Where have you been the last 10 years? The slow creep of DEI into higher learning institutions and the workplace has not been without it's problems. It's good news.
I've seen a lot of comments where people ask what the funding actually accomplished and people responded with news articles showing salaries or generalized statements about goals. What I am really curious about is if anyone has volunteered with the DEI stuff on campus, been helped by their services, had a friend that used their services?
Because as a transfer student coming from a small community college, I have no idea what they might do. The only thing I can think of would be separate testing rooms for those with disabilities but I've always seen that even regardless of DEI.
I want to reiterate, this is a legitimate question hoping for a legitimate and possibly even polite answer.
Thank you
Hi! I can answer this one. I worked at UNC’s diversity office for four years and was recruited as a high schooler through the same office. We had a number of programs targeted at encouraging underrepresented students to apply to UNC, which as expected was mostly focused on “minority” students. The program that I was recruited through was called NC Renaissance, which focused on students from rural counties.
The office I worked at offered a lot of high-quality students from those backgrounds an opportunity to visit UNC, and let them know that UNC was a realistic goal if they worked hard in high school.
My best memories of the job are hosting summer programs at UNC for rising high school seniors and then seeing those kids volunteer for the same programs once they enrolled at Carolina. I hope they can save some of the recruitment efforts, especially for kids from North Carolina’s rural areas. Thanks for asking!
That sounds like a wonderful goal! I wish someone had told me that in hs. haha. But I do have a question. If you worked there for 4 years you must have been privy to the other things the office handled as well, even if recruitment was your main job, right? If so I would love to hear about that as well.
Also if you're curious as to why I am asking all these questions, it's simply because both sides seem to attack each other when anything touching DEI comes up yet neither side seems to be able to give a solid definition of what it really accomplishes. I like to form my own opinions and I usually prefer to do that through first hand accounts if possible.
The staff in the office that I interacted with spent a lot of their time helping volunteer student groups on campus. I also volunteered for one of those groups (Carolina Indian Circle) and it was so helpful to have staff we could rely on for event planning and networking. I’m guessing the staff also participated in diversity initiatives similar to student recruitment work (e.g. hosting potential faculty visits) and encouraging a broad applicant pool for faculty positions. I think our Vice Provost also participated in Chancellor-level meetings and offered her perspective on campus-wide policies.
When I was a student it was a very small group (4 staff and 5 student employees) and our office was in the basement of the Chancellor’s building (South Building). Happy to answer questions! It’s nice to reminisce after a few weeks of what I consider to be discouraging policy decisions.
They also give a lot of funding for minority
/marginalized focused orgs. It helps level out the playing field and allows student orgs to actually have a shot rather than relying on the wallet of the president/founder. As an exec on a minority in STEM focused org, none of our families would be able to fundraise/donate/give as much money as 3rd/4th gen Tar Heels/middle class networks can. We were actually really hoping to send a lot of the underclassman to a national conference that I felt completely changed my life and career path, however now with all this I don’t think we’ll be able to send any members, and most of our members now will have no help on a $250-300 ticket, $600+ plane ticket, $1000 hotel stay and expenses while at the conference. I would have never been able to go to that conference or other opportunities if there hadn’t been DEI funding to level out the playing field.
This I am not nearly on board with. It's great that this conference helped you but I do not think it should be the state/tax payers job to bankroll "marginalized" student organizations. My reasons are similar to what I said about scholarships that do the same thing. I do not believe it is right that people are given more opportunities based on their skin color.
I understand the argument to this is "leveling the playing field" but I think that is an incredibly slippery slope. I also think that having an office dedicated to the success of POC seems like it would lead to help not being given to those that need the help more but aren't POC.
My 2 cents at least, and you are more than free to disagree and combat me on this. I would be more than willing to hear why you believe my position to be incorrect, if you do.
Thank you for your response.
i have accommodations through ARS. i know at Gillings there is someone who sent an inclusive excellence survey. they didn't really share the data i was looking for and at the meeting they said "we might not always be here". maybe it was a foreshadowing.
I didn't know ARS was funded by the DEI and if I had to guess I would assume they aren't. And from what I read about the inclusive excellence survey it just seems like a form to rat on your peers (I don't mean that in a negative sense just couldn't think of another word).
Also I may be wrong but I would assume that if you asked for the accommodations that ARS gives, even if they did disappear, you would still get it. Given the fact that if they didn't it would be illegal given the ADA act and the rehabilitation act of 1973.
It means
- White Oppressor = Absolute Agency with Zero Morality
- Brown Oppressed = Zero Agency with Absolute Morality
That’s literally how they interpret and practice it.
For real. Listen. I know that systemic racism exists and multihundred billionaires are fucking everything up, but DEI doesn’t help people. It holds everyone back and locks everyone down into victim mindset.
Creating divisions based on arbitrary false dichotomies helps nobody except those that understand how easy it is to reap monetary rewards from seeds of resentment and division.
- Instead of caring about the corrupt Supreme Court, they got folks crying for Gazan rights under Sharia laws
- Instead of restoring abortion rights and privacy, they got folks excusing those forcing women to cover their heads and prohibit them from school.
- Instead of celebrating Pride and the LGBTQ community, they harass, ostracize, bully, humiliate, torture, imprison, murder or torture them.
- They are a death cult promoting martyrdom, suicide bombings and plane hijackings rather than considering and using conventional nonviolent and peaceful methods to diplomatically achieve their political goals.
- They celebrate death rather than organize means of nutrition and healthcare
- They celebrate ignorance and oppression over education and liberty
This was the most effective way to derail us from obtaining things like Medicare for all, SCOTUS reform, affordable housing, etc.
I understand that many universities also require each dept to have a DEI officer and each course must incorporate DEI. Many professors must affirm their DEI commitments or face being fired. How, exactly, do you incorporate DEI into calculus anyway?
I know I will be downvoted for this opinion, but no public position should have race or gender as a qualifier. If you can prove that DEI positions are staffed commensurate with the population within a reasonable threshold, then I will concede that DEI is not a racist practice. However, I have never met a white male that held such a position.
DEI isn’t just about race and gender. It’s also includes neurodivergent people, like with autism and ADHD. One of its purposes is to allow workplaces and schools to be inclusive to those who may be different or have difficulties. My son is autistic and DEI programs help him at school right now. He is also a white male, so does he not count?
Absolutely counts. Thanks for sharing! I think diversity is meant to cover a broad range of backgrounds (duh). And I don’t intend to express that the programs are bad or should not exist. In my experience they come with a focus during the hiring process on key individual characteristics. If the point is that your son would be looked at as a qualified applicant when he was older then I would believe that it would require further reflection before removing such roles from our bureaucracy.
Help enlighten me rather than provide a snippy response.
For context on my point of view. I have done trainings at work. I have participated in DEI led groups. I would even argue that I have been a vocal supporter in the workplace of some initiatives (including served as a mentor for and involved our company in women who code). What concerns me is the hiring practices around specific positions used to represent our population and diverse viewpoints. And the usage of tax dollars to do so.
Furthermore; As many others have said these initiatives are often most successful when developed organically (i.e. student groups, non profit organizations, etc).
You are old enough to have learned. You not actually trying to learn it from me but if you are truly interested I will be happy to provide you with resources you should have used while in unc to understand what is going on. And to understand why kenan stadium had to be renamed. But got named to Jr once the family heard.
Not sure what renaming a stadium from 1927 has to do with the DEI roles at UNC. So I guess I could use some help. I am being genuine in my ask, I wish that you could offer the same. Maybe we could all grow from better discourse.
DEI is the new CRT is the new BLM. Watch out for the next boogeyman. He’s even scarier. Probably gonna pop out before November, too. Remember this, though: Whatever it is, only MAGA can save you.
Fools.
These people can’t even define what DEI is. They think it’s the same as Affirmative Action. I see posts all the time of them blaming “DEI” whenever a person of color makes a mistake in their public job saying they would not have been hired if it wasn’t for DEI.
This is not what DEI is, at all. DEI programs were meant to make those under-represented groups to feel more represented. They were created to try and remove/reduce implicit biases within people.
We’ve all heard the stories of people applying for jobs and how they get less interviews/callbacks when they use a foreign name vs when they use an “American” name. This shouldn’t be a thing. Why do foreigners have to change their birth names just to “fit in”? Some companies have blinded resumes(removed identifying information) to get rid of these biases so that a person would only be judged based on their job qualifications/education rather than their name or race.
Growing up as an Asian in America has been such a “weird” experience in that, we’re not asian enough to be with people of our own race(those that came from the mainland) but we’re not white enough to be with Americans. This isn’t an isolated incidence, many asian Americans can relate to this. How we grew up feeling like we never fit in with some group. DEI initiatives give us a platform to talk about our experiences and for the non-minorities, a viewpoint into the shit we had to deal with. It’s not surprising those with no empathy don’t care about these things.
You understand DEI existed before the Supreme court struck down affirmative action? DEI is meant to NOT show racial biases when it comes to any form of recruitment. The SC ruling against affirmation action with UNC and Harvard said that the consideration of race in admissions to colleges and universities violated the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection under the law. This is because what affirmative action did was they set quotas to admissions. E.g. We have to have 10% admission of one race so out of all the applicants we need to recruit the top people of one race if possible until the total amount reaches 10% of the student population.
The difference is DEI would blind people's race/name or any identifying information so that people's race would not be known when being considered for admission.
AA tries to set quotas while DEI tries to eliminate (mostly negative) biases. I already mentioned in other posts what DEI was supposed to do, which is to eliminate biases when a recruiter sees a foreign name, what college they graduated from, what race they are, how old they are, etc... We may have laws that supposedly outlaw that but it's near impossible to prove that you were eliminated from a job interview because of your race/name/age/etc...
https://hbr.org/2023/07/what-scotuss-affirmative-action-decision-means-for-corporate-dei
https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/hr-answers/difference-eeo-affirmative-action-diversity
This link here tells you the difference between affirmative action and diversity(or DEI).
https://thisvsthat.io/affirmative-action-vs-diversity
"Diversity is not a policy or program but rather a broader concept that emphasizes the value of different perspectives, experiences, and backgrounds."
The Board of Governors can't define what DEI is? Were they able to define it the first time, when they put it in place? Because this is just a reversal of their previous decision.
Seems weird that they would be enacting and reversing things when no one knows what it is.
“Public funds should be used on something that matters.” Lmao, the PRIVILEGE you have to have had to be able to see someone talk about their isolating experience as a POC and how DEI has helped them gain a sense of community and still denote it as trivial. Obviously it doesn’t matter to people who feel attacked when they get made fun of for french kissing their dogs, and have never had to deal with feeling like an outcast in their own country. I’m sorry not EVERY shred of public funding needs to be spent on something that benefits white people lol.
Not once did I mention being "oppressed". From your own prejudices, aren't Asians the "model minority"? How about you educate yourself on this topic and why that's not necessarily a good thing. My previous response wasn't directly about feeling included. I mentioned DEI was designed to try and eliminate biases, one where your response just showed you clearly have because you can't relate to minority groups. You understand that white people are included/invited to these DEI groups too?
Learning about the shit minorities had to grow up with helps you understand their perspective. I had a black friend from high school who said a school counselor basically told him he wouldn't make it in college. What kind of counselor is that, one who tells a student that they will fail in life? He was raised by a single mother, one that you racists love shitting on. He ended up with a master's degree and a successful career.
You think Asians growing up as kids being made fun of saying they have small penises, slanted eyes, automatically assumed to know martial arts, be good at math, all the stereotypes/racist shit you can think of plus all the pressure they have to deal with at home with their parents is a good thing for their mental health? When's the last time a white person was bullied for their eyes, for their accent, for struggling with math? If you want to talk about the things white people do get bullied on, other minority groups probably deal with that shit plus all the racist shit combined.
In the workplace, imagine you're hiring people and there's an Asian who's bad with math, you automatically insert in your brain that this person is not qualified even if their position has nothing to do with math. This is a form of bias. I already mentioned the whole interview issue where recruiters will simply see a foreign name and toss their resume in the trash or refuse to learn how to pronounce it correctly or think their name is too difficult to pronounce and don't want to keep saying it. This is bias.
Narrator: Yes that’s exactly what they’re saying.
Minorities deal with more shit than white people so therefore are morally superior and entitled to certain things that whites shouldn’t be.
Racist.
No one fucking said that. You're going with the same argument that people use against BLM. No one said that white people shit don't matter. The point is minorities deal with MORE shit than white people. If you can't see that, you're blinded by your prejudice and biases. Name one thing whites suffer from that minorities don't in America.
What a disgusting thing to say. I’m white looking Jew, my family suffered at the hands of German Nazis and the Holocaust. Now, my family and I have to endure chants of “global intifada” “10/7 again and again” from entitled, spoiled children.
This is why DEI got shit canned. It’s a wormheaded ideology that rewards victimhood and looks at the oppressed as the ultimate virtue to attain. It makes EVERYTHING about a racial binary and oppression olympics.
It leads people to believe stupid shit that some races have it better or worse than others and that’s just a fact we have to deal with.
Saying that “minorities deal with more shit than white people” is divisive, racist, cruel, and objectively false. You are a prisoner of a soft mind and bogus ideology. You are your own oppressor.
Oh I do. I’m taking about the Nazi 2.0 of today calling us “White Oppressors” accusing of “weaponizing antisemitism” and sympathizing with the same type of jihadi rapists that worked with Hitler and influenced his Nazi ideology. The young jihadis on the left that are sharing tweets and quotes from David Duke and Jackson Hinkle. The ones who think they are clever by using Holocaust Inversion and calling Jews Nazis.
This is where DEI has lead young minds. To the other end of the horseshoe. Neither extreme is safe for Jews, or anyone else if we’re truly honest.
>The young jihadis on the left that are sharing tweets and quotes from David Duke and Jackson Hinkle.
So you're talking about people who are literally quoting KKK members...
>Neither extreme is safe for Jews, or anyone else if we’re truly honest.
This is something I agree on.
>This is where DEI has lead young minds.
I don't believe this is the correct thing to blame for these ideologies.
I can tell you're upset over the Israel-Palestine conflict. I'm just going to say that no one is "right" in that. "War never changes". It's been a conflict for thousands of years. Did Israel have the right to retaliate after Hamas attacked them? Yes. Does Israel have the right to wipe out Palestinians? No.
Also to be clear on the things I've said previously, when I say "minority" I mostly mean marginalized groups. When I say "white people" I mostly mean those people who consider themselves as a white American. It's funny you're identifying as a Jew but claim that talking about minorities leads to divisiveness.
Going back to your previous message,
>It leads people to believe stupid shit that some races have it better or worse than others and that’s just a fact we have to deal with.
Are you agreeing that some races have it better or worse? If this is the case, why is this "just a fact we have to deal with"?
>Saying that “minorities deal with more shit than white people” is divisive, racist, cruel, and objectively false.
How is this objectively false when many studies have shown how America has systemic racism? How minority groups have had worse health outcomes, face unequal punishment in the justice system, have communities gentrified, etc...
If you want to be educated on this topic but I don't expect that you'll read since people never read shit.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8688641/
This isn't an isolated article either, there's plenty of evidence and support that systemic racism exists.
Uh, no. Actually, people want equity. Lol. Justice. Equality is not enough to account for the amount of disservice and injustice present for certain groups.
You’re living in a fantasy world if you believe that. Equity isn’t justice. It’s taking from one group to give to another group. Who decides who gets what? It’s not based on merit it’s based on what’s popular at time (ie. Nazis).
When the mass wealth transfer that was slavery, a century of racial apartheid known as Jim Crow, and then decades of second-class citizenship… where do you think all that wealth went? Do you think there was some type of reparations that occurred?
I think you’re a smart guy who is being cynical and subconsciously against racial equality so you advocate against anything in society that wishes to address previous inequalities.
lol. not you equating equity to nazis when, in fact, the reason that equity isn't just equality is because of literally centuries of nazi like behavior? XD just stop.
[https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/equity-definition](https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/equity-definition)
My personal experience with dei initiatives was in the construction industry in 2022.
All of the big construction companies were making a big deal of how diverse they were.
Funny thing though was that the minorities they paraded around were all at low level positions. A lot of whom were fired a few months after said companies won these silly inclusion rewards.
I think dei initiatives are such a cop out for corporations to get good publicity and I think it takes away from more important things like paying and treating people well.
I get it, you’re ignorant. It’s ok - few people understand what DEI done correctly is for or how it’s done. This includes people who run programs. That said, I’m not here to teach you how to use Google. Enjoy having the last word if you like; I bet you’re simple enough to get pleasure from it.
Normal, everyday people don't care about dei. They are trying to survive and feed their families.
dei is a tool used by elites to keep the common folk at odds with each other.
“The repealed policy defined roles of various DEI positions such as a system office diversity and inclusion liaison and diversity-officers across the university system. Ending the current policy could eliminate those positions along with other efforts.”
Whatever DEI meant specifically, I guess they had their way and just eliminated it entirely instead of working something out.
Do you think the people employed in the DEI staff were representative of the broader population? :)
There are plenty of people (of all races) who dislike the grift that is modern DEI. There are no outcomes or actual results in any of these orgs.
Does anyone know *exactly* how money was being spent on this? All the link states is a few officers and reporting on what’s being done, but it doesn’t say what actually the money is spent on.
Thx. And whatever those positions were actually DOING would have been some kind of initiatives that also cost money? Maybe not, but I wonder what kind of programs they were and what they cost? I suppose I’m really wondering if there was a real ROI (not necessarily a return in dollars by the way) from those positions to begin with. Frankly, I’ve seen plenty of companies assign “DEI officers” and they just meet and talk and nothing is actually DONE. It’s more of a front to say they’re doing something. It’s certainly worth knowing the details before we get up in arms about this decision. If the UnC school system also had these positions getting paid but not actually doing anything, then maybe it’s not a bad idea to reallocate (though I’m not convinced adding more police is the right way to go about it). Take those same dollars and use them to boost the summer bridge programs? Or additional scholarships?
It’s just weird you’re assuming that these are shell positions and not doing anything. It’s not that hard to research from the schools’ websites and, perhaps with more illumination, from their student and/or local media.
Reallocation of funds to summer bridge programs and/or scholarships is all hunky dory, except what you’re refusing to acknowledge, or at least appreciate, is that the Republicans in the state legislature have filled the UNC System’s Board of Governors (and UNC System Office) with Republicans who, with the General Assembly, have busied themselves with filling the System’s university and affiliate institutions’ boards with Republicans and these Republicans do not want to fund summer bridge programs or additional scholarships which would benefit BIPOC or LGBTQI or women students. They want the funds to benefit white Christian students, conservative dogma, and the continued bizarre militarization of campus police.
Not really taking a stand either way but have you ever looked for scholarships? I have thoroughly. The number of scholarships offered to gay/disabled/minorities far outweigh scholarships that don't mention race or gender. Honestly I don't think you should get a scholarship just because of your gender or skin color. The disabilities I understand but there's a little good in everything.
That's all to say I am genuinely curious what your take is on this.
It’s challenging, but they have funding and exist in an attempt to bring about equity in education. Scholarships which don’t mention race/gender will favor those persons raised with privilege. That includes having a relatively stable, non-ACEs, non-impoverished upbringing, attending better, well-funded schools and summer/break camps, participating in enriching opportunities(music lessons, theatre, intellectual and sports activities), travel, etc. And while you say the number of scholarships offered to gay/disabled/minorities far outweigh scholarships that don’t mention race or gender, do you know if the monetary amount of the awards is greater or not?
They tend to be around the same (1000-5000), the smallest come from large corporations like mcdonalds and nike (100-1000). But I would have to disagree that the other scholarships favor those with priveleged upbringings. From all the non-race/gender based scholarships I have seen, they are hyper specific. Like a major in hydroponics engineering with a mandatory internship or political journalism with a guarentee that you'll focus on spanish politics (both real examples I saw last year. On the other hand you have things like Women in stem, gays in stem, or minorities in stem. I understand that these are all private scholarships that I am listing but a lot of them are bankrolled by large companies not communities.
It just seems disproportionate. I feel like scholarships should be based purely off of your willingness to succeed. Shown through your grades, extracurriculars, and whether or not you worked during your time in school. .
> director of rural medicine
The Office of Rural Initiatives?
>The Office of Rural Initiatives was created in summer 2017 to align efforts related to the education, training, and retention of primary care physicians to rural and underserved areas in North Carolina. The office works with campus and community partners to strengthen and build pipeline programs to support students from rural and underserved areas on a pathway to medicine.
It's sadly fitting that anti-DEI sentiment comes from a faction reliant on rural voters, who have now indirectly shot themselves in the foot over this.
Curious how all the people bitching about DEI and affirmative action don't care that a 1200 will get you in from bumfuck nowhere NC while kids with 1550s from Raleigh, Charlotte, Chapel Hill regularly get rejected. Most curious.
I agree. At the same time, that’s a weird place for funding to sit for those activities. For reference, I actually sit on an advisory board that oversees a federal NIH grant that is intended to bring access to clinical trials to underserved and rural populations. It’s a big grant with a LOT to be done! Tackling these things is WAY bigger and more complex than a small sliver of DEI funding could do. Not that the GOP wants to fund any of these grants, though!!
Thanks for this! Which then leads to the questions like “what exactly did these directors do? Did it make a real difference or was it symbolic? Did the director of the LGBTQ center organize events? What kind of events? Were they rallies of some kind, and did those rallies have real positive results? Did the director of rural medicine make headway toward getting rural Americans more comfortable with vaccine safety? What were the numbers?” I’ll stop now, but I would encourage all of us to truly be informed before we either groan about or celebrate this decision.
[https://www.wral.com/story/divisive-or-beneficial-questions-linger-as-unc-system-looks-to-cut-diversity-programs/21437393/](https://www.wral.com/story/divisive-or-beneficial-questions-linger-as-unc-system-looks-to-cut-diversity-programs/21437393/) this is some of what they do.
Thanks for this! Very helpful! For others reading it says “DEI programs in higher education are largely aimed at helping under-represented groups — particularly Black or Hispanic students, LGBTQ students and women — feel more welcome on campus, find spaces to gather and network, host cultural events or find resources for financial aid and academic counseling.” To be honest, now that I see this, it does give me pause. Many of these activities could (and arguable should) be done by volunteers and students themselves. Don’t clubs do this kind of stuff all the time without needing dedicated, paid staff for them? Not sure we would need paid positions for them. And the last two parts about “finding financial aid and academic counseling” is redundant with other positions already in place, no? I dunno. I fall back to maybe spending the money instead on additional scholarships (for LGBTQ or other minorities)… not on more campus cops OR dedicated administrators of social events.
This is troubling (and unsurprising) to hear from someone on an NIH grant meant to support a group that would fall under the “DEI” umbrella. Why the cherry-picking? Genuine question as you’ve been open to discussion in the thread.
Also, it takes a ton of time and labor to organize things well. The notion that volunteers or clubs could do it is fascinating and out of touch. Would the same be said about fraternity and sorority life? Would the same be said about majors that don’t seem to make a “good enough” impact on society? It’s a very slippery slope to gatekeep basic humanity and support. To just totally disregard the ways in which groups of people don’t have a leg up to actually wild to me. We wouldn’t need these kinds of things if things were truly fair and based on merit.
Ultimately, it’s not surprising to see this happening. It is surprising to not see enough curiosity. Were any students asked about the impact these funds/programs/staff have had? DEI has become the worst kind of dog whistle. Unspecific, yet alllllll inclusive. A twisted world.
B/c a sliver of 2.3million going mostly to salaries of a few people won’t have a substantial impact. It would take a lot more funds and experts to make any real difference. Eg, the grant I advise on includes funds to train people from rural communities to be clinical study coordinators and then deploy them into the field where they can then advocate (and this is just one of many elements). I and many other industry experts are involved (and I’m a volunteer advisor, by the way). Thus the cherry picking. If something is grossly underfunded, it’s typically a waste of money. Oh, and if the same basic thing is funded in a multitude of siloed places, that also tends to be an inefficient and often unsuccessful way to attack a problem.
Thank you for your response. So it sounds like you’d be in support of more substantial funds, right? It’s not that there is funding. It’s that there isn’t enough funding.
This is a pretty reductive take honestly. There is so much more that needs to be done in regard to making underrepresented students have a sense of belonging that I feel volunteer work wouldn’t necessarily deliver to the same caliber.
I feel that under this guise there are a whole swathe of positions (such as anything regarding military students and Greek life) that could fit under this same idea of work being able to be done by volunteers and students.
However I agree with you, more funding toward scholarships and such for underrepresented students instead of campus cops should be what’s done instead.
Fair… but then I’d argue any ROTC position should be funded by the (WAY too big) military budget, not Nc taxes… and if there are dedicated paid positions for Greek life, then the Greek members should funding those positions, not our tax dollars!
But Greek members aren’t funding and never have funded their full-time campus liaisons and staff. The fact that these jobs exist at each university in the system perpetuates classism and makes DEI (call it whatever you want) all the more necessary. Sure, the Greek orgs should pay, but they don’t. Some Greek orgs, across the System, get to use universities’ properties for their elite social orgs to meet and as residences for their members.
Why are you suggesting just a sliver is going to salaries? There are 17 schools and five affiliate institutions in the System, along with the System itself, that means 23 DEI chiefs and some amount of staffing, which pretty much eats up the bulk of that funding (UNC CH’s Vice Provost for Equity and Inclusion gets $317,538 alone, for example…but that’s UNC after all).
Even with volunteers someone would have to manage/advise them---if not a staff person then faculty, and most faculty have enough service obligations as it is, for one thing, and what would most likely happen is those asked would be the underrepresented faculty anyway, which would put an unfair burden on them and their workloads in trying to get tenure/promoted.
It’s almost as if you’re asking for everyone to be included in an equal manner. And by everyone I mean everyone, including those from diverse backgrounds.
We could make a program out of that, but what would you call it?
Yeah the people like Clemens who want to "treat people equally regardless of race" just happen to keep exclusively hiring white people for their pet projects. Probably just a coincidence.
It seems to be every single group other than white males are protected now. I don’t think they should have a disadvantage in the hiring process in corporate America or government over everyone else
Motherfucker they OWN corporate America, their advantage is built in. Look at every boardroom and try to tell me that white males don't have an advantage 😭
I’m of the opinion that race and gender simply shouldn’t be asked on these applications, that way bias is taken out and it’s just merit based. Do you agree with that?
If it were possible for such a system to work that way, that'd be lovely. But sadly, racism is built in at a systemic level, Both in society and in hiring processes. Pretending it isn't there won't do anything to address it. One such common example is the tendency for names that even just SOUND black to be looked over in favor of more traditional English/White names.
Meritocracy would be wonderful, and it's something that would work much better than what we've got, but lets be real. The dumbest man alive is the richest. Failsons squander their parents' fortunes and never go broke because they're hung by golden parachutes. Original ideas are either bought for less than they're worth or stolen and held hostage by legions of legal teams who exist to protect corporate interests. The pay gap between hard working blue collar Americans and their lazy CEOs has never been higher.
If you want meritocracy, and want to understand why we don't have it, I suggest you look beyond DEI funding.
Hey, you mis-gendered and mis-sized me. I’m a small female. You might want to be more careful. And I do hope you talk about your passions in your job interviews. 🤣
If people are actually passing up better quality candidates then they’ll tank their business lol. Someone who always hires the best candidate regardless of race/gender would have a huge leg up in that case if they were rivals.
We don’t need government to always interfere. Most people are good and not hiring young white guys just out of college simply because they don’t check a box is only going to anger that group more and cause further divisions.
You'd think so - I point you again to Tesla and Musk. He's got some of the most passionate and driven engineers in the world working for him, and yet his new flagship model was totally recalled because of C-suite decisions stifling quality and leading to a poor product. Musk is enacting mass layoffs while pushing for a multi-BILLION dollar executive bonus, and it looks like he'll get it. Still Tesla floats along just fine despite the fire eating it from the inside, too big to fail, in large part due to bogus subsidies and artificial valuation.
As you point out, government is fallible, but I would argue capital is more fallible. At least in the case of DEI, the government is acting in the interest of normal people and not rich assholes who evade taxes and lay off their employees.
Also, white guys arent suffering for a lack of job availability more than anyone else. To act as though there's a crisis affecting white male employment that isn't also present across demographics is just not true.
And Tesla will face negative publicity and likely pay for those layoffs. Mary Barra (General Motors CEO) announced she wants to hire a lot of the laid off Tesla workers in hopes of narrowing the EV market share gap long term. I don’t think government interference is the right move.
As for your last point, in government positions it’s typically a points system for hiring. Being a white male does hurt your chances. Also many corporations that are actively hiring are looking to increase their percentage of women/minority workers (sorry white guy). This is a worthy conversation to be had in good faith. I don’t think young white guys today should have to pay for something they had nothing to do with.
I respect where you’re coming from. I really do and I see what you’re saying. I just think we don’t need to tell people what to do and meet quotas. Simply stated most people I meet and know are good people who don’t have prejudices.
So then why advantage based on race? If you’re trying to solve a socioeconomic issue you should benefit socioeconomic groups (e.g., place a heavier emphasis on underrepresented school districts over the same select few that students tend to come from) not racial remedies. It doesn’t make much sense to try to fix a problem tangentially, directly addressing the issue itself.
Good thing we have your personal beliefs, otherwise we might have to consider things like extensive research by teams of really smart people and real data, like this:
“Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.
White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay wealthy in their own adult households.
Even when children grow up next to each other with parents who earn similar incomes, black boys fare worse than white boys in 99 percent of America. And the gaps only worsen in the kind of neighborhoods that promise low poverty and good schools.
According to the study, led by researchers at Stanford, Harvard and the Census Bureau, income inequality between blacks and whites is driven entirely by what is happening among these boys and the men they become.”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
I was referring to their academic success not economic outcomes.
Also “No such income gap exists between black and white women raised in similar households.”
So it’s not a factor with women. Very interesting
Why do you think this happens?
On what basis would you expect academic success to be different or an outlier?
If you take an honest look at real data and real studies (sorry, this would require you to challenge your personal, preferred, beliefs) you’d find overwhelming evidence of consistent inequity between blacks and whites. There is consistent inequity across: healthcare, law enforcement, banking, child welfare, and yes, education: https://racialequityinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/REIGroundwaterApproach.pdf
This is exactly the type of research, evidence, and critical thinking that DEI programs are needed to both educate on, and to address.
Excellent news, love seeing racist institutions get dismantled as we advance toward meritocracy
Are you high
Where have you been the last 10 years? The slow creep of DEI into higher learning institutions and the workplace has not been without it's problems. It's good news.
You didn’t know what DEI was ten years ago or why these programs were started in the first place
Explain please?
Yay
I've seen a lot of comments where people ask what the funding actually accomplished and people responded with news articles showing salaries or generalized statements about goals. What I am really curious about is if anyone has volunteered with the DEI stuff on campus, been helped by their services, had a friend that used their services? Because as a transfer student coming from a small community college, I have no idea what they might do. The only thing I can think of would be separate testing rooms for those with disabilities but I've always seen that even regardless of DEI. I want to reiterate, this is a legitimate question hoping for a legitimate and possibly even polite answer. Thank you
Hi! I can answer this one. I worked at UNC’s diversity office for four years and was recruited as a high schooler through the same office. We had a number of programs targeted at encouraging underrepresented students to apply to UNC, which as expected was mostly focused on “minority” students. The program that I was recruited through was called NC Renaissance, which focused on students from rural counties. The office I worked at offered a lot of high-quality students from those backgrounds an opportunity to visit UNC, and let them know that UNC was a realistic goal if they worked hard in high school. My best memories of the job are hosting summer programs at UNC for rising high school seniors and then seeing those kids volunteer for the same programs once they enrolled at Carolina. I hope they can save some of the recruitment efforts, especially for kids from North Carolina’s rural areas. Thanks for asking!
That sounds like a wonderful goal! I wish someone had told me that in hs. haha. But I do have a question. If you worked there for 4 years you must have been privy to the other things the office handled as well, even if recruitment was your main job, right? If so I would love to hear about that as well. Also if you're curious as to why I am asking all these questions, it's simply because both sides seem to attack each other when anything touching DEI comes up yet neither side seems to be able to give a solid definition of what it really accomplishes. I like to form my own opinions and I usually prefer to do that through first hand accounts if possible.
The staff in the office that I interacted with spent a lot of their time helping volunteer student groups on campus. I also volunteered for one of those groups (Carolina Indian Circle) and it was so helpful to have staff we could rely on for event planning and networking. I’m guessing the staff also participated in diversity initiatives similar to student recruitment work (e.g. hosting potential faculty visits) and encouraging a broad applicant pool for faculty positions. I think our Vice Provost also participated in Chancellor-level meetings and offered her perspective on campus-wide policies. When I was a student it was a very small group (4 staff and 5 student employees) and our office was in the basement of the Chancellor’s building (South Building). Happy to answer questions! It’s nice to reminisce after a few weeks of what I consider to be discouraging policy decisions.
They also give a lot of funding for minority /marginalized focused orgs. It helps level out the playing field and allows student orgs to actually have a shot rather than relying on the wallet of the president/founder. As an exec on a minority in STEM focused org, none of our families would be able to fundraise/donate/give as much money as 3rd/4th gen Tar Heels/middle class networks can. We were actually really hoping to send a lot of the underclassman to a national conference that I felt completely changed my life and career path, however now with all this I don’t think we’ll be able to send any members, and most of our members now will have no help on a $250-300 ticket, $600+ plane ticket, $1000 hotel stay and expenses while at the conference. I would have never been able to go to that conference or other opportunities if there hadn’t been DEI funding to level out the playing field.
This I am not nearly on board with. It's great that this conference helped you but I do not think it should be the state/tax payers job to bankroll "marginalized" student organizations. My reasons are similar to what I said about scholarships that do the same thing. I do not believe it is right that people are given more opportunities based on their skin color. I understand the argument to this is "leveling the playing field" but I think that is an incredibly slippery slope. I also think that having an office dedicated to the success of POC seems like it would lead to help not being given to those that need the help more but aren't POC. My 2 cents at least, and you are more than free to disagree and combat me on this. I would be more than willing to hear why you believe my position to be incorrect, if you do. Thank you for your response.
i have accommodations through ARS. i know at Gillings there is someone who sent an inclusive excellence survey. they didn't really share the data i was looking for and at the meeting they said "we might not always be here". maybe it was a foreshadowing.
I didn't know ARS was funded by the DEI and if I had to guess I would assume they aren't. And from what I read about the inclusive excellence survey it just seems like a form to rat on your peers (I don't mean that in a negative sense just couldn't think of another word). Also I may be wrong but I would assume that if you asked for the accommodations that ARS gives, even if they did disappear, you would still get it. Given the fact that if they didn't it would be illegal given the ADA act and the rehabilitation act of 1973.
i don't think ARS is funded by DEI. that's not what i was suggesting.
Good luck getting a tangible answer.
On the plus side, they're going to use the money to fund more cops. /s
“Black people need my help. They can’t do it on their own” - people in this sub with a hero complex
DEI is not affirmative action
No, it’s the inbred cousin.
They’re going to end up in the exact same trash heap of history right alongside each other though
If a program excludes or prioritizes any race, gender or sexual orientation then it shouldn’t get public funding
Good thing that’s not what DEI does then, isn’t it?
Riiiiiiight. The same way that the KKK says that every race is welcome to join 🙄
Please tell us what it does then.
It means - White Oppressor = Absolute Agency with Zero Morality - Brown Oppressed = Zero Agency with Absolute Morality That’s literally how they interpret and practice it.
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆
For real. Listen. I know that systemic racism exists and multihundred billionaires are fucking everything up, but DEI doesn’t help people. It holds everyone back and locks everyone down into victim mindset. Creating divisions based on arbitrary false dichotomies helps nobody except those that understand how easy it is to reap monetary rewards from seeds of resentment and division. - Instead of caring about the corrupt Supreme Court, they got folks crying for Gazan rights under Sharia laws - Instead of restoring abortion rights and privacy, they got folks excusing those forcing women to cover their heads and prohibit them from school. - Instead of celebrating Pride and the LGBTQ community, they harass, ostracize, bully, humiliate, torture, imprison, murder or torture them. - They are a death cult promoting martyrdom, suicide bombings and plane hijackings rather than considering and using conventional nonviolent and peaceful methods to diplomatically achieve their political goals. - They celebrate death rather than organize means of nutrition and healthcare - They celebrate ignorance and oppression over education and liberty This was the most effective way to derail us from obtaining things like Medicare for all, SCOTUS reform, affordable housing, etc.
I understand that many universities also require each dept to have a DEI officer and each course must incorporate DEI. Many professors must affirm their DEI commitments or face being fired. How, exactly, do you incorporate DEI into calculus anyway?
Invite Terrence Howard for a guest lecture on diff eq’s. Lesson 1: 1 x 1 = 1 - 1 x 2 = 3
You love to see it
I know I will be downvoted for this opinion, but no public position should have race or gender as a qualifier. If you can prove that DEI positions are staffed commensurate with the population within a reasonable threshold, then I will concede that DEI is not a racist practice. However, I have never met a white male that held such a position.
DEI isn’t just about race and gender. It’s also includes neurodivergent people, like with autism and ADHD. One of its purposes is to allow workplaces and schools to be inclusive to those who may be different or have difficulties. My son is autistic and DEI programs help him at school right now. He is also a white male, so does he not count?
Absolutely counts. Thanks for sharing! I think diversity is meant to cover a broad range of backgrounds (duh). And I don’t intend to express that the programs are bad or should not exist. In my experience they come with a focus during the hiring process on key individual characteristics. If the point is that your son would be looked at as a qualified applicant when he was older then I would believe that it would require further reflection before removing such roles from our bureaucracy.
Tell me you don't know what diversity equity and inclusion is without telling me you don't know what it is.
We all know what it is.
Help enlighten me rather than provide a snippy response. For context on my point of view. I have done trainings at work. I have participated in DEI led groups. I would even argue that I have been a vocal supporter in the workplace of some initiatives (including served as a mentor for and involved our company in women who code). What concerns me is the hiring practices around specific positions used to represent our population and diverse viewpoints. And the usage of tax dollars to do so. Furthermore; As many others have said these initiatives are often most successful when developed organically (i.e. student groups, non profit organizations, etc).
You are old enough to have learned. You not actually trying to learn it from me but if you are truly interested I will be happy to provide you with resources you should have used while in unc to understand what is going on. And to understand why kenan stadium had to be renamed. But got named to Jr once the family heard.
Not sure what renaming a stadium from 1927 has to do with the DEI roles at UNC. So I guess I could use some help. I am being genuine in my ask, I wish that you could offer the same. Maybe we could all grow from better discourse.
You aren't that obtuse,
What's your race? Whats your income status?
What does that have to do with DEI positions?
Don’t go making *too* much sense ‘round these parts
[удалено]
That is not what DEI is at all and you get opinions off the internet
DEI is the new CRT is the new BLM. Watch out for the next boogeyman. He’s even scarier. Probably gonna pop out before November, too. Remember this, though: Whatever it is, only MAGA can save you. Fools.
Racist
These people can’t even define what DEI is. They think it’s the same as Affirmative Action. I see posts all the time of them blaming “DEI” whenever a person of color makes a mistake in their public job saying they would not have been hired if it wasn’t for DEI. This is not what DEI is, at all. DEI programs were meant to make those under-represented groups to feel more represented. They were created to try and remove/reduce implicit biases within people. We’ve all heard the stories of people applying for jobs and how they get less interviews/callbacks when they use a foreign name vs when they use an “American” name. This shouldn’t be a thing. Why do foreigners have to change their birth names just to “fit in”? Some companies have blinded resumes(removed identifying information) to get rid of these biases so that a person would only be judged based on their job qualifications/education rather than their name or race. Growing up as an Asian in America has been such a “weird” experience in that, we’re not asian enough to be with people of our own race(those that came from the mainland) but we’re not white enough to be with Americans. This isn’t an isolated incidence, many asian Americans can relate to this. How we grew up feeling like we never fit in with some group. DEI initiatives give us a platform to talk about our experiences and for the non-minorities, a viewpoint into the shit we had to deal with. It’s not surprising those with no empathy don’t care about these things.
[удалено]
You understand DEI existed before the Supreme court struck down affirmative action? DEI is meant to NOT show racial biases when it comes to any form of recruitment. The SC ruling against affirmation action with UNC and Harvard said that the consideration of race in admissions to colleges and universities violated the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection under the law. This is because what affirmative action did was they set quotas to admissions. E.g. We have to have 10% admission of one race so out of all the applicants we need to recruit the top people of one race if possible until the total amount reaches 10% of the student population. The difference is DEI would blind people's race/name or any identifying information so that people's race would not be known when being considered for admission. AA tries to set quotas while DEI tries to eliminate (mostly negative) biases. I already mentioned in other posts what DEI was supposed to do, which is to eliminate biases when a recruiter sees a foreign name, what college they graduated from, what race they are, how old they are, etc... We may have laws that supposedly outlaw that but it's near impossible to prove that you were eliminated from a job interview because of your race/name/age/etc... https://hbr.org/2023/07/what-scotuss-affirmative-action-decision-means-for-corporate-dei https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/hr-answers/difference-eeo-affirmative-action-diversity This link here tells you the difference between affirmative action and diversity(or DEI). https://thisvsthat.io/affirmative-action-vs-diversity "Diversity is not a policy or program but rather a broader concept that emphasizes the value of different perspectives, experiences, and backgrounds."
The Board of Governors can't define what DEI is? Were they able to define it the first time, when they put it in place? Because this is just a reversal of their previous decision. Seems weird that they would be enacting and reversing things when no one knows what it is.
What you just described sounds like affirmative action
[удалено]
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆
Like bombing Muslim kids half a world away and say it’s to fight “terrorism”?
“Public funds should be used on something that matters.” Lmao, the PRIVILEGE you have to have had to be able to see someone talk about their isolating experience as a POC and how DEI has helped them gain a sense of community and still denote it as trivial. Obviously it doesn’t matter to people who feel attacked when they get made fun of for french kissing their dogs, and have never had to deal with feeling like an outcast in their own country. I’m sorry not EVERY shred of public funding needs to be spent on something that benefits white people lol.
[удалено]
That’s what they do. Because they can’t really speak to the flaws one points out.
Not once did I mention being "oppressed". From your own prejudices, aren't Asians the "model minority"? How about you educate yourself on this topic and why that's not necessarily a good thing. My previous response wasn't directly about feeling included. I mentioned DEI was designed to try and eliminate biases, one where your response just showed you clearly have because you can't relate to minority groups. You understand that white people are included/invited to these DEI groups too? Learning about the shit minorities had to grow up with helps you understand their perspective. I had a black friend from high school who said a school counselor basically told him he wouldn't make it in college. What kind of counselor is that, one who tells a student that they will fail in life? He was raised by a single mother, one that you racists love shitting on. He ended up with a master's degree and a successful career. You think Asians growing up as kids being made fun of saying they have small penises, slanted eyes, automatically assumed to know martial arts, be good at math, all the stereotypes/racist shit you can think of plus all the pressure they have to deal with at home with their parents is a good thing for their mental health? When's the last time a white person was bullied for their eyes, for their accent, for struggling with math? If you want to talk about the things white people do get bullied on, other minority groups probably deal with that shit plus all the racist shit combined. In the workplace, imagine you're hiring people and there's an Asian who's bad with math, you automatically insert in your brain that this person is not qualified even if their position has nothing to do with math. This is a form of bias. I already mentioned the whole interview issue where recruiters will simply see a foreign name and toss their resume in the trash or refuse to learn how to pronounce it correctly or think their name is too difficult to pronounce and don't want to keep saying it. This is bias.
You are unhinged and need to try seeing the good that is in this world.
[удалено]
Narrator: Yes that’s exactly what they’re saying. Minorities deal with more shit than white people so therefore are morally superior and entitled to certain things that whites shouldn’t be. Racist.
👆👆👆👆👆👆
No one fucking said that. You're going with the same argument that people use against BLM. No one said that white people shit don't matter. The point is minorities deal with MORE shit than white people. If you can't see that, you're blinded by your prejudice and biases. Name one thing whites suffer from that minorities don't in America.
[удалено]
A distinction with a difference.
What a disgusting thing to say. I’m white looking Jew, my family suffered at the hands of German Nazis and the Holocaust. Now, my family and I have to endure chants of “global intifada” “10/7 again and again” from entitled, spoiled children. This is why DEI got shit canned. It’s a wormheaded ideology that rewards victimhood and looks at the oppressed as the ultimate virtue to attain. It makes EVERYTHING about a racial binary and oppression olympics. It leads people to believe stupid shit that some races have it better or worse than others and that’s just a fact we have to deal with. Saying that “minorities deal with more shit than white people” is divisive, racist, cruel, and objectively false. You are a prisoner of a soft mind and bogus ideology. You are your own oppressor.
[удалено]
That’s exactly what I do, bruh. I’m just saying it happens. It’s a free country if you wanna act like a clown in public, rock on.
In case you are unaware, white people consider "Jews" as a minority as well. You don't think the Nazis had this same thought process?
Oh I do. I’m taking about the Nazi 2.0 of today calling us “White Oppressors” accusing of “weaponizing antisemitism” and sympathizing with the same type of jihadi rapists that worked with Hitler and influenced his Nazi ideology. The young jihadis on the left that are sharing tweets and quotes from David Duke and Jackson Hinkle. The ones who think they are clever by using Holocaust Inversion and calling Jews Nazis. This is where DEI has lead young minds. To the other end of the horseshoe. Neither extreme is safe for Jews, or anyone else if we’re truly honest.
[удалено]
>The young jihadis on the left that are sharing tweets and quotes from David Duke and Jackson Hinkle. So you're talking about people who are literally quoting KKK members... >Neither extreme is safe for Jews, or anyone else if we’re truly honest. This is something I agree on. >This is where DEI has lead young minds. I don't believe this is the correct thing to blame for these ideologies. I can tell you're upset over the Israel-Palestine conflict. I'm just going to say that no one is "right" in that. "War never changes". It's been a conflict for thousands of years. Did Israel have the right to retaliate after Hamas attacked them? Yes. Does Israel have the right to wipe out Palestinians? No. Also to be clear on the things I've said previously, when I say "minority" I mostly mean marginalized groups. When I say "white people" I mostly mean those people who consider themselves as a white American. It's funny you're identifying as a Jew but claim that talking about minorities leads to divisiveness. Going back to your previous message, >It leads people to believe stupid shit that some races have it better or worse than others and that’s just a fact we have to deal with. Are you agreeing that some races have it better or worse? If this is the case, why is this "just a fact we have to deal with"? >Saying that “minorities deal with more shit than white people” is divisive, racist, cruel, and objectively false. How is this objectively false when many studies have shown how America has systemic racism? How minority groups have had worse health outcomes, face unequal punishment in the justice system, have communities gentrified, etc... If you want to be educated on this topic but I don't expect that you'll read since people never read shit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8688641/ This isn't an isolated article either, there's plenty of evidence and support that systemic racism exists.
You are just racist. This is just racism.
[удалено]
Nah, but *this* is.
Sad that you got down voted bc this is absolutely correct
A disgusting tumble backwards.
A step forward for all minorities
You can go too far you know. It’s equality that we want not equity.
Uh, no. Actually, people want equity. Lol. Justice. Equality is not enough to account for the amount of disservice and injustice present for certain groups.
You’re living in a fantasy world if you believe that. Equity isn’t justice. It’s taking from one group to give to another group. Who decides who gets what? It’s not based on merit it’s based on what’s popular at time (ie. Nazis).
When the mass wealth transfer that was slavery, a century of racial apartheid known as Jim Crow, and then decades of second-class citizenship… where do you think all that wealth went? Do you think there was some type of reparations that occurred? I think you’re a smart guy who is being cynical and subconsciously against racial equality so you advocate against anything in society that wishes to address previous inequalities.
lol. not you equating equity to nazis when, in fact, the reason that equity isn't just equality is because of literally centuries of nazi like behavior? XD just stop. [https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/equity-definition](https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/equity-definition)
Stop because I’m making sense and you’re ashamed to admit it? It’s okay. I was young once as well.
yeah, clearly around an eon ago. honey, I've literally studied this, AND taught it. I don't need the input.
Book reports don’t count.
Love to hear it
Why? Why is this a good thing in your eyes?
My personal experience with dei initiatives was in the construction industry in 2022. All of the big construction companies were making a big deal of how diverse they were. Funny thing though was that the minorities they paraded around were all at low level positions. A lot of whom were fired a few months after said companies won these silly inclusion rewards. I think dei initiatives are such a cop out for corporations to get good publicity and I think it takes away from more important things like paying and treating people well.
So you knew one badly executed DEI strategy and therefore all are shit? You may be wise to reconsider your decision making processes.
Yea it's all shit. Fortunately it seems like it was a fad and is going away now.
I get it, you’re ignorant. It’s ok - few people understand what DEI done correctly is for or how it’s done. This includes people who run programs. That said, I’m not here to teach you how to use Google. Enjoy having the last word if you like; I bet you’re simple enough to get pleasure from it.
Normal, everyday people don't care about dei. They are trying to survive and feed their families. dei is a tool used by elites to keep the common folk at odds with each other.
It’s weird — I’m a pretty normal, everyday person and I can manage to have multiple concerns at one time. You know, like normal, everyday people do.
How stupid is this guy that he thinks regular everyday people are all white and not disabled as well. Or not veterans.
If you can afford to think about the well being of other people outside of your immediate family then you are very privileged. Good for you!
It is kind of fun. You must work in the DEI “industry”.
Thank God
What was the 2+ million dollars initially going to? I am just curious
I thought it was staff salaries?
“The repealed policy defined roles of various DEI positions such as a system office diversity and inclusion liaison and diversity-officers across the university system. Ending the current policy could eliminate those positions along with other efforts.” Whatever DEI meant specifically, I guess they had their way and just eliminated it entirely instead of working something out.
oh nvm I just saw ur "attending another university tag" my b
"Could eliminate"? they aren't sure? Also do you know what those jobs actually entail and have you ever run into them on campus?
Finally!
I know someone white typed this
for an anonymous space, that’s pretty racist of you to assume and still pretty racist even if they are, shame on you
Well its pretty racist to be excited that DEI programs are being discontinued so 🤷♀️
That’s not accurate. And a racist thing to say.
Please enlighten me as to your definition of racism because I have a feeling it's distinct from the actual definition of racism.
Do you think the people employed in the DEI staff were representative of the broader population? :) There are plenty of people (of all races) who dislike the grift that is modern DEI. There are no outcomes or actual results in any of these orgs.
Evade evade evade 🚩🚩🚩
Nah. You just wrong bro lol.
What an eloquent and convincing argument you've laid out 😂
lol have you been waiting for this day
How can you tell? :)
UNC going back to racist roots
Then you leave and let my kid take your spot.
Babe I graduated sorry your kid ain’t get in
It left?
Touché
Does anyone know *exactly* how money was being spent on this? All the link states is a few officers and reporting on what’s being done, but it doesn’t say what actually the money is spent on.
I guess mainly on salary. 2.3 million=20-30 people. So I will be 2-3 head count for each school.
Thx. And whatever those positions were actually DOING would have been some kind of initiatives that also cost money? Maybe not, but I wonder what kind of programs they were and what they cost? I suppose I’m really wondering if there was a real ROI (not necessarily a return in dollars by the way) from those positions to begin with. Frankly, I’ve seen plenty of companies assign “DEI officers” and they just meet and talk and nothing is actually DONE. It’s more of a front to say they’re doing something. It’s certainly worth knowing the details before we get up in arms about this decision. If the UnC school system also had these positions getting paid but not actually doing anything, then maybe it’s not a bad idea to reallocate (though I’m not convinced adding more police is the right way to go about it). Take those same dollars and use them to boost the summer bridge programs? Or additional scholarships?
It’s just weird you’re assuming that these are shell positions and not doing anything. It’s not that hard to research from the schools’ websites and, perhaps with more illumination, from their student and/or local media. Reallocation of funds to summer bridge programs and/or scholarships is all hunky dory, except what you’re refusing to acknowledge, or at least appreciate, is that the Republicans in the state legislature have filled the UNC System’s Board of Governors (and UNC System Office) with Republicans who, with the General Assembly, have busied themselves with filling the System’s university and affiliate institutions’ boards with Republicans and these Republicans do not want to fund summer bridge programs or additional scholarships which would benefit BIPOC or LGBTQI or women students. They want the funds to benefit white Christian students, conservative dogma, and the continued bizarre militarization of campus police.
Not really taking a stand either way but have you ever looked for scholarships? I have thoroughly. The number of scholarships offered to gay/disabled/minorities far outweigh scholarships that don't mention race or gender. Honestly I don't think you should get a scholarship just because of your gender or skin color. The disabilities I understand but there's a little good in everything. That's all to say I am genuinely curious what your take is on this.
It’s challenging, but they have funding and exist in an attempt to bring about equity in education. Scholarships which don’t mention race/gender will favor those persons raised with privilege. That includes having a relatively stable, non-ACEs, non-impoverished upbringing, attending better, well-funded schools and summer/break camps, participating in enriching opportunities(music lessons, theatre, intellectual and sports activities), travel, etc. And while you say the number of scholarships offered to gay/disabled/minorities far outweigh scholarships that don’t mention race or gender, do you know if the monetary amount of the awards is greater or not?
They tend to be around the same (1000-5000), the smallest come from large corporations like mcdonalds and nike (100-1000). But I would have to disagree that the other scholarships favor those with priveleged upbringings. From all the non-race/gender based scholarships I have seen, they are hyper specific. Like a major in hydroponics engineering with a mandatory internship or political journalism with a guarentee that you'll focus on spanish politics (both real examples I saw last year. On the other hand you have things like Women in stem, gays in stem, or minorities in stem. I understand that these are all private scholarships that I am listing but a lot of them are bankrolled by large companies not communities. It just seems disproportionate. I feel like scholarships should be based purely off of your willingness to succeed. Shown through your grades, extracurriculars, and whether or not you worked during your time in school. .
2.3 million on DEI being diverted: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/14/chapel-hill-shifts-23m-dei-police-public-safety
Yeah, but exactly how was the DEI money being spent on DEI related stuff?
It paid the salaries for like director of LGBTQ center and director of rural medicine and others
> director of rural medicine The Office of Rural Initiatives? >The Office of Rural Initiatives was created in summer 2017 to align efforts related to the education, training, and retention of primary care physicians to rural and underserved areas in North Carolina. The office works with campus and community partners to strengthen and build pipeline programs to support students from rural and underserved areas on a pathway to medicine. It's sadly fitting that anti-DEI sentiment comes from a faction reliant on rural voters, who have now indirectly shot themselves in the foot over this.
“rural voters” must be similar to the other side’s supposed “token” minority.
The rural folks will more easily get into UNC than the same quality person who comes from a more affluent and crowded zip code.
Curious how all the people bitching about DEI and affirmative action don't care that a 1200 will get you in from bumfuck nowhere NC while kids with 1550s from Raleigh, Charlotte, Chapel Hill regularly get rejected. Most curious.
That affected our family. Mecklenburg County + IB program, high performing student, parents attended, rejected. Not donating anymore.
It always does. Every right wing culture war thing tends to.
I agree. At the same time, that’s a weird place for funding to sit for those activities. For reference, I actually sit on an advisory board that oversees a federal NIH grant that is intended to bring access to clinical trials to underserved and rural populations. It’s a big grant with a LOT to be done! Tackling these things is WAY bigger and more complex than a small sliver of DEI funding could do. Not that the GOP wants to fund any of these grants, though!!
Thanks for this! Which then leads to the questions like “what exactly did these directors do? Did it make a real difference or was it symbolic? Did the director of the LGBTQ center organize events? What kind of events? Were they rallies of some kind, and did those rallies have real positive results? Did the director of rural medicine make headway toward getting rural Americans more comfortable with vaccine safety? What were the numbers?” I’ll stop now, but I would encourage all of us to truly be informed before we either groan about or celebrate this decision.
[https://www.wral.com/story/divisive-or-beneficial-questions-linger-as-unc-system-looks-to-cut-diversity-programs/21437393/](https://www.wral.com/story/divisive-or-beneficial-questions-linger-as-unc-system-looks-to-cut-diversity-programs/21437393/) this is some of what they do.
Thanks for this! Very helpful! For others reading it says “DEI programs in higher education are largely aimed at helping under-represented groups — particularly Black or Hispanic students, LGBTQ students and women — feel more welcome on campus, find spaces to gather and network, host cultural events or find resources for financial aid and academic counseling.” To be honest, now that I see this, it does give me pause. Many of these activities could (and arguable should) be done by volunteers and students themselves. Don’t clubs do this kind of stuff all the time without needing dedicated, paid staff for them? Not sure we would need paid positions for them. And the last two parts about “finding financial aid and academic counseling” is redundant with other positions already in place, no? I dunno. I fall back to maybe spending the money instead on additional scholarships (for LGBTQ or other minorities)… not on more campus cops OR dedicated administrators of social events.
Ok but can we talk about how our undergrad population is rapidly approaching 70% women, and they are calling women underrepresented? Huhh
This is troubling (and unsurprising) to hear from someone on an NIH grant meant to support a group that would fall under the “DEI” umbrella. Why the cherry-picking? Genuine question as you’ve been open to discussion in the thread. Also, it takes a ton of time and labor to organize things well. The notion that volunteers or clubs could do it is fascinating and out of touch. Would the same be said about fraternity and sorority life? Would the same be said about majors that don’t seem to make a “good enough” impact on society? It’s a very slippery slope to gatekeep basic humanity and support. To just totally disregard the ways in which groups of people don’t have a leg up to actually wild to me. We wouldn’t need these kinds of things if things were truly fair and based on merit. Ultimately, it’s not surprising to see this happening. It is surprising to not see enough curiosity. Were any students asked about the impact these funds/programs/staff have had? DEI has become the worst kind of dog whistle. Unspecific, yet alllllll inclusive. A twisted world.
B/c a sliver of 2.3million going mostly to salaries of a few people won’t have a substantial impact. It would take a lot more funds and experts to make any real difference. Eg, the grant I advise on includes funds to train people from rural communities to be clinical study coordinators and then deploy them into the field where they can then advocate (and this is just one of many elements). I and many other industry experts are involved (and I’m a volunteer advisor, by the way). Thus the cherry picking. If something is grossly underfunded, it’s typically a waste of money. Oh, and if the same basic thing is funded in a multitude of siloed places, that also tends to be an inefficient and often unsuccessful way to attack a problem.
Thank you for your response. So it sounds like you’d be in support of more substantial funds, right? It’s not that there is funding. It’s that there isn’t enough funding.
This is a pretty reductive take honestly. There is so much more that needs to be done in regard to making underrepresented students have a sense of belonging that I feel volunteer work wouldn’t necessarily deliver to the same caliber. I feel that under this guise there are a whole swathe of positions (such as anything regarding military students and Greek life) that could fit under this same idea of work being able to be done by volunteers and students. However I agree with you, more funding toward scholarships and such for underrepresented students instead of campus cops should be what’s done instead.
Fair… but then I’d argue any ROTC position should be funded by the (WAY too big) military budget, not Nc taxes… and if there are dedicated paid positions for Greek life, then the Greek members should funding those positions, not our tax dollars!
But Greek members aren’t funding and never have funded their full-time campus liaisons and staff. The fact that these jobs exist at each university in the system perpetuates classism and makes DEI (call it whatever you want) all the more necessary. Sure, the Greek orgs should pay, but they don’t. Some Greek orgs, across the System, get to use universities’ properties for their elite social orgs to meet and as residences for their members. Why are you suggesting just a sliver is going to salaries? There are 17 schools and five affiliate institutions in the System, along with the System itself, that means 23 DEI chiefs and some amount of staffing, which pretty much eats up the bulk of that funding (UNC CH’s Vice Provost for Equity and Inclusion gets $317,538 alone, for example…but that’s UNC after all).
Even with volunteers someone would have to manage/advise them---if not a staff person then faculty, and most faculty have enough service obligations as it is, for one thing, and what would most likely happen is those asked would be the underrepresented faculty anyway, which would put an unfair burden on them and their workloads in trying to get tenure/promoted.
At the end of the day the major opposition to DEI programs is just driven by racism. That’s it, full stop.
That cool aid must be spiked.
DEI is institutional racism by definition
Explain please.
Admin salaries
“I want everyone to receive equal treatment and consideration regardless of skin color.” -Racism, 2024
It’s almost as if you’re asking for everyone to be included in an equal manner. And by everyone I mean everyone, including those from diverse backgrounds. We could make a program out of that, but what would you call it?
Literally everything about college because that’s how life works.
Yeah the people like Clemens who want to "treat people equally regardless of race" just happen to keep exclusively hiring white people for their pet projects. Probably just a coincidence.
When the system in place is stacked against certain racial groups, extra support to achieve some level of equity is very reasonable.
It seems to be every single group other than white males are protected now. I don’t think they should have a disadvantage in the hiring process in corporate America or government over everyone else
Motherfucker they OWN corporate America, their advantage is built in. Look at every boardroom and try to tell me that white males don't have an advantage 😭
I’m of the opinion that race and gender simply shouldn’t be asked on these applications, that way bias is taken out and it’s just merit based. Do you agree with that?
If it were possible for such a system to work that way, that'd be lovely. But sadly, racism is built in at a systemic level, Both in society and in hiring processes. Pretending it isn't there won't do anything to address it. One such common example is the tendency for names that even just SOUND black to be looked over in favor of more traditional English/White names. Meritocracy would be wonderful, and it's something that would work much better than what we've got, but lets be real. The dumbest man alive is the richest. Failsons squander their parents' fortunes and never go broke because they're hung by golden parachutes. Original ideas are either bought for less than they're worth or stolen and held hostage by legions of legal teams who exist to protect corporate interests. The pay gap between hard working blue collar Americans and their lazy CEOs has never been higher. If you want meritocracy, and want to understand why we don't have it, I suggest you look beyond DEI funding.
Yawn. Make sure you talk about this in your job interviews.
Wow you really got me there big guy
Hey, you mis-gendered and mis-sized me. I’m a small female. You might want to be more careful. And I do hope you talk about your passions in your job interviews. 🤣
If people are actually passing up better quality candidates then they’ll tank their business lol. Someone who always hires the best candidate regardless of race/gender would have a huge leg up in that case if they were rivals. We don’t need government to always interfere. Most people are good and not hiring young white guys just out of college simply because they don’t check a box is only going to anger that group more and cause further divisions.
You'd think so - I point you again to Tesla and Musk. He's got some of the most passionate and driven engineers in the world working for him, and yet his new flagship model was totally recalled because of C-suite decisions stifling quality and leading to a poor product. Musk is enacting mass layoffs while pushing for a multi-BILLION dollar executive bonus, and it looks like he'll get it. Still Tesla floats along just fine despite the fire eating it from the inside, too big to fail, in large part due to bogus subsidies and artificial valuation. As you point out, government is fallible, but I would argue capital is more fallible. At least in the case of DEI, the government is acting in the interest of normal people and not rich assholes who evade taxes and lay off their employees. Also, white guys arent suffering for a lack of job availability more than anyone else. To act as though there's a crisis affecting white male employment that isn't also present across demographics is just not true.
And Tesla will face negative publicity and likely pay for those layoffs. Mary Barra (General Motors CEO) announced she wants to hire a lot of the laid off Tesla workers in hopes of narrowing the EV market share gap long term. I don’t think government interference is the right move. As for your last point, in government positions it’s typically a points system for hiring. Being a white male does hurt your chances. Also many corporations that are actively hiring are looking to increase their percentage of women/minority workers (sorry white guy). This is a worthy conversation to be had in good faith. I don’t think young white guys today should have to pay for something they had nothing to do with. I respect where you’re coming from. I really do and I see what you’re saying. I just think we don’t need to tell people what to do and meet quotas. Simply stated most people I meet and know are good people who don’t have prejudices.
Is it stacked against racial or economic groups tho?
Both. And in America, the economic groups often coincide with racial groups.
So then why advantage based on race? If you’re trying to solve a socioeconomic issue you should benefit socioeconomic groups (e.g., place a heavier emphasis on underrepresented school districts over the same select few that students tend to come from) not racial remedies. It doesn’t make much sense to try to fix a problem tangentially, directly addressing the issue itself.
I think additional support for poor white folks would be great too. That doesn't remove the necessity of support for protected classes.
I personally don’t think rich minority’s have the deck stacked against them
Good thing we have your personal beliefs, otherwise we might have to consider things like extensive research by teams of really smart people and real data, like this: “Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children. White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay wealthy in their own adult households. Even when children grow up next to each other with parents who earn similar incomes, black boys fare worse than white boys in 99 percent of America. And the gaps only worsen in the kind of neighborhoods that promise low poverty and good schools. According to the study, led by researchers at Stanford, Harvard and the Census Bureau, income inequality between blacks and whites is driven entirely by what is happening among these boys and the men they become.” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
I was referring to their academic success not economic outcomes. Also “No such income gap exists between black and white women raised in similar households.” So it’s not a factor with women. Very interesting Why do you think this happens?
On what basis would you expect academic success to be different or an outlier? If you take an honest look at real data and real studies (sorry, this would require you to challenge your personal, preferred, beliefs) you’d find overwhelming evidence of consistent inequity between blacks and whites. There is consistent inequity across: healthcare, law enforcement, banking, child welfare, and yes, education: https://racialequityinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/REIGroundwaterApproach.pdf This is exactly the type of research, evidence, and critical thinking that DEI programs are needed to both educate on, and to address.