desired outcomes.

Oh, and the Head of Personnel was usually an older woman who was the nicest, friendliest person in the office. Total opposite of the raging cunts who are in HR today.

I had a friend who was head of HR in an Australian embassy. He said the ideal candidate is a black lesbian in a wheelchair.

[quote] We got an all-staff email saying he was to be treated with respect without use of a nickname. (The nickname behind his back was R2D2.)

I laughed so hard I snorted! That was wicked!

That's a funny story R142

I work for a large company that touts diversity, but the on the ground reality is that they hire a lot white guys right out of the military, so typical employee is white, male, older (30+) and VERY conservative. They're all hard core Evangelicals and bitch relentlessly about Biden (or Brandon as they call him), COVID and the vaccine/Fauci. We're a military contractor, so it's natural that we'd hire people with a military background, but the end result is a stifling, ultra conservative environment that lacks imagination and freaks over any kind of dissenting or different voice.

Any work environment needs different voices, differing ideas with a healthy respect for those differences. HR, which is simply a tool to protect the interest of the company, has no real interest in diversity & inclusion beyond checking a box. The attitudes about diversity & inclusion need to come from the top down.

LOL. OMG R166. Do you even hear yourself? What a bunch of ridiculous blather.

[quote]People with differing backgrounds and experiences approach problems in different ways. That difference is more likely to result in successful solutions.

Really? How so? And what scientific proof do you have to back up that claim? What makes you assume that because someone is a POC, a woman or gay that they will "approach a problem" in some unique and spectacular way?

You don't even understand the gross irony of your own bullshit. Making assumptions about someone (positive or negative) based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation IS discrimination.

Did you hear the one about the professor who wanted his exchange student to change her name? He thought that her name, Phuc Bui, might be distracting?

My company launched a "diversity initiative" last year. The word "chief" was removed from management titles, because it was deemed "appropriation." Interview panels now must have at least one person of color and at least one POC candidate. Whenever the director has a virtual town hall, it starts with a "moment of diversity" that spotlights a POC employee.

All of it feels like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

I’m not in the USA but in a country which has specific government imposed quotas for women and minorities in leadership positions.

I absolutely support quotas for people such as indigenous or First Nations who would otherwise have challenges getting a foot in the door with most corporations. The best bosses of my career have been women. The worst boss of my career is also female.

I see the worst bullying cases where I work now being management women against entry level and direct report women.

I don’t know what to make of that but on the whole, when hiring, as I do, if I wasn’t required to have a percentage of my team being women or minorities I would go with the best candidate every time. Who will usually be a white male, sadly.

The more I work, the more I realize I’m valued for my ability to get along with people. My work product is good, sometimes excellent, and there are plenty of people who could do it as well. I’m even-tempered, conscious and honest. I don’t cause trouble. No matter what box people tick, the ability to work harmoniously is underrated. The shit that people of all races stir up is crazy.

In many places I've worked it's been very diverse. Sure white guys like me included but it's funny the spouse says I'm not European but Mediterranean. Anyhow also worked with many from India my favorites of them are the ones who learned English in the UK. It's interesting too I like Indian food and one day I'm chatting in thee kitchen with one of the guys from India and he's heating up a something that is clearly of Indian cuisine. He actually shared some with me.

Now the fun part I actually have north African DNA in me. Not surprising.

This thread is absolutely jam packed with idiots like r171, the kind of people who think that simply saying "oh yeah, well where's the scientific studies, huh? huh?" means there are no scientific studies at all, and that they have just won the argument.

It's embarrassing. I mean, I get that DL is mostly low-experience, resentful old cranks of middling intelligence these days, and among them r171 probably sounds like a smart dude, but to normal people, r171 is embarrassing because he didn't even go out to Google to check to see what he was accusing r166 of was true.

Anyway, here's a colorful chart with a whole bunch of sources for those scientific studies you said don't exist.

[quote]We have even fewer openly gay people than we do black people, probably no disabled employees I can think of and we never hire people over 45 in any role that isn't senior management. Apparently none of that matters and it isn't even discrimination but meanwhile anyone who is a hiring manager is "encouraged" to offer the job to a black applicant.

Exactly. You should secretly spam them with those stats. Especially no one over 45 unless they are management. HR are notoriously age bias. You know people do change careers over their lifetimes, not just jobs. Some skills are better the longer someone is at it. HR even now has this twisted Boomer mentality of climbing the later as the natural coarse for EVERYONE as they age. It's not realistic. So some day everyone in your office is supposed to be in top management? That's not how a pyramid works. What happens to everyone else?

[quote] I would go with the best candidate every time. Who will usually be a white male, sadly.

African American museum accused of ‘racism’ over whiteness chart linking hard work and nuclear family to white culture

The entire function of HR is to protect the company from any liability while spinning their deeds as caring for the employees.

Exactly, HR just needs to STFU about caring, family and culture. Just say what you are, Employer pre-legal defense office. Where whatever we want to say about you goes in your file and whatever you add to it mysteriously disappear when a court case is filed.

That’s informative, R179, but my experience is largely not in the USA.

I like the term 'age diversity'. I think if it's kicked around often enough it could gain some traction and get more people to talk about age discrimination in hiring. I'm serious, not being snarky.

That's a good idea R183. When I was about 20 years younger, I worked in a studio doing digital 3D artwork so it naturally skewed very young. However, there was one woman who was 50+ all by herself holding her own. She was defiantly the odd man out. She did her work, kept a low profile and stayed out of office politics. No one really cared about it except HR. It was a creative environment, she was not management. It almost seems like things have moved backwards since then. You would never see that now in a young company. Everyone must be of an expected age. HR is the one driving that, not the "culture". Or Not a "cultural fit" BS line I have heard they use to tell people they are too old.

I'm only hiring redheads from now on. They are clearly discriminated against. Blondes, too. People think they're stupid but they aren't, usually. I will be the vanguard.

Good luck with the darkies, they hardly ever cause trouble for an organization.

* I had not realized how gay HR was. So many HR execs on DL, many of whom speak Corporatese rather than English.

* "Diverse" has definitely become a euphemism for "black" with many people, it sort of replaced "urban" and "multicultural" I've heard it used by both racists and by naive people who think that saying "Black" is somehow offensive.

* I am a consultant who works with a lot of tech companies and clients tell me that age-ism is the toughest cultural barrier to cross. A 25 year old Black engineer who went to a good college is going to fit in much easier with a team of same-age engineers than a 45 year old white guy who needs to rush home to see his kid's soccer game and so has no interest in working till 7pm and then rolling out for burgers and beers.

* Most large companies are more afraid of the negatives of bad PR from not being diverse than they are attracted to the positives of having a diverse work force.

* Gays and Lesbians are allegedly tough to hire for diversity purposes as many do not bring up their sexuality during interviews and even if they are flames-from-space, you can't assume, especially in the South and Midwest where many guys like that are in the closet and married to women.

HR corporate babble explained. Basically all verbal diarrhea to justify how important they are.

The video at R187 is not very well done. Spare yourself the time wasted to view it.

I’m a male

In the first week of a new job my manager resigned and we were restructured into a new team under a new boss.

From week one, the new boss started bullying me.

I’ve been around the traps so I knew to document everything, including:

Setting unrealistic time scales for tasks

Micromanaging me including up to 60 emails per day, usually starting at 5am and the last was at 11pm and escalating to the C Suite when I didn’t respond on time

Disrespecting me in front of her peers and my peers

Setting unrealistic tasks for which, when I completed these on time, she changed requirements

I raised my concerns with bullying with HR, provided them with documentation of each and the above. They investigated and one month later responded rejecting each of my claims, after which I resigned.

In the 12 months after she took over our team, all of her direct reports resigned and went elsewhere.

She was promoted by her female boss.

Affirmative action in progress.

Federal law is clear:

"It shall be unlawful for an employer . . . to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's age."

The real question is: why do HR departments ignore Federal law and why do they get away with it.

It’s all bullshit. At the company I work for, the D&I team is all African-American, and the people they recruit are the same. I live in a very diverse part of the country. They seem to forget that D&I means everybody. The African-Americans rebelled when black Africans were hired. Sadly, it is true about all but one A-A woman I work with — I work with many. They will play the card if it works in their favor. One doesn’t bother to show up for work or even call in for long periods of time. Her boss, an A-A woman, makes excuses to cover for her. When I said they should fire her for falsifying company documents (timesheets) by saying she worked eight hours when she didn’t even work one, they still were too afraid. They could easily prove she never logs in. Since they can’t say why she is fired, if she were, she could use it to her advantage. You want to give everyone a chance, but when you see an overwhelming pattern, you start to think….

R189 - this happened to me twice in my academic jobs. I didn't lose the battle that ensued, but the bitch cunt didn't win, and one got seriously outed as a raving shrew, so her career permanently stalled but she was a Dean and remains a dean. I would have bailed but I had tenure. It was all for nothing. Just women working out their problems with men on male colleagues they are some how threatened by. Eventually I got backstory and they had gay male drama in their lives such as disastrous marriages to closet cases or gay sons they were too "liberal" to say embarrassed them.

Dimwit @ R177. LOL, all you did is prove my point with that grade school flow chart? A lot of assumptions about some mysterious magic "diverse" individuals bring to the workplace. Pure HR gobbledygook. Just ask R191. He knows what time it is.

Love the vid @ R187. Hilarious. I think that dude is R177. Corporate cringe on steroids.

Also R193 "I found him to be a more compelling candidate than Biden. So he tweets a lot. I still like his policies."

Nope. Not me.

[quote]all you did is prove my point with that grade school flow chart

The sources are on the page in links and on the graphic itself, but it doesn't surprise me that you're not smart enough to find them.

It's so odd that all of our professors with tenure like r192 have serious problems with basic spelling and grammar.

The video at R187 is fucking hilarious. The latest corporate buzzword at my office is "socialize", e.g., "We socialized the document with that area". Heaven forfend you merely say you emailed the document.

And kudos to the poster who talked about the constant pressure to promote. Not everyone is capable of being promoted nor do some employees want to be promoted. I have a couple of reports who are not interested in moving up the ladder. They're great, dependable employees. Yet, I have to constantly defend their jobs to upper management who want to see "movement". If everyone is "moving", who the hell is getting the work done? They're also over age 50, which is apparently a black mark with management.

Which leads back to the argument that age discrimination is still acceptable. Many over 50's are often great additions to the team. No drama, no over estimation of their own talent, no pining to move up the ladder as they are reaching the end of their career. They just want to get the work done and then log off. It takes so much time and money (and disruption) to contantly train the "movers", a 50+ who stays in the same role and basically works independently without much need for oversight is worth their weight in gold.

It's so hypocritical that HR will argue that older candidates won't be "a good cultural fit" while telling us the very next second that we should hire diverse racial groups so that we can be a multicultural company without worrying about whether certain ethnic groups from certain backgrounds will be "a good cultural fit" or not.

[quote]It takes so much time and money (and disruption) to constantly train the "movers", a 50+ who stays in the same role and basically works independently without much need for oversight is worth their weight in gold.

So true.

Yes, R199. The current corporate HR blather babble allows flagrant age discrimination while forcing other types of diversity that would have far less cultural fit.

I think equity s a good goal, and people should be equally considered for job roles as long as they are equally capable of doing said job. It’s when under qualified people get in and use their minority status to deflect any legitimate criticism in the workplace. Management would rather look the other way than hold some people accountable and be accused of discrimination, and certain people know it and use it as leverage.

It’s also unfortunate that a lot of people jumped on the diversity bandwagon with all the gender cosplay—undermining legitimate efforts by many minority groups. People respect you more if you are sincere. professional and cooperative. I am out at work and honestly no one really cares. It’s usually those with blue hair, a tattoo or someone who thought a guy was cute once and called themselves pansexual that are the ones trying to make something out of nothing. They are often not considered for job roles they might otherwise attain—but not because of any minority status, but because they are volatile and unpredictable individuals. No one wants a daily headache of HR complaints or endure people focused on grandstanding out rather than getting along.

R189, did you sue?

Currently underway, R203.

I used to work for a tech company which was racially diverse. Not very diverse when it came to gender (around 15% female) and or management (all of them were white men). Now having an international team can be great, however, some of the techies came from quite strict patriarchal societies and were not used to having female or gay colleagues or *gasp* a lesbian boss. Which created a lot of problems, especially for the women who complained. That was sad and an eye-opening experience.

Another employer pretty much just hired from India, eventually even the Indians started complaining. As one told me: „I did not move to Europe to deal with the same bullshit as in my country.“

I think age discrimination for over 50 is the big elephant in the room. Everyone know HR is doing it with unbridled oversight but no one seems to say or do anything about it. Like said above, not everyone needs to climb some mythical corporate ladder. That's not everyone's goal, it's not what most people are going to be good at and it negates people really sharpening their talent mastering it over many years instead of months as a pass through amateur skill set. It's a fucked up Boomer mentality that even Millennials in HR still cling to.

Our people should reflect our customer base.

That's why we're spilling our executive team and replacing them with poor people.

I love how diverse HR is!

R208, I searched for 'diversity officer' in Google Images. There are men in the field though women are the majority. What I didn't see were any Latinos or Asians.

D&I is total horse shit. I have a very idealistic friend of mixed race who is now doing D&I for a company. He was always very cool, but has become increasingly more bitter and honestly more racist and less inclusive. When you are ALWAYS looking for a slight of any kind, you will find it, even perhaps looking for it when none exists. He tries all these initiatives for AA, Latinx (which I've told him that Latinos don't even like that term and it is something white people have foisted on that community), and is just less cool. Also, D&I seems to mean hiring anybody but a white person. Whatever, I think it's just a box to tick for a company after the Floyd killing. Every company jumped on the bandwagon and added D&I departments.

Also, I find mixed race (black parent/white parent) to be the most hard core when it comes to this kind of thing. This is just an observation. To my friend, I'm like why do you hate white people so much when it is your mom who has stuck around all your life and your black father was an absentee addict? I do understand in a sense. It's kind of like looking like an all American white athlete who is handsome and athletic, but a purse falls out of your mouth (I learned this expression here) when you talk and you have a switch when you walk. Even though on paper you should fit in, the gayness of it all, keeps you on the outside looking in, which is painful. As a mixed race you can't win - if you are too light, you get hate from the black community and if you are too dark you aren't even considered white, by the whites so damned if you do, damned if you don't.

As a white (pasty white) person, I am so envious of mixed race people. They have the most beautiful skin color and won’t scare anyone during the opening of short sleeve season. I understand it’s a matter of perspective though and my pale skin has privileged me in ways I don’t appreciate.

R211 I have noticed this a lot too with mixed race people. They are sooooooooooooo angry with white people even though they themselves are half white. Think Jesse Williams and that crazy bitch Ijeoma Oluo.

R213 - I think it is probably not being fully accepted by either community and often getting the negative elements of being a POC. There is a lot of anger and it's probably easier to see white people as the oppressors even if you were done dirty by the black side of your family.

Eldergay here. Every female head of HR at every place I worked had always got her job by fucking the boss.

Every HR woman I have met has been a total CUNT. Not a single one in my long working careers has been someone I would ever want as a friend outside the office. I remember one HR cunt in particular had a thing for the boss. Basic divorced, single mommy frau with big ratty hair. Anyway, one day I realized there is no point going to her with a problem. Before I even got the conversation started, she went into this sort of lovingly diatribe about the boss. How he gave her an opportunity, how she's learned so much, how great of a company is because of him, why we didn't need healthcare as full time employees...barf. She really believed that shit too.

Meanwhile, that place was a revolving door of employees. Murphy Brown style at level 10. Even to this day, worst place I have ever worked. Several years later met up with an old school friend, a female, turned out she worked there too. Same shockingly bad HR experience. Before I even said it, same words came out of her mouth "worst place I have ever worked".

HR and PR/communications whatever you want to call it are pink ghettos where 90% of the women are cliches of some sort.

[quote]I had not realized how gay HR was.

Even HR Frau-Fuhrers have to hire token persons occasionally. So when they have to stoop to interviewing birthed penised persons, they have to be the most neutered wet wipes available.

Guess which little self-effacing masochistic sub-subgroup ticks that box?

Hint: it's the one below Nasty Pig shopbottoms....

Obsessively Neat & Anally Retentive HR Screamers Addicted To Lip Balm.

R4, that would be . . . "greater workforce sustainable vegan humanitarian equality for women of colour (if I can play the race card and merch it)."