Lets stop talking about diversity and start working towards equity | Paloma Medina | TEDxPortland
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2019
- Paloma Medina challenges our paradigm of diversity in the work place and in society with this eloquent, humorous talk. We need to do a “find and replace” in our vocabulary challenging the concept of diversity vs. equity.
With special thanks to core the TEDxPortland organizing team, 70+ volunteers and cherished partners - without you this experience would not be possible. Our event history can be found TEDxPortland.com
In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
Paloma is an expert in the neuroscience behind equity and the psychology on how to improve our work and personal lives. She is a performance coach, trainer, and owner of 11:11 Supply, a store that specializes in beautiful work tools designed to help you feel more productive, happy, and balanced. She has worked with tech companies such as Etsy and Digital Ocean, nonprofit organizations, homeless healthcare clinics, as well as individual leaders and CEOs. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
At several moments in my life I thought about moving to the US… I don’t think I would want that anymore
Where you live plays a big part in how enjoyable the experience is.
If you love our country and it's founding principles, please come here. We need you.
that’s good, we don’t need any more people here
@@MC32595 rude.
Go through the comments and then consider the L/D ratio.
So the NBA's lack of diversity is a sign of the biased recruiting process?
Diversity, equity... don't apply where minorities hold superiority in numbers. It's all about taking whites and "their" structures down.
the NBA must be racists?
It is for the NBA owners and executives.
The players compete and are measured constantly on their capabilities. They do what they are paid for, or they are booted off the squad. They earn this typically after years of proving their skills and honing their game in college where they aren't paid and are measured over 100x/year. I would say those who make it to the NBA rosters are pretty well tested and have earned their spots on the team.
@@jenniferobrien5188 So you're saying that it's totally merit based? So you saying that there is a difference between the races?? That's a hate crime. Be careful.
@@mrmoneyhacks5480 you're taking my comment to an absurd conclusion. Just. stop.
Equality of opportunity ≠ equality of outcome
Say not to equity.
I say YES to equity! Besides, equity is the only way that The West will ever be able to keep up with China!
@@thomasreaves588 I disagree and even if it required us to be more like China I'd say Let's Lose and keep our souls
@@thomasreaves588 keep up? China is in a guided age, they’re reliant on the west.
@@thomasreaves588 Funny you mention China. Many stories of how African workers feel mistreated there. Also China learned almost everything in new technology from the West when it was not quite diverse.
@@thomasreaves588 if I say slavery should be reintroduced for us to keep up with China, I'd be wrong but only as much as you. Slavery and equity are morally wrong. That's it. Economic effects don't matter
Equity can only be acheived though destruction.
Theft and violence are the only ingredients in the recipe.
Yea--destruction of power structures and systems that created the inequities in the first place.
@@iAmDrQuin Proof?
You mean Equality
@@iAmDrQuin destruction of civilization itself , which will only bring mass Depopulation.
I don't make as much as the CEO....I think I need some of that equity.
Nailed it!
But your white sorry
Equality=equal opportunity
Equity=equal outcome
One is good and one is impossible
@@DrumL3000 indeed
Its crazy that that is how the words are being used by the woke left. According to the dictionary, Equity means fairness and Equality means sameness. so Equity=equal opportunity and Equality=equal outcome. Unfortunately our language is under assault.
And you can only have one.
💯
the meaning of words matters, equity and equality are two different things
Two opposing things.
You can't have equality if you have equity (aka discrimination). You can't have equality of opportunity and equality of outcome, they contradict one another.
@Ash Hegde Okay. I'll tell that to the 99% of elite sportsmen who were born poor.
I say this at least once a week!
Equity and equality have meant the same, but confused people are trying to create different meanings and this confuses other people.
@@AdrienLegendre 😂🤣
“Equity” is a term designed to signal “equality,” in some manner, and is a term designed to appeal to the natural human tendency toward fairness, but it does not mean the classic equality of the West, which is equality before the law and equality of opportunity.
Capitalist fairness, religious fairness or commie fairness?
@@TeaParty1776 Either you are fair and provide everyone the same opportunities to shine or you don't. I think the capitalist system where there is an emphasis on merit is close to being fair, whereas the communist system predicates that people are made equal no matter their different abilities... I think it's necessary to provide people with difficult social circumstances a way to compete with people who have easier backgrounds. I'm not talking about lowering the bar for them - merit is merit and nothing must change that. Make less losers should be the aim of every society and I think that's totally in line with most religions and capitalism. I don't think that is the aim of communism because the collective is more important than the individual.
@@ptolomaeer Capitalism is based on mans moral right to live for himself. Statism creates slaves.
@@ptolomaeer > it's necessary to provide people with difficult social circumstances a way to compete with people who have easier backgrounds. I
necessary for whom and for what?
> aim of every society
Individuals have aims. Society is an abstraction, a category.
Religion is mindless, selfless death-worship. God, like the collective, is more important than the individual. Capitalism is individual rights, a need of life in society.
@@TeaParty1776 It's in the interest of capitalism to enable and find talented people so that we all progress as fast as possible. Leaving people behind is not a good strategy especially now that we have to compete with China. I don't see religion as bleak as you do and even though I'm probably agnostic I still find some religious text helpful and rich in wisdom.
Listening to this hurts my head. No one should want ‘equity’ ..
Yeah cuz equity worked out great in so many places. South Africa is looking awesome after all that equity.
my 13th Month old child watched this video with me and at the end she turned to me and said ''this is some bull$h1t''
Yeah ok! I find that extremely hard to believe!
@@thomaslawarejr.2362 That loud noise you heard overhead that was the joke flying by
😂
😂😂😂
3
Equality= equal opportunity and equity= equal outcomes. I hear diversity way to often in my classes and where I work. Where I work, a lot of their goals is to employ minorities so make the work place more diverse than it is, so our students have educators to look up to that might look just like them. In the workplace, it is so important to remember that yes we can have a diverse group of people, but it is how we are all treated that we need to remember is important.
Of course, I want everybody to be treated the same but I also think it is important to celebrate those who might have more experience than others and get promoted than someone who is still learning.
THE NAME OF THE MOVIE IS INEQUALITY FOR ALL!!!
There is a need for diversity and quite and inclusiveness so that the workplace not only have people that look like you, you also are given the same access as others, and you feel invited to the party. But you also should be made to feel you belong at the part.
As a manager of a small business, I will always prioritize competence over equity when hiring. Equity doesn't even enter the equation. Equality of Outcome is a horrible idea.
There’s no need to pit these two ideas against each other. Diverse populations can also be competent.
@@MsCafecito they can, and thats fine. The issue arises when someone prioritizes diversity over competence.
Good job
@@modernklassicsgaming5991 It seems like you already have the assumption that diversity *is* a priority over competence. There are plenty of people and groups whose competence is not questioned; they are already presumed to be qualified and competent based off of their looks, race, gender, etc.
If we're honest, no business is intentionally hiring a person who is not competent. Your statement means that you will prioritize competence over being fair. Does that mean you'll hire the first competent person you find instead of maybe interviewing more people in hopes of finding a person who is competent and who brings diversity? The funny thing is that your attitude is better for everyone involved because if you don't value diversity, you should not hire a competent person who is also diverse.
EVERY HUMAN CREATURE HAS SOME LEVEL OF PREJUDICE, BUT MANY ARE TOO INFECTED WITH IT.
Equity doesn't/ never exclude diversity. Plainly said. ❤❤ :-)
The connection between inflammation and racism is a perfect example of correlation and causation. There is a correlation between minorities and inflammation, this is a fact. However, when writing an article about America's obesity epidemic, I found that people in lower income brackets had a much higher rate of obesity, which causes inflammation, congestive heart failure, and cancer. The strain on one's emotions is not the cause of these higher cancer rates and inflammation among minorities it is obesity.
You are correct. The presentation's goal is to persuade, not get at the truth.
Research social determinants of health. Who is more likely to be in lower income brackets? These are systemic issues.
Its absolutely amazing to read the comments. The focus is the definition of the word vs based on the underlying principle.
Can you describe the underlying principle? I do not understand what you mean there
Explain?
right, but what do you expect from a bunch of people living in denial?
exactly!
Yes exactly this!!
So most of the people in the comments seem to realize this woman is full of it, so i have to ask..why so many likes on this video?
stupidity?
It's easy to hit a like button but not be able say anything that can back up what she says.
TED buys likes from Indian click farms. Back when socialblade was more useful you could see the fake likes.
Her friends were probably paid to ‘like’ the video
I don't consider 1.5k to be that many. The dislikes are hidden for a reason though, I'm sure there are a lot more of them.
So the real problem then is the loads of people who have radically over-inflated perceptions of their performance.
Mediocre or even sub-standard performers who think they deserve the same rewards as high performers. When it doesn't happen, they pull out the victim card.
I wish I had attended this event that took place one block from my apartment! This is delicious!
The early example of the monkeys is a simplification of more complex human work, but it illustrates her point clearly enough. However, the one critical question she left out is "Which monkey did the trick better?" This type of question would not be irrelevant when applied to a human scenario.
Human beings are born with different capabilities and capacities. Those who are free, are not equal and those who are equal are not free
Funny how she has absolutly no idea what the difference between equity and equality is and confronts those 2 completley different things throughout the talk while drawing insanely missleading and fals conclusions.
No no, she - and others in her field - know EXACTLY what they’re saying.
@@Teal_Seal Yes it's called rigging the contest because they cannot win based on merit.
@@secondopinion6654 merit gone more or less last night in oregan
@@secondopinion6654 Oh you mean the GOP?
the worst part was how she explained what equity means, she didn't.
She is using equity with the dictionary definition, meaning fairness.
But no one wants to face the possibility that you can have perfectly fair hiring practices, and hire the best people, and not end up with diversity.
Diversity doesn't matter at all. The only thing that matters is hiring the best people.
If you're on a slab with your chest cavity cut open you want to know your physician is the very best physician available, not someone who is there is to increase diversity.
When a "social scientist' begins with the phrase "we know," we know they are about to convey their profound ignorance.
People of all types are invited to apply for software engineering jobs. Indeed, US developer teams are filled with workers from many backgrounds and ethnicities.
In order to meet the quotas the speaker suggests, well, the pathway is simple. Those groups not filling the quotas need to start studying and achieve competency in this work. Then getting hired is pretty straightforward.
Indeed, there is a shortage of skilled professionals.
The pathway is clear . Go for it!!!
First, she's arguing for equity, not diversity. Her entire talk focused on not meeting quotas, but instead on dismantling systemic racism and addressing implicit bias. Second, your implicit bias is obvious when you imply that minorities are not as smart or hard working as whites by saying people of color just need to "start studying" and "achieve competency." Getting hired as a minority is NOT "pretty straightforward" . MANY minorities have higher competencies in their fields than whites are they are NOT hired nor promoted. The data is all there. Systemic racism exists. Do a simple google search and you'll find proof everywhere.
I support equality of opportunity, but equity? The way it is used to sell equality of outcome, no. Making a firm goal to, per her example, increase gender and racial representation on our executive team, comes with inherent issues of its own that are unjust.
What if there aren't that number of qualified minorities who can fill those roles already in your company? (Note: I'm not saying that minorities are less qualified, I'm saying assume you haven't got enough minorities that meet the qualifications to be
an executive, what happens then?)
Should you pass over qualified employees who have worked in hopes of promotion, in order to hire outside talent to fill those roles because of your goal to seat more minorities in positions of power? Should you promote existing employees because they are minorities (to meet this 50% goal, mind you) even if it means passing over others who might be more qualified?
There should be firm and measurable requirements for executive positions, and those who display the qualities needed should be placed in executive positions. Their skin color and or gender should be utterly irrelevant. THAT is the only method that is just.
Even if they are qualify u won't want to hire them
this is basically "GIVE ME YOUR MONEY"
So should we only hire people based on race?
Goal should be equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome ("equity"). Remember: free people are never equal, and equal people are never free.
Equity is about Equality of opportunity not other way around
Yes, equity me half your income and education, cause it's not like just anyone can come here and be successful on their own merit.
Or like systemic barriers and inherent biases are not a thing, right?!
@@tyroneatbradley You want them to be. No doubt.
When will the NBA implement an equity and diversity plan so each team's starting lineup matches ethnic makup of the U. S.?
Paloma doesn’t seem to define equity in a robust way.
Equality of opportunity= fairness, liberal value. Equality of outcome(equity)=discrimination, incompetence, lack of incentive to be better and work harder, resentment for those who put in more effort and still get paid the same, Socialist core value.
Part of the grift.
I am 55 years old with very little set aside for retirement at this point. I have always been curious about the stock market and have witnessed some people who played the game right and retired early because they used the stock market. When I ask them, most said that they invested very little to start with, but their portfolio grew. I do have a significant amount of capital that is required to start up but I have no idea what strategies and direction I need to approach to help me make decent returns.
Buy index funds if you wanna be safe, though you are probably be better off just going to Vanguard or something for that
Even with the right technique and assets some investors would still make more than others, as an investor, you should've known that by now, nothing beats experience and that's final, personally I had to reach out to a market analyst for guidance which is how I was able to grow my account close to a million, withdraw my profit right before the correction and now I'm buying again
@@jaluriaja6294 who is your financial coach, do you mind hooking me up?
@@santiagoagustine3749 "My consultant is *Loretta Wilkinson* I found her on a CNBC interview where she was featured and reached out to her afterwards. She has since provide entry and exit points on the securities I focus on.
@@santiagoagustine3749 You can look her up online if you care supervision. I basically follow her trade pattern and haven't regretted doing so"
PERFECT AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT
Equity is the nihilist hatred of mans independent mind.
Taking from one group to give to another reminds me of Marxism
What does excluding all but one group remind you of?
Equality of outcome is a Marxist value, it’s a core value of socialism(the first stage of communism)
@@4cwhisperer86 Where is this "exclusion of all but one group" taking place in America? Bringing in minorities has been carried out by most companies since the 1980s. When you force companies to meet quotas regardless that positions may be filled with unqualified hires is very similar to Marxist-socialist practices where quotas were fulfilled regardless of the human toll.
@@lora8546 where are these quotas?
@@4cwhisperer86 Quotas are the central part of planned economies which is what Marxism is all about. It applies not only to material goods but also to people. In the last instance it is best exemplified in how Stalin, Mao and other communist dictators would throw out a figure of "secret enemies of the state," "internal spies for foreign imperialists," "kulaks" (independent farmers), "surviving rot of old order classes," etc. and then the secret police would find the number of people called for to fit the quota.Ordinarily they would be executed. You need to begin reading and not just absorbing propaganda like a sheep. Your mind is seriously degrading when you cease to be a critical, independent thinker and researcher.
ok at 9 minutes she got my first agreement with her. both are core needs tho.
Post-modernism....socialism......... marxism.
All amount to the same conclusions.
Violent and brutally lethal destruction of freedom, relentless assault on human individuality (true diversity), and the dismanting of the best working system of civilization ever experienced in all of human history: Western Judeo-Christian culture and free market capitalism.
You nailed it
How is American free market capitalism not violent and brutally lethal?!
@@Bertorellim How is it?
@@Bertorellim America BECAME violent and lethal when the government grew too big.
Agree with SMART goal approach to any change - must be tangible and not theoretical.
Equity is measurable - look at not just hiring rates, but promotion rates across teams and work categories, look at opportunity rates (who gets into the mentor or leadership programs or who gets sent to conferences/certifications), look at salaries across the same jobs, look at those things across different jobs . . . where are your concentrations demographically?
This type of data starts to tell the story of inequity in our organizations, but it is just a starting point.
We have to discover what is actually going on for each of the inequities we think we see. Analyzing workforce demographics and identifying viable solutions is challenging. There are many contributing factors, so teasing out what is actionable (i.e., what we can impact in a meaningful way) can be difficult, but it's doable.
To identify the causes, begin with multivariate regression (statistics), develop a hypothesis, then do a controlled study of the proposed solution.
I first had a difficulty in accepting this, while thinking to biodiversity, which means for us beauty, security, balance,, protection of life and more. But It Aldo means equity among living beings. It also means equity among generations. It also means equity between Rich and poor.
You'd be happy in the USSR or Venezuela then, where people beg for their own deaths.
Equity between the rich and the poor do you truly believe that the store clerk should be paid as much as the doctor
@@Dino2GunZ I agree that strategies may not be those we see by looking the world with a habit's eye. And I'm not suggesting a strategy. I'd like to see things in an empathic way. Sorry for not doing so now. I may be back later.
Your answer is not clear to me. Maybe you need honesty and justice?
And perhaps you would prefer to refer to what we call "merit"? Could you give me an example?
@@MikeDonaldson-eh2ru Your answer is not clear to me. Maybe you need honesty and justice.
And perhaps you would prefer to refer to what we call "merit"? Would you please give me an example, so that I can understand the context, the environment you're describing or interpreting?
You want equality of outcome not opportunity.....
This people clapping don’t know they’ll be out of jobs
It's Portland, they are all brain washed idiots.
What happens after equity is achieved?
YES. THIS. Nobody asks these questions. At what cost? To what end? Then what?
Everybody will be equally miserable. Well, everybody except the people who will oversee all of this "equity".
Read Frederick Nietzche's " Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and the part about " The Last Man"
That is the trick, it never is. It is why they never set a standard to judge themselves. No standard = the process of revolution NEVER ends.
it can never be achieved
In South Africa, diversity is a real big problem, I am white and struggle to get a job because I don't match a certain skin tone, in America it is reversed so to be honest us as people need to wake up and grow up.
It's not the opposite here in the U.S. it is a false narrative. Just like this speech.
You have no idea whatsoever what it's like living in the US. Women and minorities are given a first class seat to every possible opportunity here.
It's closer to the opposite of what you think here in America.
I think some may have missed her point... Paloma never said hire poorly qualified individuals and ensure they are "given" anything. She said hire competent individuals and treat everyone equally regardless of race, gender or ethnicity. However as a society, we also need to address historical systemic bias and bring up those who were systemically unable to participate in education, jobs etc. That will make our whole society richer and a better place to live. Finally, high performers and low performers should not be treated the same but high performers of all races, genders and ethnicity should be treated the same. (and the same for low performers)
First, she offered her pie chart of getting people of color to match their population percentage then threat them equally. The latter is easily argued but the former is not. That may be where some have issue. In regards to your second point of systemic biases, your definition and use would have to be defined/cleared up and then your definition of addressing as well.
I had to watch it again and she never addressed competency (neither poor or high performance). If you listen again her point was that our goal should not be diversity, it should be equity. Diversity is a measurement of whether we achieved equity. She starts talking about biases. Then the benefit of equity is that it is good for our health. If we don't have equity, there is some injustice in our hiring process (8:30, this part I did not agree, i don't think one prove the other.). She goes on to explain how to achieve equity by making it into a goal and gave examples of how to write a measurable, specific and time bound goal and said equity is achievable. If we missed the point about hiring competent people was because it was not there.
@@sae4842 it's not there because it goes without saying. In what company does HR have a policy of hiring unqualified people?
@@4cwhisperer86 I pointed out that we missed the point because it wasn't there. Paloma just said make it a goal to hire women. The example was to hire 50% women. I don't want to make assumptions on what she meant by how to achieve it because it wasn't there.. She just said that 'you can do it! If you are a smaller business you can do it faster!' But normally people with the equity agenda refers to increasing the number in STEM, executive positions and positions in politics (positions of power). I can't speak for all HR. Assuming a competent HR, HR should not tell us to hire unqualified people. My issue is with using gender as a criteria. But let's say some HR somewhere has a 50% woman goal. You need to hire 2 people. You got 10 candidates, 2 are women. Assuming they are all qualified, you hire the 2 women. Statically, it is unlikely that they were the best qualified. But yes, they were qualified. HR didn't say to hire unqualified people, we just made gender a hiring criteria: if qualified, give them preference. In my own opinion, being a woman, it would be sad to hear I was a diversity hire rather than being hired for being the best, in practice you should never tell the hired person. I do hire more women than men, my HR hasn't given me quotas so I hire the best. I just hired for 2 position where I met 7 candidates, all males. There are some positions that just can't have 50% women. If I were forced, it would either take me way too long to reach the goal OR I lower my expectation. In practice, I always lower my expectations once I waited enough since I have to reach my hiring goal. Now add gender as a criteria in positions where most candidates are males, and if given a quota and time limit, I will not hire the best. If HR is any good, they will help me or delay my deliverable goals.
@@4cwhisperer86 The executive branch of the US government.
Why is this woman advocating for discrimination? DEI is one of the greatest grifts of this century.
Because the left has finally realized that they can't succeed based on merit or good policy so they switched to Identity. She is the very last person to ever quote MLK "Judge a person by the content of their character, not the color of their skin." These people now see MLK as a total waste of time. CRT and identity politics is an admission that in order to win they HAVE TO go based on skin color. Yet when any minority goes against them they go after the content of their character. LOL.
Because she's a university educated brown woman. It's in her interest to do so.
@@secondopinion6654 The left has been taken over by the university class. It now reflects their interests and wants. Not the interests and wants of the working class.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 even though she is University educated, men aren't looking at her. She is smart talented but she deserves it. This makes her sad and lowers her life expectancy. other good looking women get all the attention. She needs justice from discrimination . They are all racists. It is what this video is about. Watch it again. 🤣🤦🏼♂️
I think everytime some men take uneducated attractive girl to dinner, she feels like why am I not getting what I deserve for my education. I think this personally influenced her. You will never see a attractive women advocating for this. I see this pattern always.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 lol cuz BLM....🤣
So we should be hiring and promoting people based on their race. And here I thought discrimination and racism were bad and to be avoided. Guess I'm old fashioned.
If we were hiring based on merit, Americans would be out of Job in America. The best engineers and scientists aren't of American origin.
OK - measure it in a time bound way! How is the corporation or small business doing BEFORE this programming of equity, and then after? Stockholders and customers will figure it out for you. Equity for equities sake will not automatically mean a better product or service. And THAT is a basic human need of the cavemen. (Had to use spellcheck on that as cavepeople isn't a word).
Bully Maguire, is that you?
Summation for those in a hurry: "stop focusing on diversity, and instead focus on diversity!"
Just burn your business to the ground and stick your hand out for the government dole. The US is dead with people like this leading it.
She definitely misled the audience and flipped the narrative in the first 5 minutes. She went from talking about monkeys doing equal tasks with different outcomes to talking about equal outcomes completely apart from tasks performed. The audience didn’t notice this sleight of hand.
She might not have explained it well enough, but this is something a lot of POC go through on a daily basis, which is why she says that equity is a better goal to try to implement compared to diversity. We often perform the same tasks as our white peers and don't get as many rewards. We also often have to work twice as hard to be recognized for our work. POC have to be absolutely extraordinary while white mediocrity is easily rewarded because whiteness is the standard (in America). I know it's not easy to see and might be difficult to believe, but there have been many studies done on this phenomenon. Hope this helps!
@@SomeyaMusic She explained it well enough. She’s a communist trying to gaslight whites and inflame blacks into pursuing a non-merit based hierarchy of identity labels. This ideology is destroying America and Western culture. As it was intended to. It’s communism she’s preaching. She’s race baiting.
Done
Sad we have no goal for America and haven't had one since Kennedy
'Peace Keepers' has been Americas 'Goal' for a long time now. We've been meddling in foreign affairs since before I was born. Always trying to tell others how to live intrinsic to American approval.
Only individual goals are important.
If you believe that all people are created equal with inalienable rights, you can't work towards equity, those two can't coexist. Two words: Harrison Bergeron.
Let's hire and promote based on race and gender instead of qualifications. What could possibly go wrong?
I bet most HR department are women. Before asking all other parts of the organization to hire more 'equitably' they should try it themselves.
You can bet that should there be a convention of the thousands of company diversity officers they will be almost all of one gender and color.
HR zampolits are all resentful gays or women. A nastier lot of harpies you'll never meet.
Equity is for people who have simple minds and are obsessed with "utopia." It is not possible nor is it desirable. Stop focusing on cosmetic identity.
Equality of opportunity is a Liberal value which has the virtue of fairness like a race, everyone starts at the same line. Equality of outcome is a socialist value, it has no virtue and aims to achieve an inhuman utopia, all races will never cross the finish line at the exact same time because humans are complex individuals which are fundamentally unequal.
it’s not ‘cosmetic’ when POC struggle, shane. did you not watch the video when she spoke of stress among POC victims of racism?
Snausages Mcgee I refuse to entertain your ableist and barbaric mindset. You know that it’s not the 50s, but you also know or should know minorities are still under-compensated and not represented.
Equity is forcing equality of outcome. Worst idea ever.
I thought we have learnt that lesson before
@@user-eu9ht5me5jThe Gods of the Copybook Headings are prepared to teach us once again.
Equity is inherently a bad idea, it's the thought that everything should be equal in outcome. I'm sorry but that's not how the world works, nothing is truly equal and their will always be inequality and that's not inherently a bad thing because inequality is not always because of malice
You came from Scribe?
Could someone help me? Inequality (Ungleichheit; unfaire Behandlung; Uniformitätslosigkeit - thats the german words the lexicon gave me) and Inequity (Ungerechtigkeit, Unfairness - same here)... In germany we have only one concept of this: Ungerechtigkeit ("recht" comes from "right" like in law), that's a different concept as Ungleichheit ("gleich" = equal )... These two concepts mean different things in Germany while I think it is a mixed bag in the anglosphere?
Now back to Scribe and Monkey and see what they have to say... rofl
@@maxmuetze9083 inequality = not equal; inequity = not fair. I'll use punishment for a crime as an example since we live in a police-state (police-country?). An example of equality would be the same punishment for the same crime for everyone; equity would be taking into account the reason the person committed a crime in the first place and giving appropriate punishment.
equality and equity are two separate and different things, i think its about the starting line being fair rather than the finish line
Don't promote equality, promote equity. Hire an outside firm and have them make policies to insure equity. By the way, if you look at the back of today's program, you'll find information how you can hire my diversity and equity consultant firm at very reasonable prices. You can also employ my second firm that does mold abatement.
Someone please show me anywhere equity (aka. Communism, marxism, socialism) has worked.
It works in my household. That's the best I can come up with. And even then, it sometimes fails when you don't have someone contributing for extended periods of time when it is within their capacity.
Matthew 20:1-16
This was covered around 2000 years ago and it had (has) NOTHING to do with race. It’s a heart issue.
Give thanks and be grateful for whatever it is you have, and work hard for what is to come.
i never started talking diversity etc. and never will.
I was enjoying this video at the beginning, she's an engaging and entertaining speaker, and I like monkeys. I thought she was going somewhere, then those graphs came up and was given pause...
I can understand that if there is a large margin between the ration local racial diversity and your company that it may well be a sign of some discrepancy in the companies hiring practices, but this seems far from hard proof or even strong evidence, there could be numerous reasons a specific demographic has chosen to work at that place of employment. Also what margin of acceptability is given for an employer before he or she is deemed to be practicing nefarious hiring policies? 2%? 5%?
Also again if the employee sways the other way and hires too much of a minority does that then mean that said employee is guild of racism toward the majority?
How far to do take maintaining this ratio also? Does it take into consideration the diversity of all the local population or just those qualified in the particular field? The variables are endless. What level of inconvenience is acceptable before this can be waved? If say that you had a qualified person that lived locally but because they did not help you fill your equity or equality quotas and would in fact detriment them, do you then have to go to the expense of advertising and hiring nationally?
As for equity in the workplace, I'm given to understand there are laws on preferential treatment in work places, which I assume stretches to preference due to ethnicity. I'm not sure what they are though so perhaps someone could help me out.
I know there had existed a great deal of racism in the world that has horrendously effected many areas of society and that we are attempting to redress this balance, but this does not seem the answer to that, this seems like painting the glass green because the soil is bad, I would say strong social and educational changed need to be implemented which would go a long way towards rectifying problems in the employment market, and you'll have to forgive me for being vague on that point but this is already running into a novel.
At no point does she explain what achieving equity would look like. Because she would have to say, we need to take something that someone else earned and reward someone who didn't earn it. Explain how equity, diversity, inclusion, or anything of the sort adds value. How do these things make a company more money?
Of course, equity is conveniently never operationally defined by its fervent advocates since doing so would demonstrably reveal its utopian nature -- equal outcomes.
@@molloarden8938 equitably miserable
So what you're saying is that one group will ALWAYS be superior to others/another and the only way to get to where we need to be is to take it from someone and give it to someone that's LESS qualified? So that means(Because of your statement.) that the other groups has no one that can fit the criteria because in your eyes they're somehow lesser. That my friend is the Gate Keeper concept.
@@iamcoachmichaelmcbride So, do you think the NBA needs more diversity?
Should they be forced to hire more Asian female dwarves for instance?
If not, then why not?
exactly, they pretend like they're giving to some at no expense to others.
"So this is how democracy dies, to the sound of applause..."
for some people IT IS THAT HARD merely to invite.
Being Diverse or different doesn't mean better, worse, or equal. It means individuality. Take pride in your heritage and how far we've come to be better than our ancestors.
BTW: She put shame to my last name .
Hi Angelo, She wasn't downplaying our diversity at all. She was saying it's not enough to invite us to the table, but rather treat us with the same opportunities and welcoming spirit as you would those who are not like us. She made an amazing case for it, too. It's hard sometimes to listen to these types of talks because we are often trying to defend those things about us that are worth celebrating. TY for being passionate about who you are. I agree 100% with that sentiment.
@@professorrivera3471 Ty I learned from your comment
@@professorrivera3471 Ty I learned from your comment
@@professorrivera3471 Ty I learned from your comment
Liberty prime would like a word with you
I don't why everyone's definition of equity is 'diverse'. As per Oxford dictionary; Equity = fairness= equal opportunity while equality = sameness = equal outcome
Equity is possible, equality seems impossible!
White what? Took you 8 minutes to mention race and jump into Hwiteness. Good Job.
These comments... limbic brain army in full effect (unfortunately and apparently unbeknownst). Let me help...what she's saying is that in your professional & competent hiring practices, broaden your horizons by being mindful that we all naturally/innately/without knowing it, want to exclude ppl different than us, THEREFORE, let's try not to do that so much by practicing awareness so we can have a more diverse group of competent, qualified and able body of employees. Then OPERATE our companies with equality and equity, in a way that is measurable so that we are actually improving as employers while holding an expectation for delicious results as a fully competent company (yes diversity + competency is a real thing). She's not saying discriminate, she's saying consider the current way you assimilate and aim to improve. That's all folks. You have to begin with the listening ear that imagines she has the basic core understanding that you all are intelligent and know how to do your HR job, she should not have to go over the basics for you to understand how she is FURTHERING our thinking and EXPANDING our approach.
Uh no, that's not what she's saying. "Equity" means to judge people on the color of their skin and their genitalia, not the content of their character.
Yes, let's stop talking about diversity and start working. As in get back to work and stop expecting special treatment.
Why is special treatment such an offensive word? We should treat everyone as someone special.
@@jesusgood2462 if everyone is special, then nobody is special.
In equity, people expect the same reward as others despite what value they contribute. It also expects that my gifts are equal to yours. Equity is an outcome. So if one person is an MD & another person flips burgers, they should be paid the same. How obtuse!
Forcing equity aka equality of outcome would require a considerable loss of freedom and individual responsibility.
And the deaths of hundreds of millions.
Noo that is not how it works equity is about fairness it does not care were you come from as long as you are good about it you get it
Equality is not fredom
@@whiteeye3453 Unequal outcomes are called out as inequity.
@@barryon8706 equity is about fairness
NO TO EQUITY!
Love to see the "Equity" of that crowd. Making themselves feel better
Just saw the crowd ..... I was right 😂
She owns the outside experts. The Bobs from office space.
I REALLY want diversity dont tell me what I really want lol. that's my only gripe with this whole talk is her catch phrase that we dont actually want diversity....uh...yes we do lol. we just ALSO want equity.
Harrison Bergeron.
7:20 How do you know how much racism someone experiences in order to connect that information to inflammation?
You do qualitative investigation and ask them about experiences over time while doing blood draws over time as well. Do the weeks that they report experiencing micro or macroagressions correlate to changes in their lab values that week?
Let's talk about equity. Now only women and children are allowed to left Ukraine. Equity means 50-50 including in the army.
god it just sounds like shes talking to children
Equity causes inequality, that is the double edged sword
no
why not just say Communism??
That’s equality, she’s talking about equity there’s a difference look it up
What about diversity in sports.
Yes! We definitely need more Asians in all sports
You got to be smart enough to realize that sports do not have a structure in place to ensure that the whites can't play. We're talking about the conscious effort to exclude.
@@supercornelius81 like where? Ben Carson? Famous Amos? Barack Obama? The list goes on..
There's a difference between exceptions and examples. Please just refer to some studies that all overwhelmingly show that this is true. In fact the behavior in this chat shows that this is true, no one in this chat or comment section is likely to promote qualified minorities. It's evident from the insecurities being displayed
@@supercornelius81 Asians being kept out of Harvard is one example.
Part of the problem with this idea is how we interpret situations. We can change how to interpret situations. Being offended by someone's behavior is a choice. Thinking that an environment is somehow hostile because of the demographic makeup is a choice. Making ethnic and gender hiring benchmarks are completely arbitrary metrics. Companies and organizations should hire and promote based on akills and competence, nothing else. The demographics after that are irrelevent.
This is completely true. Fairness isn't achieved by incorporating racial and gender characteristics into the decision process of hiring. A candidate's skill level, education, and experience should be the only factors that companies consider when hiring. Otherwise, if we follow her advice, we are simply encouraging discrimination which is unjust inherently.
I wonder if this lady has been to an Asian restaurant? Is she going to make them hire a diverse staff that meets the demographics of America? If not, why?
Or the NBA.
Before calling for equity, we need to have a frank discourse explaining why there is so much inequity. I suggest schadenfreude (in English, epicaricacy) is a widespread social and psychological disease contributing to inequity. It requires demeaning others to enable gloating over their misfortune. You can't gloat about living on the good side of the tracks unless others are somehow condemned to live on the wrong side.
Her idea is great but needs to be taken a step further. What I mean is, she fails to take into account competency and merit rather than putting social significance into one's immutable characteristics. Although, this is a moot endeavor when technology captures all relevant occupations and leaves vast amount of free time for humanity.
Bullseye
She is trying to push and rig her context into people's mind.
The problem is those who clap for absolute false statements.
They are paid to clap. Or maybe people who came to this conference think like her.
She is little more than a DEI grifter, loads of people cashing in on this business nowadays, knowing they best grab the money while it lasts.
Correct.
She is leaving out the lack of leverage most employees have over the executive hiring process. I really doubt this will emerge as part of the employee bargaining process…but maybe it will.
Which is none, as it should be.
The employees are being traded their labor for a compensation. They aren’t entitled to ownership or control over the business itself, where someone else risked a great amount of personal capital (including the very salaries of said employees) in order to try and turn the business profitable in order that it might support itself, it’s customers, and yes, those employees.
Forcing equity when you have different inputs is inherently unfair. If person A produces twice as much, should they be paid EXACTLY as much as person B? Note, I have not mentioned race, gender, or anything else. If you answered 'yes', you should never be in a position of any responsibility.
I can't believe these comments. I thought She had valid points and she didn't say hire someone not qualified or pay someone the same amount as their coworkers (without adding) DOING the SAME WORK. bejesus! your clubs are showing.
You are projecting. No one is saying diversity and inclusion shouldn’t exist. But they can see through BS.
The comments are so widespread because most people have enough common sense to see through BS. Equity is the new trendy BS to sell people like sheep. Its all tied to political interests and people have been brainwashed into believing almost anything like naive sheep.
I like diversity. I think it is great and i prefer to work in a diverse environment. She said I shouldn't care about it. That I should care about equity. That is where I disagree. I am not disagreeing with paying people the same for same work. I definitely agree with hiring only qualified people. People who don't agree with equity has no problem with these 2 things you mentioned.
@@sae4842then what am i missing?
Listen to anything by James Lindsey. It's in the language and what the words - diversity, inclusion, and equity mean. It's Marxist "utopia" preying on the compassion of good people.
So why not just give a test for the job. The best score gets the job your welcome.
Interesting and Informative
Her knowledge is like from magazine articles and picture books, but maybe some CEO’s need such low level seminars
Agree.
Equality is when people are subjected to the same laws and protected by the same rights . Anything more is government overreach .
Only if you assume those laws and protections are actually applied equally. We know they aren’t.