So how much longer before we get pissed enough to start doing something about it? I’m a white CIS heterosexual male and this is infuriating to me. This isn’t correction of DEI policies. This is blatant sexism and racism. Fuck these nazis.
I watched AOC's "What's Happening & How You Can Take Action" video and thought it was really impactful, so much so I decided to write up a summary of the insights, copy pasted below.
TL;TR for what you can do about it:
Know your rights and teach other people their rights
If something like war ever breaks out, engage in simple sabotage when you can. Short preview of link: "Whenever possible, arrange to have the fire start after you have gone away. Use a candle and paper, combination, setting it as close as possible to the inflammable material you want to burn"
However, we're not currently there yet. We don't need to wait until things get impossibly bad before taking action. If you think all that stuff like "contacting representatives" & "organizing for elections" will do is slow our collective downfall, then realize that a slowed downfall means more time to organize a resistance and more time for vulnerable groups to escape the country.
Also, feel free to copy-paste this excerpt anywhere if you'd like!
Executive Orders are not that powerful:
For all the Executive Orders being signed, know that they're not actually as powerful as they might seem. Congress can block Executive Orders, courts can block Executive Orders (you might have heard of this being done for the EO ending birthright citizenship), and they're essentially more limited in scope/permanence than actually signed laws. In fact, much of the EOs Trump has signed are meaningless or completely unconstitutional, which is not a pointless distinction, because as mentioned before, courts are blocking these EOs.
Fascist dictators thrive on perceived power instead of actual power. They want to "flood the zone," pump out so much terrible nonsense the populace becomes overwhelmed and docile. Don't believe them, don't become docile and don't consent in advance. The reason Trump is using Executive Orders instead of actual laws is because he knows he only has a slim majority in the House (218R-215D, ie 2R's could flip a vote, 2 vacancies in FL to be voted on 4/1, 1 R departure in NY-21 to be up for another special election)/Senate (53R-47D/I, ie 4R's could flip a vote), and he doesn't want his perceived power to crumble, such as when 3 GOP Senators John McCain, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski blocked an Obamacare Repeal Bill "Health Care Freedom Act" from going through in 2017.
(In this case, by erasing this womans history NASA is doing a little thing called complying in advance.)
Action Being Done by Democrats:
Apparently Trump did a bunch of stuff while Congress was on recess, and they only got back in session Feb 5th, which was why there hasn't been much news from democrats. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries recently released a 10 objectives plan for House Democrats to obstruct the administration
What You Can Do:
While I'm sure we're all positively exhausted with everything going on, at a minimum, you can know your rights regarding ICE Raids: Don't let them in without a Judicial warrant signed by a Judge, don't answer their questions even if you are a citizen, don't talk to them without a lawyer. If you have extra energy, you can:
Contact your Representatives urging them to obstruct Trump nominees while Elon is invading the Treasury
Help Organize for the Florida special elections 4/1 for the House of Representatives. While it would be difficult for these +30R seats to flip (Note in the Jan 29th Iowa special election for Senate (a state Trump won by +21) actually flipped to Democrats), even switching a +30R district to a +10R district lets Republicans know their policies are unpopular and they should think twice before supporting Trump's policies. Additionally, there will eventually be another special election to fill a House of Representatives Republican vacancy up for grabs in NY-21.
Help Organize for other Swing Elections near you
Additional stuff that may be useful eventually:
If something like war ever breaks out, engage in simple sabotage when you can (short preview: "Whenever possible, arrange to have the fire start after you have
gone away. Use a candle and paper, combination, setting it as close as possible to the inflammable material you want to burn")
However, we're not currently there yet. We don't need to wait until things get impossibly bad before taking action. If you think all that stuff like "contacting representatives" & "organizing for elections" will do is slow our collective downfall, then realize that a slowed downfall means more time to organize a resistance and more time for vulnerable groups to escape the country.
Contacting your Representatives:
To contact your representatives, you can make a short 2 min phone call to their office, which will either be picked up by a staffer or go to voicemail. Representatives listen to phone calls when trying to get a sense of what their constituents care about, but other forms of contact (email, text, etc) are by and large ignored. Additionally, you should say where you live, because representatives only care about what their constituents think, not outside people. Note that the voicemails only record up to 2 min so be brief. You can find your representatives phone numbers at https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member
To express your views to your representatives, the format goes like this:
"Hi, my name is [Name] and I live in [City, State, Zip Code]. I wanted to ask for your support on [Policy, Bill, etc]. [Anecdote if you have one to be more personalized]. Thank you for listening, my phone number is [Phone Number] and my email is [Email]."
I personally have just called my senators to let them know I want them to vote NO on advancing/approving all Trump nominees, and that I supported them continuing obstructionist actions including the 30hr filibuster against Russ Vought, Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget pick.
Florida 4/1 Special Elections for 2 House of Representative Members:
Summary, trying to elect Gay Valimont (D) District 1 & Joshua Weil (D) District 6. You can sign up to volunteer on their websites (linked) if you'd like.
New York-21 Eventual Special Election for 1 House of Representative Member:
Elise Stefanik (R) will be vacating her seat to become the U.N. Ambassador for the Trump administration, after which within 80-90 days a special election will be held for a new House member. While it's somewhat of a pipe dream, if Dems win all 3 of these House seats up for grabs, it puts the House at 218D-217R.
I hope this helped you get a sense of what you can do, feel free to copy-paste this anywhere if you'd like!
Fascist dictators thrive on perceived power instead of actual power. They want to “flood the zone,” pump out so much terrible nonsense the populace becomes overwhelmed and docile. Don’t believe them, don’t become docile and don’t consent in advance.
If someone starts a revolution I'd join the fight. "And just because he's a worker,
no class can free him but his own.
The emancipation of the working class
is the task of the worker alone."
Look into your local PSL or DSA. Us socialist are on the top of the leaderboard for Nazi killing and it's not even close. Join the SRA too. This shits not going away with votes. Fascism doesn't let you vote it out of power.
Are you going to storm the Capitol like your granddads stormed the beaches of Normandy? Are you going to only bitch about it on the internet, or are you actually going to do something about it - storming the Capitol not necessarily has to be a part of it - you can plan a better alternative.
Typical American response. Yeehaw you gonna kill some people er what!?
Attacking each other is not going to solve this problem because the wealthy have been pitting us against each other for a long time now. It was the wealthy that caused WWII and every other major war where everyone but them ends up dying.
So how much longer before we get pissed enough to start doing something about it?
Says the guy making no note of anything he is doing about it.
The people in power aren't going to do anything about it because they want it this way.
Half the regular people also want it this way
Of the people left, somewhere around 50% don't care either way.
And of the last people left who do care, probably at least half of those aren't doing anything < this is presumably where you are.
You can't just sit around and expect everyone else to be as angry or angrier than you and expect everything to work out because THEY'LL do something about it.
Only 28% of adults voted for this and lots of Trump voters just wanted the cheaper groceries that Trump promised them (he lied).
So please don't spread the lie that Trump has majority support or any kind of mandate. He doesn't. Over a 100 million people didn't bother to vote because they have no faith or hope that voting can improve their lives. They aren't wrong. At best, electing Democrats is just a stay of execution.
You can't really assume people aren't organizing themselves just from a post like that. Its also bad for opsec to just post what you are up to online. Plenty of people are, there just aren't enough people as people are stuck in the mindset that the systems haven't collapsed yet so there is no need to build up a safety net.
Well let's see... This country has been dealing with these issues for the entirety of its existence, so the time to start doing something about it has long passed.
I thought my dad would have come around by now with everything going on. Last night he was gloating about how much work is getting done in the White House and how everything’s about to get a lot cheaper.
Then, you should challenge him and make him set a deadline for when everything is supposed to be a lot cheaper. When people starts to get sidetracked from thinking critically, that's when you need to make them set an ultimatum that either forces them to think critically, or make them set their own limit that you can then point back to later.
His only concern is himself, he thinks he'll benefit so everyone else can suffer as far as he is concerned. This is the broad motivation of the entire movement. As if America first didn't make it obvious enough, it was really "me first". What they don't understand is how the me in that is entirely relative and they quickly become expendable.
maybe if you explain to him the cause of the great depression being isolationist economic policy hitting everyone really hard, meanwhile japan with its keynesian policy managed to do pretty well, even in the face of global economic downturn.
Some people find facts more reasonable, ironically, even if they will cognitively dissonant themselves from them.
Ask your dad why the GOP needs to raise the Debt Ceiling by $4 Trillion in their budget bill, and how many of the now dozens of lawsuits Trump might win based on his performance in 2020 when he lost almost every single court case, even when Trump appointed the judges himself.
I tried that with someone on facebook. They retreated back to "we have to get federal spending under control." Maybe so, but this group isn't doing that.
make it real for your dad - every chance you get, capture the price of a few things and chart it out over time... actual real evidence that you collected yourself is harder to refute than a graph produced by anonymous sources online.
I can't wait to talk to my parents. Lifelong republicans (though not specifically trump fans, just voting R), so it's extremely likely they voted for this.
I'm a federal employee. They voted to put my job (and my wife's job) in jeopardy. They voted for this. They voted to hurt us.
While all this is going on, I'd also like to point out that grants are being flagged for being "woke" by this anti-DEI nonsense. Grants that have to do with cancer, physics, eclipses, and so on.
The order to end dei in government positions. Women are included in diversity equity and inclusion. Nasa is a government agency, so it makes sense. Is it good? Absolutely not, just the wacky world we have to live in.
Actually, this situation isn't about cancel culture at all. Cancel culture typically refers to public backlash resulting in personal or professional consequences for offensive or harmful behavior. What happened here seems to be a systemic decision to remove content highlighting women in STEM at NASA.
This isn’t driven by public outcry or social pressure; it’s a form of institutional erasure. There’s a big difference between being held accountable for harmful actions and having your achievements wiped out due to a policy change.
I think you are misinformed about the nature of cancel culture — it was always a government program. Those mass account purges on Twitter over COVID "misinformation", for instance, happened explicitly at the behest of the Biden administration. It was not at all the result of public outcry.
Also, many of the claims that were made (such as the lab leak theory) did, in fact, turn out to be true.
Indeed, firing someone seems like a much more drastic measure, and as far as we can tell from the OP, Rose still has her job.
Also, this page about Women at NASA, which contains literally hundreds of articles about female scientists' achievements there has apparently not been deleted, so this doesn't look like some sort of systemic erasure to me. Perhaps her profile was simply deleted by mistake?
I tried clicking a bunch of them just to make sure they're not all dead links, and so far I haven't hit any 404s.
Huh. The only possible reason to conflate cancel culture with erasure is if you're such a shit person with truly deplorable views that being forced to just fucking be polite feels like an attack on your person.
Everyone knows the dog whistle involved here, buddy.
I don't think I follow that train of thought. What do you think cancel culture was except the systematic erasure of people with "undesirable" viewpoints?
Sadly, that stooge isn't even self aware enough to realize it's trolling. Which makes feeding trolls so, just, tedious these days. No fun in it at all!! 😡
Deleting the record of a women's scientific achievements isn't the same as firing (or declining to renew a contract) of someone who's falsifying test results or just being an ass.
I wonder which person you're actually referring to. Have a few names we can "peer review"?
She does not sound sexist. She sounds justifiably upset that the organization she works for and clearly loves is trying to erase her her involvement in it just because she is a woman.
I'm sorry... she sounds sexist because when she talked about the article on her at nasa she mentioned..... her dreams.... her being raised poor..... her being homeless.... and.... her getting a job at Nasa despite all that. Huh oh wait weird I missed the part where she made it all about her being a woman? because... she didn't even do that? She wasn't even highlighting that she is important as a role model to women in STEM. Didn't even mention it in the part discussing the article that was erased. She was highlighting being a role model of achieving her dream job even though she was poor and homeless at one point. And was simply pointing out that it is being erased BECAUSE she is a woman. and you are calling HER sexist? Are you high? Can you read? You just enter a fugue state when you see the word women and make shit up that didn't happen so you can feel better about yourself? Cuz I'm super confused how you can get sexist from what she said without just assuming she's sexist because she is a woman.
Oh geez that would be great wouldn't it. But it sounds like you've never had some tell you that you can't do something because of your sex. Highlighting successful minorities in a field inspires and encourages others in their same position.
You have so consistently dehumanized the women in your life that this statement actually makes sense to you? Like, it's pretty well known that women are a minority in STEM fields. What the hell you so afraid of, that celebrating a woman's accomplishments offense you so???
Maybe stop trying to gain power over other human beings. Cause the path you're currently on? You fucking know where it leads. And no, dragging others down will never change the hellscape of fear and paranoia you have found. You have to walk out of the valley of despair; there is no other escape.
Why couldn't it be? Why shouldn't there be a section for "people", to serve as motivation for whomever wants to follow their footsteps and work at NASA?
And also, supposedly, only women's info were removed. Did they also remove the bio of men?
It is pretty standard practice. For one, it helps people who read or review your work know who they are dealing with. For another, it helps the general public understand who scientists are. Part of the mission is to make sure that the next generation carries the work on, and by emphasizing the human aspect of the science, young people can actually imagine themselves getting to that point some day.
The current admin cabinet hires are completely based on DEI. What other companies would hire such a diverse cadre of alcoholics, rapists, and idiots, while most companies tend to hire on merit.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion get in the way of their nepotism and cronyism hiring. If they were hiring based on merit alone there would be no problem being transparent and publishing their hiring decisions.
It’s been said better by other people but the general understanding of the right’s use of “DEI” is as a convenient blanket slur.
It’s typically used against Black and Hispanic people the most, followed by trans people, but any/all women are convenient extra padding under the bus tires of their bigotry and insecurity.
Remember that their fascism is based in feelings of superiority in addition to fear. Use that against the cowardly bastards. They can’t stand to see someone “undeserving” do as well as or better than them, so they try to mow it down.
Fuck ‘em.
EDIT: It seems like Rose Ferreira is of Hispanic descent, hailing initially from the Dominican Republic then moved to NY and eventually secured an internship at NASA, and is now an astronomer and aerospace engineer. It seems like her NASA page got reinstated, maybe after backlash. She’s awesome. Hell yeah for the Streisand effect.
They can’t stand to see someone “undeserving” do as well as or better than them, so they try to mow it down.
in australia and new zealand we have a concept called “tall poppy syndrome” (people who stand out from the crowd, who promote themselves excessively and publicly) and the reaction to that: “cutting down the tall poppy”. cutting down the tall poppy originally meant just bringing them back down to earth, but kinda morphed into simply criticising anyone that does well
we tend to have a relatively strong egalitarian streak, and perhaps that change was tearing people down rather than distributing their success to equalise
anyway, related: tearing down the tall poppy, ie pulling down anyone that stands out
Remember that their fascism is based in feelings of superiority in addition to fear.
Hi, it's me, I'm the "well akshuslly" guy today. Fascism (and the whole right-wing mindset) is based on fear, primarily fear that they, personally and individually, are interior. That's why they need the constant and over-the-top demonstrations of dominance and claims of superiority—to drown out those fears.
As I keep telling people, they keep saying "DEI" because even most Bible belt folks get uncomfortable when you drop the hard R they really want to say.
Women and visible minorities are often given the absolute worst conditions for getting out of the shit cycle started by white dudes. This can mean that they don’t have great scores on tests and stuff and that can look like they are, by default, not as smart if you’re the kind of person whose brain is barely firing enough to allow you to breathe.
So you extend that out and suddenly it’s “wait if they get hired at all and they’re not as smart that means they don’t deserve it!”. DEI does, I’m sure, bring some people in that might not be the best candidates but it never brings in people who are unqualified for the job like the racists believe, and the even the metric for “best” on paper is clouded by the aforementioned lack of support.
They’re connected because these people believe that there’s no way a straight white male would ever lose to a minority or a woman despite the fact that most of the people who believe it are huge losers barely stumbling through life while ignoring the fact that they are supported by everyone else.
I’m a straight, white dude whose parents can financially support me when I need it shit’s hard enough as-is. To act like I don’t have serious privilege and like so many people don’t have it even worse than me…god I can’t even fathom that level of self-centered egotism.
I've got cousins who live in a house purchased by my grandparents. Pretty sure my uncle has always lived in places they've bought? His kids, college age, told me that they aren't privileged...
If someone hired someone provably less qualified that would be easy grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. The problem is actually usually the opposite. People from disadvantaged groups often have to work way harder and be way more qualified just to be treated equally in society.
DEI isn't about who we hire and fire specifically but about how we as a society of institutions act overall. People in DEI might review the hiring and firing practices more holistically as one part of their job. Possibly focusing on recruiting practices including all communities (who are you advertising the job to?), job descriptions being simplified and more honest to what is actually required (broadening who qualifies), training hiring and firing authorities about unconscious bias, etc. That enables them to follow the eeoc laws and truly hire people that are most qualified while having a more representative candidate pool, resulting in a more representative group of employees. When you're correcting your hiring practices to be more equitable, you don't need to hire people less qualified.
DEI would also be how they are treated once there, how the organization treats their staff in a fair and equitable manner. How current policies and processes can be changed to remove structural bias. How to best utilize a broad range of perspectives to improve your organization. For business often how you can include a broader range of targets to market to, etc. Analyzing the structure as a whole for institutional bias. That's all DEI.
The right has perverted the concept of DEI to make people believe unqualified people are landing positions when that's not what DEI is even there for.
The 1950s boom was built on two things. Subsidizing a middle class instead of corporate (awesome). And the notion that a mediocre white male was more valuable in any job role than a woman or a non-white male.
The 1950s was, in part, built on the backs of women sent home from jobs after the war to have those jobs taken by folks who may or may not have been less qualified, as it was based entirely on gender, and to lesser extent, color.
Woman’s minds were squandered. I encourage you to ask about grandma back in the day. How mean was she? How mentally I’ll was she? How many suicides or addictions occurred? The mean stories abound at this time for a reason. Alternatively there’s the paper thin personality-less woman who avoids anything even remotely confrontational.
Ask your family.
Equality before the law is introduced and a subset of men who don’t have coping skills for not having power over other human beings, lack capacity to stand as an individual, lose their collective shit.
Three things, don't forget that American companies got a lot of European contracts to help rebuild after WWII. There's too many people out there that ignore that influx of money and try to say the economic boom of the 50s was because misogyny and racism worked.
That's what it claims to mean, but that's frankly not how it was implemented.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion are fabulous ideals that result in better science that improves the lives of more people. If properly implemented, they create a better workplace ecosystem that better serves its employees and our nation/planet/community.
I wish that DEI programs didn't stand for Demonization, Exclusion, and Inequity.
It's the feel-good story that Republicans talk about when they say "pull yourself up by your bootstrap" but they're upset because that's only supposed to work for white men.
I find this opposition to DEI somewhat perverse since to my mind it has mostly been a tool to add some limited legitimacy to a cruel system devoid of humanity; it was there to wash away the more obvious biases of an unjust system.
To my mind to remove DEI is to accelerate the collapse of the West. It seems counterintuitive to me that the people who are pushing for this seem to be the ones with the most to lose from it.
That's the republican playbook. Do everything you can to destroy the government, and then point at the rotting corpse that's left as evidence that government doesn't work
I find this opposition to DEI somewhat perverse since to my mind it has mostly been a tool to add some limited legitimacy to a cruel system devoid of humanity; it was there to wash away the more obvious biases of an unjust system.
A Band-Aid solution to a complicate problem. They're removing the band-aid and letting an open wound.
To my mind to remove DEI is to accelerate the collapse of the West. It seems counterintuitive to me that the people who are pushing for this seem to be the ones with the most to lose from it.
They're bigots. Bigots often shoot themselves in the foot.
Even if you're against DEI in hiring (which I am), taking down pages of women in STEM is ridiculous. We want to encourage people to know what's possible and we want them to push for it based on merit
DEI is an attempt at merit-based hiring. The only difference is what the definition of merit is. The definition that is based on past achievements is biased towards those who have previously had better opportunities, not necessarily better skills. DEI takes a look at the potential of someone in the context of how well they've done with respect to what has been available to them.
Someone who has a GED instead of graduating high school on time might have had opportunities closed to them because they had a reason for dropping out of high school (e.x. had to help family by getting a job), so it wouldn't be equitable to judge them harshly for not having as strong of a resume as someone who had a "conventional" experience and was given more opportunities fresh out of highschool because they could afford to take an unpaid/low pay internship, instead of focusing on taking care of a family.
Nothing about either situation really can tell you about an applicants potential in the field or their work ethic or anything. But 9 times out of 10 the one who was fortunate enough to finish highschool on time will be ahead in the selection process for no reason other than they didn't have life get in the way of their career.
DEI won't be able to magically tell you which candidate is better, but it can allow employers to level the playing field and use different metrics to measure merit that might be less biased against people who have had nontraditional lives through no fault of their own.
I just wanna say I appreciate that you went into such detail to explain this. As somebody who's honestly a little dumb, this has always been something I struggled to understand but could tell I was missing something. It's nice to finally hear it in a way that makes sense to me.
The main reason I'm against "Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion in the hiring process" is it makes the average minority at a company worse compared to their white male peers, which is a horrible situation that breeds further racism.
My girlfriend is a visible minority in a STEM field. If people look at her and think "DEI hire", that's harmful, not helpful.
No. She is the one mentioning it, and I don't understand her point. She complains that no one knows her on Threads, because she moved from Twitter? Then @[email protected] 's comment is quite reasonable.
Do you suppose they would have received fewer downvotes if they rephrased their comment such that the first part conveys empathy and the second part recommends to try other platforms?
For this community yes, but I think the over-dramatising works against the wider acceptance of DEI practices. Most people have never even had an article written about them, those people still have personhood, so does this lady. From that perspective it comes off as entitled and decoupled from reality. Who wants to listen to someone acting unhinged on social media?
Obviously, removing the section is wrong, and we should have these articles to highlight the achievements of women in male dominated fields. Plus highlighting that it's been removed by the vile actions of the trump administration is important