DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males (/Thread-DNC-we-don%E2%80%99t-want-to-recruit-any-cis-gendered-white-males) |
DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - StLucieBengal - 10-30-2017 http://www.dailywire.com/news/22939/exclusive-dnc-official-discriminates-against-elliott-hamilton Nice hiring practices lol no wonder the DNC is a wreck. Quote:EXCLUSIVE: DNC Official Says She Doesn't Want To Recruit 'Cisgender Straight White Males' RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - GMDino - 10-30-2017 (10-30-2017, 06:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: http://www.dailywire.com/news/22939/exclusive-dnc-official-discriminates-against-elliott-hamilton Don't worry Lucy. If they act "too fruity" I'm sure they will be reprimanded. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - BmorePat87 - 10-30-2017 I hope they have binders full of women RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - StLucieBengal - 10-31-2017 (10-30-2017, 07:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: Don't worry Lucy. If they act "too fruity" I'm sure they will be reprimanded. I think cis gender is just basically normal. So it seems they want fruity lol Maybe one of you could shed some light RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - BmorePat87 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 12:32 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Maybe one of you could shed some light Pretty sure he was commenting on the gay people they would hire, making light of your ridiculous past statements of not liking "fruity" gay employees by assuring you that the DNC wouldn't allow these non-straight hires to be "too fruity". As for the story, a private group wants diversity hires to represent a broader group of people. That's their choice and, despite what that clearly fake quote from not a source said, I don't think diversity hires for a single department hurts them or their message. If their goal is to reach a multitude of voters, the department in charge of them reaching more people should have a diverse group of people to help them better craft their message or strategy towards individual groups. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - StLucieBengal - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 08:48 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Pretty sure he was commenting on the gay people they would hire, making light of your ridiculous past statements of not liking "fruity" gay employees by assuring you that the DNC wouldn't allow these non-straight hires to be "too fruity". Why is it ridiculous that I do not want to hire someone who can’t condict themselves in a professional manner in the office? Employees represent the business and I certainly do not want employees prancing around my office. As for diversity hiring..... it’s terrible. And only set people up for failure. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - GMDino - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:11 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Why is it ridiculous that I do not want to hire someone who can’t condict themselves in a professional manner in the office? Employees represent the business and I certainly do not want employees prancing around my office. What is ridiculous is someone thinking a homosexual can't be professional if they are "too gay". (10-31-2017, 10:11 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: As for diversity hiring..... it’s terrible. And only set people up for failure. Not if the person is also qualified for the job. Or the employer is willing to train them to give them a leg up. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - BmorePat87 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:11 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Why is it ridiculous that I do not want to hire someone who can’t condict themselves in a professional manner in the office? Employees represent the business and I certainly do not want employees prancing around my office. It's ridiculous to (1) only be concerned with if gay people are capable of being professional, to (2) believe something about gay people justly causes this concern, and (3) describe any personality of a gay person as "fruity". No one is "prancing" around an office. But we both know this, so let's move past Dino's joke. I think the best people to consult from marketing or lobbying towards a group of people are members of that group. Apparently you disagree or were you comments only on diversity hires unrelated to a goal involving their diversity? RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - bfine32 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: Not if the person is also qualified for the job. Or the employer is willing to train them to give them a leg up. BmorePat87 Wrote:As for the story, a private group wants diversity hires to represent a broader group of people. That's their choice I think it is unfair when a group of people are openly omitted from employment consideration because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. How about you guys? RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - Benton - 10-31-2017 (10-30-2017, 07:34 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I hope they have blenders full of women RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - Belsnickel - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:28 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I think it is unfair when a group of people are openly omitted from employment consideration because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. How about you guys? Where are they openly omitted? I saw "prefer" in there. That word does not imply cisgender straight white males will not be considered. Granted, my eyesight is bad enough that I didn't see the line in the email image originally, but I'm pretty sure I'm correct in this wording. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - BmorePat87 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:28 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I think it is unfair when a group of people are openly omitted from employment consideration because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity. How about you guys? That's why I said "to represent a broader group of people". If your goal is to increase outreach towards one community, there's nothing wrong with hiring exclusively from that community. If the job doesn't require that, I'd disagree with it. No doubt the rest of my post that you left out would have made that clear... RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - bfine32 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:35 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Where are they openly omitted? I saw "prefer" in there. That word does not imply cisgender straight white males will not be considered. Granted, my eyesight is bad enough that I didn't see the line in the email image originally, but I'm pretty sure I'm correct in this wording. Yes, but they didn't say the prefer diversity, they said they would prefer (like better than the other) NOT to hire folks because of their race, gender, and/or sexual orientation. That's a whole different message than we prefer diversity hires. But do not worry. The problem is not with your eyesight; perhaps just your vision. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - bfine32 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:39 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: That's why I said "to represent a broader group of people". If your goal is to increase outreach towards one community, there's nothing wrong with hiring exclusively from that community. Oh I read the rest of the post about them being a private organization and it is their choice. I just didn't think that changed the context of your assertion. BTW, you didn't answer my question. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - Belsnickel - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:43 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, but they didn't say the prefer diversity, they said they would prefer (like better than the other) NOT to hire folks because of their race, gender, and/or sexual orientation. That's a whole different message than we prefer diversity hires. I agree the word choice was poor, but the message is the same. Preference is still only preference, it isn't saying that they will not hire someone based on their race, sexual orientation, or gender identity; they are only saying they would prefer it. That is still a different thing than people being openly omitted from employment. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - BmorePat87 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:45 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh I read the rest of the post about them being a private organization and it is their choice. I just didn't think that changed the context of your assertion. Okey Doke. Quote:BTW, you didn't answer my question. Yea, I did. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - bfine32 - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:50 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I agree the word choice was poor, but the message is the same. Preference is still only preference, it isn't saying that they will not hire someone based on their race, sexual orientation, or gender identity; they are only saying they would prefer it. That is still a different thing than people being openly omitted from employment. Unless you answered the question and I missed it like when Pat answered it; I'm not sure you answered the question, just challenged the wording. So let me ask it in revised form as we have decided to focus on the wording and not the context. I do not think it is fair when one population is preferred for employment over another based on their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Do you? Pat already answered but I really cannot tell you if he said yes or no. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - Belsnickel - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:56 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Unless you answered the question and I missed it like when Pat answered it; I'm not sure you answered the question, just challenged the wording. Since I wasn't quoted in the post I was under the assumption the question had not been asked of me, and so I was not attempting to answer it. I was merely commenting on how the question you were asking was not representative of the situation described in the OP. I have no problems with preference given to hires based on any demographic qualifier. I disagree with quotas and I disagree with people being disqualified because of a demographic qualifier, but preference in an attempt to further diversity is not something I have an issue with. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - GMDino - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:56 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Unless you answered the question and I missed it like when Pat answered it; I'm not sure you answered the question, just challenged the wording. "we" (10-31-2017, 10:43 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, but they didn't say the prefer diversity, they said they would prefer (like better than the other) NOT to hire folks because of their race, gender, and/or sexual orientation. That's a whole different message than we prefer diversity hires. But do not worry. The problem is not with your eyesight; perhaps just your vision. RE: DNC: we don’t want to recruit any cis gendered white males - StLucieBengal - 10-31-2017 (10-31-2017, 10:26 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's ridiculous to (1) only be concerned with if gay people are capable of being professional, to (2) believe something about gay people justly causes this concern, and (3) describe any personality of a gay person as "fruity". No one is "prancing" around an office. Who said I was only concerned about gay people being professional in the office? I have had gays come in and during the interview they were being fruity.... It’s fair to not want my office to turn into an episode of will and grace. The only people who should be prancing around are little girls. Unfortunately that isn’t the case. I don’t think diversity really matters when you sacrifice quality for the sake of diversity. |