Is transgender why trump is doing this or is it the excuse?

fooferdoggie

Site Master
Site Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Posts
5,507
all the crap Trump is doing all the anti DEI and attacks on people all because of transgender people? or are they going to use them as the scapegoat so they can get away with this and have someone to blame? it sure seems trans are what Trump is totally obsessed with them.
 
all the crap Trump is doing all the anti DEI and attacks on people all because of transgender people? or are they going to use them as the scapegoat so they can get away with this and have someone to blame? it sure seems trans are what Trump is totally obsessed with them.
I think agenda is not related specifically related to transgender/non-binary people, but hey why not make everyone mad at them while getting rid of all protections.
 
I think agenda is not related specifically related to transgender/non-binary people, but hey why not make everyone mad at them while getting rid of all protections.
thats what I am thinking. got to blame someone else. who cares if they die?
 
It's a distraction while he and his class raid the treasury department. They'll stop paying taxes while they take all ours and kill all services the wealthy don't need. When people run out of money to spend it's a largely untapped resource they can use to grow their wealth.
 
Theres a number of “debates” I got sucked into in the industry over this. DEI initiatives start from two particular principles. First, studies that show having more diverse voices “in the room” when working on a project improves the project and avoids some ugly blunders (see Google Photos labeling black people as gorillas). So there’s clear benefits to the business if you don’t just hire a bunch of white tech bros. The second principle is that biases (conscious or not) impact the whole pipeline. If you are a teacher who thinks “women don’t like STEM”, then your attitude will tend to cause women to leave/avoid your classes, making a it a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you are boss that “has a type” when hiring, your team will be almost entirely one type of person, and you’ll think that your “type” is the “right type”. It’s the impact of many seemingly small things that can cause us to lose out on talent.

The end result is that organizations taking on these initiatives do include some putting thumbs on the scale. Reaching out to offer internships to women and minorities, and yes, using “are they under-represented in our team” as tie breaks when you have multiple candidates you want to hire for a single position.

But everyone in tech that I’ve seen argue against it say that it’s undermining the “meritocracy”, because it elevates unqualified people to “meet quotas”. It’s an easy story to tell, but doesn’t really match reality, as if everyone was using quotas, nobody could reach them due to all the small issues in the education pipeline.

The mind numbing thing is that programming back in the day was considered women’s work. Secretarial work to be performed by data processors. So it should be no surprise that it was the people doing this work (such as Grace Hopper) that suggested some of the key developments that underpin the modern computer. Once it was figured out just how transformative computers would be, men rushed in and it stopped being “secretarial work”. So it went from “too unimportant for men” to “too important for women”. Video games were the same way. Early attempts were to go after men and women pretty evenly. The idea being that men and women could socialize over games and drinks (shocking). It wasn’t until Nintendo decided to sell the NES in toy aisles, and had to decide which aisle to put it in that these consoles became a “boy’s toy” in the US, which forms the current anti-woman stance in that industry.

——

On the political aspect, I don’t believe it’s a distraction any more than the rest of his jobs policies are. It’s all from the same vein of thought: protecting (white male) domestic jobs.
 
1738083161276.png
 
The end result is that organizations taking on these initiatives do include some putting thumbs on the scale. Reaching out to offer internships to women and minorities, and yes, using “are they under-represented in our team” as tie breaks when you have multiple candidates you want to hire for a single position.

We ran into this situation a couple years back where we had multiple candidates with one being a female. My input was we're a team of dudes and having a female perspective on the team could only help us. Thankfully I work at a place where that comment was taken seriously. The motivation wasn't "we need more females to balance the scales", it was "she might be able to bring something to the team that more dudes simply can't provide". For me ties always come down to what a person can bring to the team that we don't already have.

I believe we did end up hiring her, but due to some other mixups things ended up not working out.

I've been in this business long enough to recognize that only a fool fills their toolbox with hammers. If you add a little diversity to your toolbox, you'll start completing tasks quicker and easier. Call it DEI if you like. I call it common sense.
 
I agree with the assessment that these business leaders are going to miss the halcyon days of dealing with the annoyances of DEI as public sentiment moves to eat the rich. Enjoy when 90% of the global landmass becomes an unsafe neighborhood for you.
 
I really think Trump wants to roll back the US to the 30's or even earlier. Back to a time that women still had obey in their marriage vows and white guys could use any racial slurs they wanted, as everyone that wasn't "blessed" with their skin colour was a second class citizen.

Honestly, I think the rest of the world is just as horrified as we are on this side of the border. Terrified of what atrocities this monster is capable of inflicting on Americans and the rest of the world.

And all those deportations? He's sending some of them back to their death....political refugees that have a price on their head "back home" :(
 
Last edited:
I really think Trump wants to roll back the US to the 30's or even earlier.

I might be wrong about the years, but he said that the most prosperous time of the US was between 1870 and 1913. And it seems he wants to get back to those times, and I bet a lot of hyper-conservative Republicans want that too.
I didn‘t check, but my first thought was: Most likely women didn‘t have voting rights back then either, and they (EDIT: i.e. Republicans) want that too.

What I don‘t understand are women like MTG and Boebert, who also seem to want the good-old-times, but they seem to be forgetting that they wouldn‘t be in Congress then. But these two are stupid anyway…
 
Last edited:
I don't usually comment on US politics, but the renaming of LGBTQIA+ to just "LGB" on US federal websites [source] struck me as one of the darkest signs for the future in recent memory. I obviously didn't expect Trump to be a supporter of transgender rights, but seeing the "T" taken out of LGBT —an acronym that has been around since before I was born— draws some horrifying parallels with early-30s Nazi Germany tactics.
 
Back
Top