The woke roll back continues

[Hoardasurass]

Jack Daniels has ditched all it's woke policies and it's lgbtq equality index membership

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/08/22/jack-daniels-owner-scraps-diversity-targets-amid-anti-woke/

I was wondering about those comments about the judiciary and banning Reform. I'm not in the UK so I have no idea what she's on about.

I think the substantial body of reporting done by McKinsey (for one) showing the benefits (including in relation to financial performance) that diversity brings to organisations probably takes it out of the realm of a ‘faith based statement’ in fairness.

There are people on the left who talk about banning Reform. As far as I know it's not an organized group though. Just the usual numbnuts who think that they should ban whatever doesn't fit into their ideology because its bad.

I'm not sure what the comments about the judiciary were meant to refer to specifically but there have been some real issues with the courts like the stuff in the judge's handbook about insisting that assault victims use preferred pronouns. They have been very captured. But maybe she meant something else.

The pp's dismissive post struck me as rather packaged.

Ithink there are a heck of a lot of questions around that research. Whether that actually represents a causal relationship being the most fundamental.

I’m not sure what was ‘packaged’ about my response, @TempestTost?

The McKinsey research is particularly interesting and compelling I find, not just because of the huge body of data it uses and strong research methods, but also because it’s been able to track progress over time.

It’s your prerogative to disagree of course.

Horrible thread. This is not a good thing. I haven’t RTFT and don’t plan to either.

Sorry I didn't mean yours sounded packaged, but the one calling everything garbage. No content as such.

The McKinsey research has had huge flags around the methodology, because no other academics have been able to replicate the results. Given they make money off of DEI , it's not a great picture.

Perhaps you should read it before you make a judgement otherwise you end up looking like a bit of a twit

@TempestTost

"There are people on the left who talk about banning Reform. As far as I know it's not an organized group though. Just the usual numbnuts who think that they should ban whatever doesn't fit into their ideology because its bad.

I'm not sure what the comments about the judiciary were meant to refer to specifically but there have been some real issues with the courts like the stuff in the judge's handbook about insisting that assault victims use preferred pronouns. They have been very captured. But maybe she meant something else.

The pp's dismissive post struck me as rather packaged."

Thank you for your post and yes rather than any organised political party position, I was referring to those on the hard left calling for the ban of Reform in the wake of the anti immigrant riots who wish to ban or shout down any viewpoints that do not fit with their own.

In the judiciary I was referring to the allegations of two tier policing for example:

www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/metropolitan-police-chief-notting-hill-carnival-two-tier-b1178325.html

www.spiked-online.com/2024/08/09/two-tier-policing-is-not-a-myth/amp/

@1dayatatime what have allegations of two tier policing got to do with the judiciary?

In the U.K. we are incredibly fortunate to have a robust independent appointment system for the judiciary.

@JandLandG

"What a garbage post.

Who's seeking to "outright ban" Reform?

Two-tier policing? Which right-wing idiot did you pick that phrase up from?

"Undermining the independent judicial system?" I thought that was the Daily Mail day after day when the judges said that your mate Johnson couldn't shut down parliament.

Have I got that wrong?

Clown."

Rather than respond to my post with any fact based structured counter argument, you have instead chosen to shout down my post with insults such as "garbage post" or "clown".

Thank you for reinforcing my point that the real fascism in society today can be found in the hard left through the shouting down of opposing views to silence them, rather than any actual counter argument.

Staff should be chosen on suitability for the job that needs done not because to the number of LGBTQIXYZWTF boxes that they tick!

This post shows exactly why EDI initiatives are becoming so extreme. It’s like a religion being pushed by those with blind faith and no critical thinking or reflection. There are plenty of examples on this thread of DEI clearly going very wrong. The stuff being taught in Irish schools being a perfect example. But not one DEI advocate here can even recognise this as being completely inappropriate learning material for young children. We’ve reached a point where we have CRT and Queer Theory being pushed in schools and used in policy under the guise of EDI. It’s frankly manipulative and people are starting to twig. I expect with the pushback we can expect to see a lot of tantrums a bit like when we push back on transgender ideology.

Garbage post again.

I have specifically addressed the actual nonsense you actually spouted in your actual post.

The quotation marks contain your words.

The words "garbage" and "clown" are accurate descriptors of the nonsense you wrote.

So, I'll ask you again:

Who's seeking to "outright ban" Reform?

Any answer?

Two-tier policing? Which right-wing idiot did you pick that phrase up from?

"Undermining the independent judicial system?"

Was this, or was this not, the Daily Mail day after day when the judges said that your mate Johnson couldn't shut down parliament?

You might read the Daily Mail, so you might remember.

Either way, don't write garbage and you won't get called out for it.

Is that clear enough for you?

Not comforted enough by redefining CRT and 'woke' to become the next 'downfall' of society, those pushing back have found new relish with the entire DEI apparatus. Good luck to them and all that, but it's curious really that many seem to think once they've done away with all the 'DEI-nonsense' that order will somehow be restored and the feminists will be among the victors.

Maybe the blind, the deaf, the physically disabled, to name a few, could benefit from all this spare money sloshing around? Isn't that what it's supposed to be about?

This will be interesting…

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/bar-regulator-to-impose-new-diversity-and-inclusion-duty/5120738.article

That page is coming up as not found

Dodgy link. Try this…

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/bar-regulator-to-impose-new-diversity-and-inclusion-duty/5120738.article

Allison Bailey isn’t impressed…

“I will be submitting a written response to this consultation; however, my immediate reaction to the announcement by my regulator, the Bar Standards Board, that it proposes to amend the Core Duty of all barristers by requiring them to 'promote equality, diversity and inclusion when practising or otherwise providing legal services' is that it’s a terrible idea.

EDI has become synonymous with trans activism, the removal of single-sex protections and rights in the workplace and elsewhere, and the unlawful discrimination and victimisation of women.

This has been to the detriment of tackling other forms of discrimination and inequality in areas such as disability, age, sex, race, and sexual orientation discrimination, including by those within the so called LGBTQ+ 'community'.

But it isn't for barristers to promote anything beyond the rule of law and the best interests of their clients within the law.

I think the existing core duties are enough in this regard. They require barristers not to discriminate unlawfully and to act with honesty and integrity. Turning this into a requirement to promote EDI is fraught with danger. This smacks of regulatory overreach.

Written responses to this consultation must be received by 5 pm on 29 November 2024.”

It’s important to note that if a company wants to become a B-Corp they are required to self-assess on a number of targets including diversity, and show they are taking steps towards increasing diversity.

That’s one of the reasons why a lot of companies don’t apply to be a B-Corp. British companies including my employer are looking at alternatives such as the Investors in Environment scheme, which contains the eco aspects of B-Corp but not the stuff about diversity.

Where EDI = bigotry and discrimination.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/education/schoolbook-publisher-apologises-for-junior-cert-book-portrayal-of-potato-eating-traditional-irish-family/a1718961184.html

https://extra.ie/2024/09/04/news/irish-news/publisher-school-irish-family

@Signalbox

Whoah that is off the scale for n offensive. So basically if you are Irish born , white and with a white spouse (ie the majority of Irish people) then you are all closed minded racists who don't like change or anything new and most probably greet everyone with a "top of the morning ".

Whereas you if you are not Irish born, not white or don't have a white spouse then you live vibrant happy lives and get to enjoy more varied food.

The quote that stood out for me is:
"On closer inspection, we now appreciate that our approach should have been different and accept that it has caused upset and anger, even though this was not our intention".

It also reinforces the view that real racism now comes from the left (eg against Jews and now Irish), that real fascism now comes from the left (by trying to silence, shout down and silence opposing views) and that the real threat to democracy now comes from the left (by other parties refusing to talk to or engage in coalitions with right wing parties).

It’s beyond offensive and beyond parody isn’t it? When I read it to my DH it took a while to convince him it was real. Question is how did it even get published let alone become teaching materials in a school? Is it because nobody dare question the value of DEI content in case they are denounced as being against equality etc.