But why should we have to do it?Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
Are you Harvey Weinstein?
Prof fired for refusing to complete two diversity and antibias training modules
-
Not sure Harvey Weinsteind is the reason universities give training on "white fragility."
But why should we have to do it?
Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
Are you Harvey Weinstein?
You see, Harvey is exactly why businesses give this training. Did you even think about that for two seconds?
-
But why should we have to do it?
Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
Are you Harvey Weinstein?
You see, Harvey is exactly why businesses give this training. Did you even think about that for two seconds?
People don't need a 2-day seminar to learn that they shouldn't r@pe their employees.
They need a 2-day seminar to politically indoctrinate people.
-
But why should we have to do it?
Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
^Faux libertarian.
And if your boss tells you for whom to vote or what house of worship to attend, then you're fine with that?I'm not even fine with the harassment training. There are many things I have to do at work that I'm not fine with. I do it because I want the paycheck.
You have three options:
1) comply
2) sue
3) exitThis is basic stuff. You kids that have never had a real job will have to learn it the hard way.
-
People characterizing this as "indoctrination" have probably never been through it. It doesn't indoctrinate anyone at all. It merely mitigates liability for the institution should you discriminate against someone and they sue.
My parents grew up in the Soviet Union. They told me how it worked there. It's similar here. The point is not to "indoctrinate" the point is to "intimidate" and "humiliate" by making you repeat complete non-sense (e.g "unconscious bias") and by making you doubt you understand the meaning of normal words (e.g "equity", "racism", etc.).
By the way, no this doesn't mitigate against anything. I think you are not aware of the law.So you don't believe in bias?
Nice strawman.
-
But why should we have to do it?
Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
Are you Harvey Weinstein?
You see, Harvey is exactly why businesses give this training. Did you even think about that for two seconds?
Harvey Weinstein aced the training.
Joining Winfrey onstage to accept their own medals were architect David Adjaye, artist and activist Harry Belafonte, Congressman John L. Lewis, LL.D. '12, of Georgia, Oscar-winning filmmaker Steve McQueen, television producer Shonda Rhimes, and Miramax founder Harvey Weinstein
https://harvardmagazine.com/2014/10/harvard-honors-eight-with-du-bois-medal
-
But why should we have to do it?
Because your boss told you to. Don't like it? Get another job. Are you even an economist?
^Faux libertarian.
And if your boss tells you for whom to vote or what house of worship to attend, then you're fine with that?I'm not even fine with the harassment training. There are many things I have to do at work that I'm not fine with. I do it because I want the paycheck.
You have three options:
1) comply
2) sue
3) exit
This is basic stuff. You kids that have never had a real job will have to learn it the hard way.You are a "real-world" troll, trying to switch the topic from normative to positive. Nice try, boomer.
You tell people they have no options bc you support the indoctrination.
We must first figure out what is right, then we decide what to do.
-
People characterizing this as "indoctrination" have probably never been through it. It doesn't indoctrinate anyone at all. It merely mitigates liability for the institution should you discriminate against someone and they sue.
My parents grew up in the Soviet Union. They told me how it worked there. It's similar here. The point is not to "indoctrinate" the point is to "intimidate" and "humiliate" by making you repeat complete non-sense (e.g "unconscious bias") and by making you doubt you understand the meaning of normal words (e.g "equity", "racism", etc.).
By the way, no this doesn't mitigate against anything. I think you are not aware of the law.So you don't believe in bias?
Nice strawman.
You literally called unconscious bias nonsense.
-
You are a "real-world" troll, trying to switch the topic from normative to positive. Nice try, boomer.
You tell people they have no options bc you support the indoctrination.
We must first figure out what is right, then we decide what to do.You have to become a Converse College administration before you get a voice as to what is right.
-
You literally called unconscious bias n0nsense.
So do scientists that study it.
chronicle com article // can-we-really-measure-implicit-bias-maybe-not/Look up some work by Kahneman and Tversky.
LOL? Decades ago? That is the work that has been debunked.
Measurements are all over the map. This ephemeral quality can't be measured the same way twice. The measurements have no relation to any reliably measurable quantity. It has no relation to discrimination.
It doesn't exist.
-
You have to become a Converse College administration before you get a voice as to what is right.
Gee, I don't think so, troll.
You have any power at all over Converse policies? Heck no. All you can do is complain on ejmr.
Movable goalposts.
First, you say that I have no voice to say what is right.
Then you point out that I am not a Converse admin.
All the while, you ignore the distinction between a normative and positive discussion.
Sloppy thinking. My children give me much better arguments. You can't be an economist. If you are, you are a poor one.
Are you a HS student or a sociology undergread at a nowhere school?