New Year Reflections, Part II (A Further Discussion of DEI)

(Note:  In the December 9, 2023 post, "Year End Reflections, Part II,"  I discussed the evil of DEI.  This is a further discussion about that.)  As with many universities and businesses, Johns Hopkins Medicine has an Office of Diversity.  Heading the office is one Dr. Sherita H. Golden.  In the January edition of their Diversity Digest (yes, they have such a publication), Dr. Golden said this:  "In the United States, privilege is granted to people who have membership in one or more of these social groups identity groups:  white people, able bodied people, heterosexuals, cisgender people (you identify with the sex you were born with, i.e. almost everybody), males, Christians, middle or owning class people, middle aged people, and English-speaking people."

So then, what are we talking about?  99% of the population?  Won't the vast majority of people fall into one of those groups?  It's nonsense.  And what's the point?  Taking the first two groups, white people and able bodied people, I'll use myself as an example.  Am I white?  Yes.  Am I able bodied?  Not since age 15.  So, as between those those groups, would I be identified as 50% privileged and 50% non-privileged?  But what if my physical limitations have had a greater impact on my life than being white?  So, can we say then I am only 25% privileged and 75% non-privileged?  How would we even measure the impact of the two?  And what's the point?

I have good reason to believe that early in my career I was turned down from two different jobs for these reasons.  The first time was because I am Jewish.  So...I ended up at a firm run by Jewish attorneys and where I was very happy.  The second time was because of my physical disability issues, and was walking with a cane for years prior to my bilateral hip replacements.  So...I ended up at a firm that said they didn't care about that.  In fact, I had the two hip replacements while working at that firm, and they took care of me while I was off for two months each time.  And they paid my salary.  What's the lesson?  There are a-holes in the world, but there are plenty of good people also.   

Dr. Golden:  "...privileges are unearned and are granted to people in the dominant groups whether they want those privileges or not, and regardless of their intent."  Whether you want it or not.  Regardless of your intent.  Well, there is guilt by association for sure.  How should we punish you?

Dr. Golden subsequently apologized for her post, likely under pressure from the administration at Johns Hopkins Medicine.  The President and Dean issued a statement in which they "repudiate(d)" the statement by Dr. Golden.  And they added that the definition of privilege by Dr, Golden "runs counter to the values of our institution, and our mission and commitment to serve everyone equally."  Here are a couple of questions.  I would ask the President and Dean:  Are you serious?  What did you expect from a DEI office?  And I would ask everyone, how comfortable would you be getting treatment from Dr. Golden if you fall into one of her privilege categories?  And, depending on how much influence Dr. Golden has had on the other doctors at Johns Hopkins, how comfortable would you be there at all?  

In May of last year, the Pew Research Center issued poll results from people who work as employees.  56% said focusing on DEI at work is a good thing.  28% said it is neither good nor bad.  And 16% called it a bad thing.  Not surprisingly, more women (61%) than men (50%) thought it was a good thing.  Also not surprising was the difference between the races.  78% of blacks said it was a good thing, joined by 72% of Asians and 65% of Hispanics.  But a minority of whites, 47%, said it was a good thing.  

Also not surprising was the age gap, with 68% of those 18 to 29 saying the focus on DEI was a good thing.  56% of those age 30 to 49 agreed, but only 46% of those age 50 to 64 agreed.  In the 65 or older group (likely many were soon to be retired) the number went back up to 52%.  And, least surprising of all was the difference between the two parties.  Democrats and those leaning Democrat favored the focus on DEI by 78%.  Republicans and those leaning Republican - only 30%.  (Pew said the poll was taken of employees at companies with 10 or more people.  And the results for Asians consisted of only those who spoke English.)  

I would submit to my readers that Republicans came in with that low number because they actually believe in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King - that people be judged based on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.