Opinion Lowering of standards in every industry in the name of diversity

Koro_11

Gold Belt
@Gold
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
20,338
Reaction score
19,286

Activists ⁤and‍ the Erosion ⁤of Standards​


One of the most striking aspects of activists who seek to reshape society and‍ dismantle established hierarchies in the ⁣name of “equity” is ⁣their unwavering determination‌ and assertiveness. They don’t⁤ wait for permission; they simply forge ahead. And they do so ‍in such vast numbers and across ⁢so many domains that it becomes nearly impossible to keep track of their actions. Even if you oppose ‌their agenda, ‍as⁤ many people do, it’s challenging to stay fully informed due to the sheer scale of their operation.


Here’s‍ a brief ⁢overview, although far from exhaustive. In recent ⁤months⁢ alone, we’ve discovered that ⁣the LAPD‍ is⁤ relaxing its standards for new ‌officers ‍to recruit fewer white males. The San‌ Francisco ⁣school board is considering lowering admission requirements, and the New York Regents Exam may soon become optional ⁣for high school graduates. ⁤The LSAT is dropping its challenging “logic games” section to accommodate blind applicants. Even medical schools like U.C. Davis are ranking⁣ applicants⁢ based on perceived “hardships” ⁢rather than merit. ‌This trend ‌of lowering‌ standards to increase “diversity” is evident ⁤in various fields, from air traffic control ‍and airline⁢ piloting to Silicon Valley and even zoos ‍and aquariums.

With all this in mind,‌ one might ⁤assume that it’s impossible to be shocked by any industry lowering⁢ its standards in the‍ name of diversity. After all, if ⁣everyone‌ is doing it, how surprising ⁤can these initiatives truly be?


A Startling Development in Social Work​



That’s what I thought until recently when I learned about a new plan to “diversify” one of the least demanding and rigorous professional fields. I didn’t believe ⁣it was‍ possible for this field ⁤to lower its‌ already low standards.


According to NBC News Washington:


They’re now ‌lowering the standards ⁢for social workers because not ‌enough people with‍ “darker skin” are passing the test. This segment is already insane. A black woman‌ named Sarah⁤ claims she needed a black⁢ therapist‌ who shared her “views.” She couldn’t tolerate a white, Hispanic, or Asian therapist.⁢ NBC News doesn’t challenge her reasoning or its implications.

Let’s consider⁢ those implications. The‌ underlying assumption⁤ is⁤ that you⁣ can only ‍benefit from a therapist who shares your exact ‌worldview. This assumption is prevalent‍ because much of therapy involves paying someone to agree with you. There’s no⁣ scientific basis for it.‍ Patients choose doctors⁣ who tell them what they want ⁣to hear, ⁢and doctors are ⁣aware of this. They call it “affirmative care.” Instead of offering independent diagnoses or pushback, therapists tell children ⁢they’re‍ “transgender” or have ”ADHD.” This is how therapy works ⁣today, but it’s not ⁢how ⁤it’s supposed to work.



In theory, counseling should involve someone ‌who⁣ sees the world ⁣differently ‌from you. You seek guidance because there’s‌ a problem with your perspective. But what’s even more interesting in the clip⁤ is Sarah’s assertion ⁤that the only way ‍to find a therapist who thinks‍ like her is⁢ to find ⁤one with the same skin color. This goes beyond mere racism; it’s race essentialism. If a white person endorsed this perspective, they would be labeled a domestic terrorist.‍ But when a black person endorses it on NBC News, there are no consequences. NBC⁣ News even endorses her viewpoint.


Let’s examine the statistics mentioned in the clip. Between 2018 and 2021, ⁢approximately 76% of white test-takers passed the bachelor’s level exam on their first attempt. Asians had ⁢a 60% pass ‍rate, followed ⁣by Hispanics at 53%, and blacks at 33%. These rankings generally align with the distribution of ⁣SAT⁣ scores, with one notable exception. Asian test-takers typically excel on standardized tests, but in this case, they lag⁢ behind.


NBC News, however, disregards the relatively poor performance of Asians and instead ‌focuses solely on the low number of black students who pass. For my part, I take some ⁤pride in the fact that⁣ white people are surpassing Asians in at least one category. But the question remains: why is the 33% pass ‍rate among black test-takers automatically seen as evidence of ⁢a flawed test?‍ Is it truly racist? To find out, I watched study sessions on YouTube, hoping to identify any ⁤racist questions. Instead, I was bored to tears. The questions were mundane and far from racist.


After examining the social worker exam questions, it’s clear that they are not racist. Yet, activists and elected ‌officials in D.C. are attempting to eliminate the testing requirement entirely,⁣ based on unfounded claims. This move contradicts the purpose of licensing requirements, which aim to ensure competence in a profession and protect ‌the‌ public. Instead of ‌admitting everyone and then dealing with the⁤ consequences of incompetence, we should ⁣maintain standards from the start.



Ironically, the Left has been advocating for social workers to replace law ‍enforcement in various situations, expanding their power and scope. Yet, they are simultaneously lowering ⁢the standards ⁤for social ‌workers. While social workers ⁢are generally ineffective, this trend symbolizes a larger problem. The Left seeks ⁤to reshape society by eroding standards across all⁤ professions, from the most demanding to the least. They⁣ won’t stop until they have undermined the legitimacy of every job in the country.


Except, of course,‍ they won’t implement any diversity initiatives ‍in major sports leagues where their⁢ preferred⁢ demographics are already dominant. But in every other field, they are determined to reduce standards⁤ to the point of nonexistence. If even social workers are exempt from⁤ a simple test, it proves⁣ that they can eliminate standards in every other area. We must decide whether we⁤ want a functioning society or if⁢ we will allow them ‍to succeed.





What message does‍ the initiative to lower standards in professional fields send about the value of hard work and maintaining well-established standards?​


Students⁣ have a higher pass rate, not because of their skin color, ‌but because they have ‌studied, prepared, and met⁣ the⁤ standards required for success. It is not a matter ⁤of discrimination ⁣but of competence and merit.



The decision to‌ lower the standards ‍for social workers based on race is not⁣ only concerning but also dangerous. The field of social work is one that requires individuals to⁣ have the knowledge, skills, and empathy necessary to support and assist those in need. Lowering⁢ the standards in this ⁣profession compromises the quality of care‌ provided to vulnerable individuals and‌ puts their well-being at risk.


Furthermore, ⁣this‌ initiative sends a message that academic achievement and competency can be overlooked⁤ in the⁣ pursuit of diversity. It undermines the value of hard work and the importance of maintaining well-established standards in professional fields. By‍ prioritizing diversity over competence,⁢ we‍ risk diminishing the credibility and effectiveness of these professions.


It is essential to recognize‍ the difference between promoting diversity and lowering ‌standards. ‍Diversity should be embraced‌ and‍ celebrated, but it should not come at ‍the ⁢expense of⁢ excellence and professionalism.‍ Standards should be based on⁤ objectivity, competency, ⁤and merit rather than race ‌or ethnicity.


As a society, we must strive to⁣ create equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their background. However, this should not⁣ be achieved through the erosion of standards.‍ Instead, we should focus on providing resources, support, and equal access to education and training that enables ⁣individuals ‌from ⁤all walks of‍ life to meet and excel in established standards.



Activists who advocate for the erosion ⁤of standards in the name of equity must be mindful of the unintended consequences of their actions. It is crucial to consider⁤ the long-term effects on⁤ the⁣ integrity and effectiveness⁤ of ‌the professions they seek to change. Balancing⁣ the pursuit of ⁤diversity with the maintenance of excellence is a delicate task that requires thoughtful consideration, ‌collaboration, and a commitment to upholding high standards.


In conclusion, the trend of lowering standards in various fields, including social work, under⁣ the guise of diversity is ⁣concerning. It undermines the credibility and⁤ effectiveness of these professions and puts ‍vulnerable individuals at risk. While promoting diversity is important, it should‌ not come‌ at the expense of competency and merit. Upholding‍ and maintaining ⁢well-established standards is crucial to ‍ensure the ⁢quality of care and services provided. It is essential for activists and society ⁣as ‍a whole to find a balance‌ between diversity and maintaining excellence to ensure the continued ‌success of these professions.


 
anchorman-diversity.gif
 
Conservatives fighting to make sure black people don't get any help.

Just another day, like yesterday and tomorrow.
Yeah, because the way to help a person seeking mental therapy is by having them talk to another person who thinks exactly like they do. Good thing woke white upper middle-class liberals know what’s really good for black people and they help them by patronizing and coddling them like perpetual children.
 
Yeah, because the way to help a person seeking mental therapy is by having them talk to another person who thinks exactly like they do. Good thing woke white upper middle-class liberals know what’s really good for black people and they help them by patronizing and coddling them like perpetual children.

You trust the conservative network completely because they tailor their message for people that don't want any advantages for black people.

They dress the message up so you don't feel like a Klansman, but they always misrepresent the truth.

This tired tactic you're using to make it sound like liberals are treating black people like children has been popular since before emancipation. It's as hollow and pointless now as it was then.
 
Yeah, because the way to help a person seeking mental therapy is by having them talk to another person who thinks exactly like they do. Good thing woke white upper middle-class liberals know what’s really good for black people and they help them by patronizing and coddling them like perpetual children.

How would you or Matt Walsh know either way?

The whole article is riddled with basic grammatical errors and logical fallacies. The writing is downright horrendous.

He cites a fucking a random person who demands a black therapist

"A black woman‌ named Sarah⁤ claims she needed a black⁢ therapist‌ who shared her “views.” She couldn’t tolerate a white, Hispanic, or Asian therapist.⁢ NBC News doesn’t challenge her reasoning or its implications."

What does that have to do with anything? How does a person's random demand have anything to do with the left reshaping the industry? The whole article says a lot of things without providing any evidence or links you to a section of the website that has no relation to the point he was making.

"The San‌ Francisco ⁣school board is considering lowering admission requirements, and the New York Regents Exam may soon become optional ⁣for high school graduates." I clicked the link in "high school graduates" and it leads me to an article about a random school board member saying "to remember jihad". What does that have to do with anything here? How does that relate to his point about lowering admission requirements?

His points are all over the place and it leads no where. It's the ramblings of a crazy person.
 
You trust the conservative network completely because they tailor their message for people that don't want any advantages for black people.

They dress the message up so you don't feel like a Klansman, but they always misrepresent the truth.

This tired tactic you're using to make it sound like liberals are treating black people like children has been popular since before emancipation. It's as hollow and pointless now as it was then.
People who “don’t want any advantages for black people”?

Well, I guess you can put me in that group as well, I don’t want any advantages for black people, or any other colour of people that’s the whole point. Why would we want any group to have some sort of advantage over another based on their fucken skin colour?
 
People who “don’t want any advantages for black people”?

Well, I guess you can put me in that group as well, I don’t want any advantages for black people, or any other colour of people that’s the whole point. Why would we want any group to have some sort of advantage over another based on their fucken skin colour?

A lot of "advantages" black people are given are corrections to racist policies that have existed since the very second they were available.

If equality of opportunity actually existed they wouldn't be necessary.
 

Activists ⁤and‍ the Erosion ⁤of Standards​


One of the most striking aspects of activists who seek to reshape society and‍ dismantle established hierarchies in the ⁣name of “equity” is ⁣their unwavering determination‌ and assertiveness. They don’t⁤ wait for permission; they simply forge ahead. And they do so ‍in such vast numbers and across ⁢so many domains that it becomes nearly impossible to keep track of their actions. Even if you oppose ‌their agenda, ‍as⁤ many people do, it’s challenging to stay fully informed due to the sheer scale of their operation.




With all this in mind,‌ one might ⁤assume that it’s impossible to be shocked by any industry lowering⁢ its standards in the‍ name of diversity. After all, if ⁣everyone‌ is doing it, how surprising ⁤can these initiatives truly be?


A Startling Development in Social Work​



That’s what I thought until recently when I learned about a new plan to “diversify” one of the least demanding and rigorous professional fields. I didn’t believe ⁣it was‍ possible for this field ⁤to lower its‌ already low standards.


According to NBC News Washington:




Let’s consider⁢ those implications. The‌ underlying assumption⁤ is⁤ that you⁣ can only ‍benefit from a therapist who shares your exact ‌worldview. This assumption is prevalent‍ because much of therapy involves paying someone to agree with you. There’s no⁣ scientific basis for it.‍ Patients choose doctors⁣ who tell them what they want ⁣to hear, ⁢and doctors are ⁣aware of this. They call it “affirmative care.” Instead of offering independent diagnoses or pushback, therapists tell children ⁢they’re‍ “transgender” or have ”ADHD.” This is how therapy works ⁣today, but it’s not ⁢how ⁤it’s supposed to work.



In theory, counseling should involve someone ‌who⁣ sees the world ⁣differently ‌from you. You seek guidance because there’s‌ a problem with your perspective. But what’s even more interesting in the clip⁤ is Sarah’s assertion ⁤that the only way ‍to find a therapist who thinks‍ like her is⁢ to find ⁤one with the same skin color. This goes beyond mere racism; it’s race essentialism. If a white person endorsed this perspective, they would be labeled a domestic terrorist.‍ But when a black person endorses it on NBC News, there are no consequences. NBC⁣ News even endorses her viewpoint.


Let’s examine the statistics mentioned in the clip. Between 2018 and 2021, ⁢approximately 76% of white test-takers passed the bachelor’s level exam on their first attempt. Asians had ⁢a 60% pass ‍rate, followed ⁣by Hispanics at 53%, and blacks at 33%. These rankings generally align with the distribution of ⁣SAT⁣ scores, with one notable exception. Asian test-takers typically excel on standardized tests, but in this case, they lag⁢ behind.


NBC News, however, disregards the relatively poor performance of Asians and instead ‌focuses solely on the low number of black students who pass. For my part, I take some ⁤pride in the fact that⁣ white people are surpassing Asians in at least one category. But the question remains: why is the 33% pass ‍rate among black test-takers automatically seen as evidence of ⁢a flawed test?‍ Is it truly racist? To find out, I watched study sessions on YouTube, hoping to identify any ⁤racist questions. Instead, I was bored to tears. The questions were mundane and far from racist.


After examining the social worker exam questions, it’s clear that they are not racist. Yet, activists and elected ‌officials in D.C. are attempting to eliminate the testing requirement entirely,⁣ based on unfounded claims. This move contradicts the purpose of licensing requirements, which aim to ensure competence in a profession and protect ‌the‌ public. Instead of ‌admitting everyone and then dealing with the⁤ consequences of incompetence, we should ⁣maintain standards from the start.



Ironically, the Left has been advocating for social workers to replace law ‍enforcement in various situations, expanding their power and scope. Yet, they are simultaneously lowering ⁢the standards ⁤for social ‌workers. While social workers ⁢are generally ineffective, this trend symbolizes a larger problem. The Left seeks ⁤to reshape society by eroding standards across all⁤ professions, from the most demanding to the least. They⁣ won’t stop until they have undermined the legitimacy of every job in the country.


Except, of course,‍ they won’t implement any diversity initiatives ‍in major sports leagues where their⁢ preferred⁢ demographics are already dominant. But in every other field, they are determined to reduce standards⁤ to the point of nonexistence. If even social workers are exempt from⁤ a simple test, it proves⁣ that they can eliminate standards in every other area. We must decide whether we⁤ want a functioning society or if⁢ we will allow them ‍to succeed.





What message does‍ the initiative to lower standards in professional fields send about the value of hard work and maintaining well-established standards?​


Students⁣ have a higher pass rate, not because of their skin color, ‌but because they have ‌studied, prepared, and met⁣ the⁤ standards required for success. It is not a matter ⁤of discrimination ⁣but of competence and merit.



The decision to‌ lower the standards ‍for social workers based on race is not⁣ only concerning but also dangerous. The field of social work is one that requires individuals to⁣ have the knowledge, skills, and empathy necessary to support and assist those in need. Lowering⁢ the standards in this ⁣profession compromises the quality of care‌ provided to vulnerable individuals and‌ puts their well-being at risk.


Furthermore, ⁣this‌ initiative sends a message that academic achievement and competency can be overlooked⁤ in the⁣ pursuit of diversity. It undermines the value of hard work and the importance of maintaining well-established standards in professional fields. By‍ prioritizing diversity over competence,⁢ we‍ risk diminishing the credibility and effectiveness of these professions.


It is essential to recognize‍ the difference between promoting diversity and lowering ‌standards. ‍Diversity should be embraced‌ and‍ celebrated, but it should not come at ‍the ⁢expense of⁢ excellence and professionalism.‍ Standards should be based on⁤ objectivity, competency, ⁤and merit rather than race ‌or ethnicity.


As a society, we must strive to⁣ create equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their background. However, this should not⁣ be achieved through the erosion of standards.‍ Instead, we should focus on providing resources, support, and equal access to education and training that enables ⁣individuals ‌from ⁤all walks of‍ life to meet and excel in established standards.



Activists who advocate for the erosion ⁤of standards in the name of equity must be mindful of the unintended consequences of their actions. It is crucial to consider⁤ the long-term effects on⁤ the⁣ integrity and effectiveness⁤ of ‌the professions they seek to change. Balancing⁣ the pursuit of ⁤diversity with the maintenance of excellence is a delicate task that requires thoughtful consideration, ‌collaboration, and a commitment to upholding high standards.


In conclusion, the trend of lowering standards in various fields, including social work, under⁣ the guise of diversity is ⁣concerning. It undermines the credibility and⁤ effectiveness of these professions and puts ‍vulnerable individuals at risk. While promoting diversity is important, it should‌ not come‌ at the expense of competency and merit. Upholding‍ and maintaining ⁢well-established standards is crucial to ‍ensure the ⁢quality of care and services provided. It is essential for activists and society ⁣as ‍a whole to find a balance‌ between diversity and maintaining excellence to ensure the continued ‌success of these professions.




So much to say on this but I whole heartedly agree with every single word
The contradiction is unreal. One minute they're saying diversity is essential but the next minute they're calling for black only X to deal with black patients/customers because of shared experience and views. So which is it? Because it cannot be both. You either want diversity or you want racial segregation.


My uncle was the most sought after grievance and substance counsellor in Northern England. Like, backlogs of people wanting to specifically use him of all races, backgrounds and professions. Why? Because he'd been through every fucking meat grinder life could throw at him for 30yrs, attempted suicide several times, recovered from numerous hardcore addictions.....came out the other side and got numerous academical and professional qualifications. He was THE GUY any man wanted to open their heart to.


On paper he looks a little bit like Ed Norton from American History X without the tattoos. So nowadays I wouldn't be surprised if this absolutely incredible counsellor was knocked back on his whiteness and appearance in favour of someone far less capable.
 
A lot of "advantages" black people are given are corrections to racist policies that have existed since the very second they were available.

If equality of opportunity actually existed they wouldn't be

So you think that the way to correct wrongs form the past is to wrong people in the present who happen to look like some of the people who committed wrongs in the past?

What's your plan for 50 years from now, punish future black people who are now given privilege over whites and asians?
 
I stopped reading at “conservative news daily”. I’m sure they are the industry leaders on mental health and know the optimal way to help people in need of therapy.

How would you or Matt Walsh know either way?

The whole article is riddled with basic grammatical errors and logical fallacies. The writing is downright horrendous.

He cites a fucking a random person who demands a black therapist

"A black woman‌ named Sarah⁤ claims she needed a black⁢ therapist‌ who shared her “views.” She couldn’t tolerate a white, Hispanic, or Asian therapist.⁢ NBC News doesn’t challenge her reasoning or its implications."

What does that have to do with anything? How does a person's random demand have anything to do with the left reshaping the industry? The whole article says a lot of things without providing any evidence or links you to a section of the website that has no relation to the point he was making.

"The San‌ Francisco ⁣school board is considering lowering admission requirements, and the New York Regents Exam may soon become optional ⁣for high school graduates." I clicked the link in "high school graduates" and it leads me to an article about a random school board member saying "to remember jihad". What does that have to do with anything here? How does that relate to his point about lowering admission requirements?

His points are all over the place and it leads no where. It's the ramblings of a crazy person.
You just said in your earlier post that you "stopped reading at conservative news daily".

Now you're telling me you went so deep down the rabbit hole and read it so thoroughly that you know all the grammatical errors. You gotta make up your mind whether you just wanna play the war room edge lord, or if you're actually attempting to have an honest conversation.

Also, the person writing the article, making spelling errors, or being someone you happen to dislike is completely irrelevant to the conversation, you either agree with his point that people should be considered for their profession based only on their ability to do the actual job, or you disagree and believe that people should be disqualified if they lack an x amount of melanin in their skin.
 
So much to say on this but I whole heartedly agree with every single word
The contradiction is unreal. One minute they're saying diversity is essential but the next minute they're calling for black only X to deal with black patients/customers because of shared experience and views. So which is it? Because it cannot be both. You either want diversity or you want racial segregation.


My uncle was the most sought after grievance and substance counsellor in Northern England. Like, backlogs of people wanting to specifically use him of all races, backgrounds and professions. Why? Because he'd been through every fucking meat grinder life could throw at him for 30yrs, attempted suicide several times, recovered from numerous hardcore addictions.....came out the other side and got numerous academical and professional qualifications. He was THE GUY any man wanted to open their heart to.


On paper he looks a little bit like Ed Norton from American History X without the tattoos. So nowadays I wouldn't be surprised if this absolutely incredible counsellor was knocked back on his whiteness and appearance in favour of someone far less capable.

So you have this imaginary scenario in your head where someone you look up to is overlooked because of the color of their skin...

You know there are tons of people who have already had that happen to them for real and who still have it happening, right? And while some do indeed look like your Uncle, the majority of them don't.



 
So you think that the way to correct wrongs form the past is to wrong people in the present who happen to look like some of the people who committed wrongs in the past?

What's your plan for 50 years from now, punish future black people who are now given privilege over whites and asians?

Hiring needs to be equality of opportunity, it currently isn't. Did you know that a hiring algorithm being used by every major corporation in America was created using historical data which was fundamentally racist? Black applicants were rejected the vast majority of the time no matter what their qualifications were.

Fifty years from now there will be conversations to determine what's fair. People like you will be fighting to maintain white supremacy, while people who care about fairness will be fighting for better decisions.

The media you consume is telling you the world hates white people. I'm telling you that's a lie and you should probably consume better media, the source you used to make this thread is rabidly hard right and absolutely cannot be trusted.
 
Last edited:
So you have this imaginary scenario in your head where someone you look up to is overlooked because of the color of their skin...

You know there are tons of people who have already had that happen to them for real and who still have it happening, right? And while some do indeed look like your Uncle, the majority of them don't.




Why is his scenario imaginary? Because it doesn't go along with your narrative?

You posted some movie clips to justify racism? Your point is that you think white people's kids should be discriminated now because some shitbag who happens to share their skin color discriminated against some black person at some point in history?

You believe it's justified?
 
Hiring needs to be equality of opportunity, it currently isn't. Did you know that a hiring algorithm being used by every major corporation in America was created using historical data which has fundamentally racist? Black applicants were rejected the vast majority of the time no matter what their qualifications were.

Fifty years from now there will be conversations to determine what's fair. People like you will be fighting to maintain white supremacy, while people who care about fairness will be fighting for better decisions.

The media you consume is telling you the world hates white people. I'm telling you that's a lie and you should probably consume better media, the source you used to make this thread is rabidly hard right and absolutely cannot be trusted.
I don't need to consume any media to see this for what it is, you yourself are only confirming the point with your posting.

I'm married to a half black Latina, I have a mixed race child, and I'm proposing that we don't judge people based on skin color but on the content of their character, and according to you I'm a person "fighting to maintain white supremacy".

Thank you for proving my point and being a living parody of this ridiculous and incoherent ideology.
 
It's not only diversity of races..... they are trying to force mentally handicapped, mentally ill and cripples into the workforce as well in the name of inclusiveness.

It's hilarious how often upper management tries to force us to hire from special needs programs these days. Management pressures us to meet targets of employment within special needs groups. My job is generally too dangerous and requiring of full wits to reasonably employ any of them
 
I don't need to consume any media to see this for what it is, you yourself are only confirming the point with your posting.

I'm married to a half black Latina, I have a mixed race child, and I'm proposing that we don't judge people based on skin color but on the content of their character, and according to you I'm a person "fighting to maintain white supremacy".

Thank you for proving my point and being a living parody of this ridiculous and incoherent ideology.

You've used your race as a cudgel before, it doesn't prove anything.

My ideology is pretty simple, it's be fair. The people in your source have no interest in being fair, nor do you.

Quoting MLK to fight rights for black people is particularly white supremacist of you.
 
Back
Top