To put it lightly, racial and gender bias has been legalized far longer in this country than not. So it would actually be a more reasonable assumption that bias is the baseline instead of true meritocracy. DEI critics pit the flaws of DEI against a romanticized notion of pure meritocracy that has never existed on a systematic level.
It sounds like the typical DEI trainwreck. A reflexive assumption that any “gap” in outcomes must be due to a “gap” in opportunity…without any thought to alternate etiologies….and lacking the basic understanding that correlation does not automatically equal causation.
The point about citations is particularly idiotic. A paper might be cited less often simply because it is less citation-worthy, regardless of the gender, religion, or creed of its lead author.
This is typical of most data presented about gender (female) disparities. Maybe women are smarter than men and pay more attention to family life and things outside of work that matter. Men tend to be workaholics. Shaming organizations for different ratios is harmful to the greater good. DEI philosophy is to make all organizations 50-50 by artificially selecting under represented people based on color, race or gender rather than by qualifications. That is the ultimate racial debacle.
Tempest in a teapot. The relationship of obesity to health and disease is quite slender. I had no idea there was an Obesity Society with its own journal.
When an organization has devoted itself to ideological purity on the DEI front, any resistance,no matter how minimal, cannot be tolerated. Whatever other mission the organization claims becomes subordinate to the DEI mission. No amount of scientific merit, accuracy or honesty can be considered if it seems to undermine the DEI goals.
To put it lightly, racial and gender bias has been legalized far longer in this country than not. So it would actually be a more reasonable assumption that bias is the baseline instead of true meritocracy. DEI critics pit the flaws of DEI against a romanticized notion of pure meritocracy that has never existed on a systematic level.
Many people have said that, Dr. Veigel. I guess some lower profile journals think they are flying under the radar. Just speculating.
I am sorry that this happened. I thought we have moved beyond such things.
indeed. We went into a little more detail in the actual commentary. But the SM post, says enough to give you the idea. As you know.
It sounds like the typical DEI trainwreck. A reflexive assumption that any “gap” in outcomes must be due to a “gap” in opportunity…without any thought to alternate etiologies….and lacking the basic understanding that correlation does not automatically equal causation.
The point about citations is particularly idiotic. A paper might be cited less often simply because it is less citation-worthy, regardless of the gender, religion, or creed of its lead author.
This is typical of most data presented about gender (female) disparities. Maybe women are smarter than men and pay more attention to family life and things outside of work that matter. Men tend to be workaholics. Shaming organizations for different ratios is harmful to the greater good. DEI philosophy is to make all organizations 50-50 by artificially selecting under represented people based on color, race or gender rather than by qualifications. That is the ultimate racial debacle.
They fired him for being an Editor instead of a flunky.
It is the principle of NOT letting ideology infect professional activities that is large. And, FWIW, Obesity is an important journal in that field.
Tempest in a teapot. The relationship of obesity to health and disease is quite slender. I had no idea there was an Obesity Society with its own journal.
When an organization has devoted itself to ideological purity on the DEI front, any resistance,no matter how minimal, cannot be tolerated. Whatever other mission the organization claims becomes subordinate to the DEI mission. No amount of scientific merit, accuracy or honesty can be considered if it seems to undermine the DEI goals.
Sounds like TOS is collapsing under its own progressive weight
Clever and accurate. Ideologic weight for certain.
Very well said!