Because we champion diversity and inclusion
And we’re fully prepared to fire you if we don’t get it.
Another white man has his job threatened merely by expressing an opinion on gender issues that differs from some orthodoxy, the explanation some ambiguous double-speak about diversity and inclusion. You couldn’t make this up. Oh, wait: it’s all made up.
Anyway, poor old Kevin Roberts is forced to take an unplanned holiday from work. It shouldn’t be too onerous. With his income last year reportedly $4.7 million, he should have the readies to fly to a tropical island he fancies for a couple of weeks soaking up the rays while his future is determined.
Publicis Groupe works very hard to champion diversity and will continue to insist that each agency’s leadership be champions of both diversity and inclusion.
But clearly, your opinions must not stray very far from ours, or (never mind your opinion) we shall describe you as not valuing the importance of inclusion, which makes the listening public gasp in horror and disbelief and lets us immediately besmirch your good name, suspend you without pay or terminate your employment. We can do this even when you have an excellent record of valuing inclusion—because it is your highly visible, questionable, public statement just now that must be stamped on.
Of course, you are white. If you were some shade of brown, we would be delighted to signal our virtue by trumpeting our “inclusion” of you. If brown, we would be prepared to bend quite a lot to achieve this, so you must quite seriously offend against our moral code before risking your job.
The buzz words are a bit confusing. “Diversity”, which naturally indicates numerous cultures and ethnic origins, seems to be applied only to gender—but there are only two. The idea of “inclusion” seems important. I don’t know whether inclusion might mean allowing a person of the opposite gender to share your table at morning tea, including them when relating a ribald tale or something else entirely. I haven’t spent much time with media people.
Note that the leaders are called leadership (“good morning, your leadership”?), and it must be a plural noun, since leadership are champions.
The Groupe will not tolerate anyone speaking for our organisation who does not value the importance of inclusion.
I’m annoyed at the woeful lack of precision, fairness and reasoning. It’s those at the top table thumping the table, that’s all it is. They have good language skills, but that just means they know how to misshape their sentences so we mistake their meaning.
Views: 173
applied only to gender—but there are only two.
Are you implying that there are only two genders?
I am triggered. I need a safe space.
NYC recognises 35 genders, of which one is “bi-gendered” which means “both genders”.
Confused? Me too
There ain’t no rest for the triggered
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwYd5cRlROE
Teaching in an outer-London Comprehensive a few years ago, I was stunned when senior management placed a small group of yr 9 students on the panel set up to interview prospective staff members, to demonstrate the school’s commitment to ‘inclusion’. I left shortly afterward to take a position in a school far from London, convinced that State Education in London was compelling itself to fail through the application of barking mad ideology.
And this was before the mad gender debate occurred!
Andy, 35 genders seems excessive. You sure you weren’t looking at different bagels? Nature certainly makes just two genders, with hermaphrodites possibly a third, though I don’t agree they’re different, they’re more logically a combination of the first two. Or those two are a logical development from hermaphrodites, which I’m guessing came first. In humans and some animals there’s the mental factor we call identification which can cause a preference for one’s own gender which clouds the usual binary issue. So we can identify ourselves as in the wrong body in various ways, and medical science now offers ways of transforming our wrong body into something we more readily approve. None of this creates new genders. Then, from time to time Nature gets everything wrong, so we see endless variety in the physical manifestations of genitalia, though none of this creates new genders, either. Call me old-fashioned, but reproduction is still old-fashioned because it occurs as ever it did, even in a petri dish. The constant — though very rare — birth anomalies simply create defects or disabled functions while the new identifications, assisted or not by medical intervention, are simply new identifications. They are psychological and subject to consolidation, change or reversal. Finally (this is a bit long, eh?) there are a very small number of people, less than one-legged, one-eyed or one-armed persons, affected by these defects and identity disorders, yet the group takes rather more attention than their problems merit. We certainly don’t need to eliminate gendered school toilets. It makes little sense to expend public funds, disrupt generations of cultural understanding and upset 99.95% of the population just to soothe the difficult feelings of the 0.05%. Some even agitate for a new personal pronoun, the so-called singular “they”. For perhaps two people in the whole country. Seriously? What kind of insanity are we listening to?
Alexander,
Modern times will become famous in recorded history for forgetting that the development of intelligence and discrimination in the human person takes a number of years, not that it’s fully available at birth. After all, that’s what lies behind the principle of attaining one’s majority. But the fact that this is most overlooked in those (teachers) closest to handling that nascent discrimination causes the most frustration.
RT – I’m one of these old fashioned types that thinks that gender is a biological construct with occasional deviations
However, in the “progressive” mindset, all these issues, gender, identity, race, etc become “social constructs”.
It is all Marxist claptrap
Andy,
I agree, and the words “social constructs” mean that we make it up. Not that they’re unimportant, but I think they are too often blown out of proportion when the professional offence-takers start shouting. But how are these issues connected with Marx?
They are not directly connected with Marx, but more come out of the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism, which aims to disassemble society by deconstructing language, culture etc. using things like “Critical Theory”
I read about it but it does my head in
I see. Well, I’m impressed by your recall and by the complexity (if somewhat briefly expressed) of the topic, though it’s bewildering to think of one’s society being disassembled from beneath one. Sorry about your head. I won’t raise this again.
Well, it is all around us. I hear that in the USA it is almost impossible to keep a job as an academic in the humanities unless you buy into this. If you show any signs of being even vaguely centre-right or conservative, you are out. If you thought global warming orthodoxy was bad …
Yes. But, there, you’ve gone and raised it yourself, and I thought I was looking after you by ignoring it.
>”…..things like “Critical Theory” I read about it but it does my head in”
Critical theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory
The Marxian stream fell apart rather badly:
There is “an era of social revolution” in Venezuela right now – accompanied by empty shelves.
Attempts to resurrect it all by megalomaniacs of course but in terms of “inclusion” we’re looking at Postmodern critical theory, Language and communication, and Construction. This seems to be indulged in primarily by the non-productive sector of society. A stiff global recession on the way will weed out a lot of the parasitic element I’m thinkin’. Not sure what they will do then, it’s hard enough in the productive sector at the best of times unless you are skilled in some way. Even then it is still highly competitive.
At least Marx and traditional critical theorists were concerned with production:
The primary contradiction within capitalism now is debt – it ain’t working anymore.
Enter “helicopter money”:
Helicopter money has been proposed as an alternative to Quantitative Easing (QE) when interest rates are close to zero and the economy remains weak or enters recession.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money
Not applicable to NZ (yet) but to our export destinations – Japan, China, US, Europe.
Only “Helicopter Money” Can Save The World From The Next Recession
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-09/buiter-only-helicopter-money-can-save-world-next-recession
The False Promise of Helicopter Money
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/helicopter-money-risk-for-central-banks-by-james-mccormack-2016-05
What seems important to some now, like “inclusion”, will probably take a back seat to more pressing issues in the near future I’m inclined to think. “inclusion” is certainly not the hot topic in Venezuala right
now:
Not much call for leadership “champions of both diversity and inclusion” there at the moment. They’re either queing for food or looting food delivery trucks.
Murdoch’s NatGeo Plans DiCaprio Climate-Panic Documentary, Couric on ‘Gender Fluidity’
By Tim Graham | August 1, 2016
[…]
Further evidence that this is a liberal-media factory that hasn’t been “Foxified” comes with the news that it’s promoting a Katie Couric documentary called Gender Revolution, an “in-depth look at the role of genetics, brain chemistry and modern culture on gender fluidity.” This is “science” uncorrupted by those conservatives who think they are just males and females “assigned at birth.”
“This show will explore the roles of science, politics, and culture on gender, giving viewers a greater understanding of what is becoming a rapidly evolving issue,” said Monroe. “We’re proud to partner with Katie and her talented production team to play a part in breaking down the complexities of gender identity.”
“It seems that every day, there’s a new story and a new vocabulary around gender that’s challenging our long-held attitudes and preconceptions about what makes us who we are,” said Couric. ‘Gender Revolution’ will go beyond the headlines to examine the why, the how and what it all means, with intimate stories of the people who are at the forefront of this new frontier. We’ll also explore how it’s impacting almost every aspect of our lives, from bathrooms to boardrooms, and from colleges to competitive sports. Think of it this way: this will be everything you wanted to know about gender but were afraid to ask.”
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2016/08/01/murdochs-natgeo-plans-dicaprio-climate-panic-documentary-couric
# # #
Sounds more like “Science Fluidity’
I am reminded of Timothy, a “masculine-of-centre gender-queer” who was deemed to be insufficiently diverse to be a Diversity Officer because she was a white male. Here’s the clip from Mark Steyn’s speech – https://youtu.be/oXBgfl7ga6w?t=251
I enjoyed that, thanks. And there’s still a Super Rugby final to come…
Mark Steyn keeps me sane,
On that note, I ended up in a meeting yesterday with a group of residents, councillors, council workers and others, to discuss the Tonkin and Taylor peer review
I have just about lost the will to live after that
There are people in our community that believe that the sea levels are accelerating rapidly and six metres is locked in even if we shut down the entire world economy tomorrow
I was glared at by several Kool Aid Drinkers on my suggestion that the maths didn’t stack up.
There was a lot of “facilitation” to achieve a good “community outcome” and other weapons grade corporate BS.
At least we have some snow to slide on for some light relief..
Chin up Andy. You’re the voice of reason which may at least get one or two to consider looking at the maths. The others are locked in an echo chamber of their own device.
This may cheer, if not inspire you Andy:
Mark Steyn rebukes democrats in climate hearing: ‘You’re effectively enforcing a state ideology’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa9dX1hkEYI