I think that the least interesting and least important thing about me is the fact that my skin is brown. Rather, I think what is of more importance if we're looking at things of diversity, I'm blind. I've experienced a hell of a lot of discrimination surrounding that and a lack of accommodation and so on and so forth. Hello and welcome to a awake at the Wheel. So in today's episode, we're going to be revisiting the topic of DEI diversity, equity and inclusion. So in our previous episodes, we did speak about Scott Adams and some of the rhetoric that he has experienced as a result of some of the commentary he's made surrounding race and DEA and mental health issues and so on. One of the comments that he made was that DEA is self-harm. So he spoke a little bit about our thoughts on this. But just to summarize my view on that is I can see where he's coming from that a lot of these DEA initiatives are indeed harmful, but using the term self-harm is insensitive because there is such a serious implication clinically when it comes to self-harm. But we're going to explore a little bit more about why DEI is harmful and we're going to look at a video from the Google DEI leader who is talking about the issue that she takes with parents talking about or teaching their children to not see color. So this is something I think that before DEI was even a thing a lot of people would talk about, like I don't see color or color doesn't bother me, and so on and so forth. And I think people have been pretty divided on it. But this is a really interesting take. So let's start out by watching this video. In the year 2023. It also amazes me how many people are like, Well, I don't see color, or it would be so much better if we just didn't worry about someone's skin tone. You as an individual are contributing to the problem because our broader society sees color and it's not just physically seeing a color. There is so much more to it than just that. And if you don't understand that, you are again part of the problem and it's just to keep telling people that over and over. It's so frustrating. And I was just on TikTok and there's a trend where parents are teaching their kids not to see color, quote unquote. And I'm like, okay, so the next round of people that are going to be joining our workforce, this next generation are going to be dealing with the same issues that we're dealing with now because to say you don't see color, you don't see me, you don't care to acknowledge the struggles that people like me face. And we're not looking for problems. We're not, you know, like. Okay. So I'll start and preface heavily here with I'm not trying to be insensitive, but I'm not commenting on this woman in particular and anyone who's not watching us on YouTube and listening to audio only. I am a woman of color, so I feel like I have a leg to stand on with this. First of all, I don't think she really said anything of substance in that video. And yes, it was a snippet of a larger video and perhaps the context wasn't captured. But that aside, as a person of color, I think that the least interesting and least important thing about me is the fact that my skin is brown. Rather, I think what is of more importance if we're looking at things of diversity, I'm blind. I've experienced a hell of a lot of discrimination surrounding that and a lack of accommodation and so on and so forth. So if we're going to, you know, pick and choose what areas of my diversity are important, I'll throw that out there. But with this whole I don't see color thing and that being problematic in the view of this woman, I really think that it just feeds into this race obsessed narrative that our society is so, so entrenched in and so focused on that. To say that the color of our skin is the most important thing. So I think that's essentially what she's saying and the most problematic thing is problematic in and of itself. I just I really fail to see where she's coming from with this. And I will add that, of course, there are certain struggles that certain groups experience. We do need to be aware that there are cultural differences that may influence our behavior, may influence our psychology, may influence the way that we conduct ourselves in everyday life. That's fine. And that acknowledgment is fine and healthy and helpful. But going to this extreme is extremely unhelpful, right? And yeah, of course, we see color. You know, it's evolutionarily revolutionary, designed to see differences in group outgroup. No, we see that. But, you know, we don't have to act on it. We don't have to, you know, determine that because someone is of a different color. They can't be part of my group or I can't be part of their group or why do they even have to be groups? Forget that. You know, why can't we just, you know, connect as people? So, yes, we we can't ignore certain things. I can't ignore that you are a woman. And again, if you're a woman of color, you're all register with me potentially. Okay. But the registering doesn't have to actually, you know, mean anything. Right. So at least on a conscious level. And that's where the all this implicit bias and the implicit association task test that was proven to be a complete sham and doesn't work at all. But still, somehow my unconscious biases, I need to be able to address them and so on. And so, yeah, we all have unconscious biases about a plethora of things. Right. And to assume that, you know, that somehow it's affecting us in our conscious actions. And by the way, even if it does, to assume that it has a hugely negative impact, it might influence my my thoughts, my behaviors by 0.0001%, as it would a million other things about you or about the circumstance or whatever. Right. But people like her. And again, we're not picking on her. We're talking about the things that she's saying. Right. They're saying that, no, if you don't see what she said, if you don't see my color, you don't see me. You don't see the problems I have. Well, I know many black people who have taken umbrage with that kind of statement saying, no, I was raised in privilege. I had a great time and a great life to parents publicly. So to make all these assumptions that because of the color of my skin, somehow I must have faced adversity, that someone who, you know, doesn't have the same color, someone who's white, who may have been raised in poverty or by a single mother, but who had some tragedy in their life, to assume that by default I must have had it worse than them. That in of itself is racist. And so many people say this. And how people cannot see that to me baffles the mind. Yeah. And I think that putting that label on oneself to use Scott Adams terminology, that is self harm, you're putting yourself purposefully in a disadvantaged position by assuming that, like she said, you know, if you don't see the color of my skin, you don't see me To imply that that's a negative thing. Like it's almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's so such a bizarre place that we found ourselves in, in society with again, this like hyper focus on race and the importance of it. So I think that what that then leads into is this high level of divisiveness and nervousness that comes from being part of different groups, like you said, or and you you can obviously see that I am a female and that I am a person of color, and that's fine. But that doesn't and correct me if I'm wrong, but that doesn't impact the way that we communicate or engage and, you know, whatever. But yet and I'm having a very hard time formulating the thought here because I don't want to be rude and insensitive and insulting and dismissive. But it's not as big a deal as people seem to think it is. Right? Yeah. Know, I mean, if someone asked me know about my colleague, my boss, my co-host, you know, some her like the color of your skin, your blindness, you know, your sex, none of that would come up. I mean, if it might come up in some kind of other context. But those are not the first things I would be saying. None of that and I hate to be cliche, but I'd be talking about, you know, the things that you say, the things that you do, you know, your character mean. That's what I'd be talking about. Those other things are irrelevant and they're only relevant if there's something specific. If I'm saying, well, you know, she invited me to go for a drive and I was like, Well, I know I'm going to be the one driving that might be thing, right? She might be right. And yeah, so and this is a genuine response. That's not offensive to me, right? This is the thing is that everyone is so sensitive about these things now that I feel like somebody else listening to that or receiving that commentary, like, I can't believe that that he would say such a thing. Right. Exactly. And but kind of it's the first thing I ever said to you. And we didn't know each other. And that would be talked to a different story. Right. Exactly. Yeah. Right. So and again, now, by the way, if you and I were talking about something and your sex was relevant, then yes, we would talk about it. But again, it doesn't define you. There are times when you if you and I are. Well, you know, I would think that the biggest difference between us when I think about like professionally or about our podcast would be the religious background, for example. Right. It doesn't define you, but when we're talking about relationships and, you know, and values and so on, that's a difference and that's where it's relevant cause we know where it's coming from. Right. But, you know, but I don't just think, well, she's religious, therefore I make all these assumptions. No, it's again, it's context specific. And that's how critical thinkers are. Just normal people are supposed to function. It's not the be all, end all. I don't see everything to the filter of color, of skin or sex or religion. Yeah. Yeah. But back to Scott Adams in this topic of of race and some of the commentary that he's made, we'll share it on YouTube. But for those listening, I'll just describe what this comic is. So it's a four frame comic. The first frame is a male with dark skin, and the caption is, It is not okay to be white. The next frame is Dilbert. And he's saying, Well, if that's how you feel, then I don't want to be around you. Seems like a logical thing to say. Dilbert White Frame three is this person with a frowny face. Frame four is in capital letters. Well, that's racist. So I really liked this comic because I feel like it really illustrates the point that we're trying to make here, where there's been this hyper focused surrounding race and divisiveness and what it means. And you can't say certain things and you should feel a certain way and black versus white, like it's just it's so crazy. And it's I have said this in other contexts as well. There's so much else wrong with the world right now and the fact that this is what we're spending our time and energy on is crazy to me. And the fact that we're calling something like that scenario racist is crazy because there is actual racism. I'm not denying the fact that there's real racism, but we can't call everything racist. And in fact, in doing so, we're minimizing the severity of racism. Right. And we've talked before. It's the same as you can't call everything, let's say rape. You can't call it like when you do that, you are meant as you say, you're minimizing and it's denigrating to the people who have actually experienced real racism, for example, or real adversity. And so, you know, right now he's been making the rounds, and I think he's a really interesting voice to listen to because he is very intelligent. He composed himself so well. And the reason I'm saying he already comports himself so well because he went on The View and had to deal with a bunch of, I can't even think of words to use. But as Coleman Hughes, he was on Joe Rogan recently. But yeah, you made all the waves for going on The View. And you know, his book is about you know, about I forget the name of the book was about racism and what it is and what it is and how this hyperfocus on racism is, you know, destroying society. You know, and and again, they tried to mischaracterize him and just attribute things to him that that are not true. And he handled himself so well. So anyway so he's because I know people talk about Thomas all they talk about my gosh, I'm blanking. There's a bunch of names that I just hate when that happens. But they're a bunch of names that people use. But Coleman Hughes is younger. He's a fresh, new voice, and there's a lot of people online who are doing for likes and clicks. I'm not going to assume Coleman's motives, but it doesn't come across in this brash or hyperbolic way. He's just so effective in communicating these points and he brings up the stats and he brings. And as a black man himself, you know, he can say, you know, here's what I've experienced, but I don't let it define me and so on. So I hope people more people will listen to reasonable voices, too. So when he talks about DUI and all the harm that it's causing and why it's almost it infantilize his people, right? It's saying if you belong to this particular group, well, you deserve special treatment. You deserve not to be held accountable. You deserve to have standards lowered because we believe that just because you belong to issues cottage, we belong to this group, Right? We believe that you're, you know, inadequate or you don't measure up to the standard, the standard being the white straight male. And again, and that's just so insulting. And I've said it before, anyone who doesn't understand how insulting that is to anyone in these groups that quote unquote, groups, I just I can't fathom how they wouldn't. And unfortunately, a lot of people, they embrace that because and I know we'll talk about this in another podcast, but this is the first time that I know of in modern society where victimhood is celebrated, that you get ahead by being in this, being a victim. And again, I know we'll talk more about that in a different podcast, but that is one of the most pernicious effects. Number one. Number two is, again, if you're being told that you need all these special accommodations, you need the special treatment, because, you know, 50% or more of society hates you, despises you, do things badly of you, wants to do a harm to you. What do you think it's doing to the mentality of these people? And if I'm an adult and I'm hearing all this stuff bad enough, but if I'm a child and I'm being raised in an education system, that that's all that they're promoting. And we know that for a fact that people claim, no, it's not being taught in school. Yes, it is. Teachers are being taught through the lens of either being every institution, you know, is being taught that you have to ascribe to it. You have or subscribe to it, sorry, you have to promote it and you have to swear fealty to it. Right. And again, that's bad enough as adults, but children are getting this crap. From the earliest of ages now. Yeah. And I want to touch on something that you said earlier to the recipients of this, let's say myself included. It doesn't feel good. It doesn't feel good that all of these other things about me that are interesting and unique and skilled and so on don't receive nearly as much focus as these areas of perceived adversity. And the fact remains, even though I have these perceived adversities, I also lived a life of and do live a life of great privilege. I had wealthy parents growing up. I do well for myself financially as an adult. I've been able to afford the means to be able to work around pretty much anything that comes along with my disability. So to place me in this category of being oppressed is inaccurate, and frankly, that is insulting. And to add to that, too, you mentioned it was either in this episode or a previous one that people often fear then that they were the diversity hire or they're only in X, Y and Z position because of their diverse characteristics. I'm not going to lie. That feeling has come over me many, many times, and I know how skilled and talented and whatever. I don't want to get a big head here, but I know that I'm a skilled individual and I know that that's what's gotten me to where I have. But I can't shake that feeling of, well, with the climate the way it is these days, people probably who don't know me do think, well, you know, she probably only got here because fill in the blank And that's that's a shitty feeling right. And we spent how many years decades trying to make sure that that's not you know, again it's since the fifties and sixties especially so much effort made to see people, you know, based on their character, based on their abilities, based on their behaviors. And, you know, and this merit based, that's what we're supposed to see, that she accomplished these things because she has all these great qualities with so many years in the last decade and a bit it's being totally eradicated. That perspective of, you know, again, who what who is she and what has she done versus what are some features of her. That's how we're going to judge her. Yeah. And we had on our podcast, David Millard Haskell, who did some research surrounding this and surrounding the effectiveness of DTI. And he got a lot of flak and I encourage people to go back and watch that episode he'll talk about, or he does talk about his research in quite a bit more detail. But the general gist of it is that his findings were that these DTI initiatives well-intentioned initially, but the execution resulted in causing more harm than good and didn't actually accomplish what it set out to. And a lot of his findings were similar to the things that we're saying here, where it caused people to focus on the wrong things. It removes the focus on merit, which that's a super unpopular topic these days that how dare we talk about merit? But that's the way that our society has run for so long. And where there are inequities, of course there were, but not to the degree that DTI wants us to believe that there was. Right. And any society that's not, let's say, based on merit and, you know, it can't it can't proceed because then what is the motivation to work hard and to try to succeed? And people will say, well, that's now you know how you say black people feel because no, they know for fact that no matter how hard they try, they're still going to be second class citizens. They still won't be able to do A, B, C, and D, and they're speaking about an America or a Canada or some other country that maybe existed hundreds of years ago, you know, but over the past number of centuries and decades in particular, that that has changed. And then when whenever people bring up statistics and they say, you know what? You know, when you look at in Canada and the states, when you look at bi racial or ethnic or cultural group, right, there are a number of different Asian groups, whether it's Chinese, whether it's Indian, whether it's South Korean, these groups do better than the whites. Okay. So then so it's not just about the color of your skin being a handicap. And people say, well, they didn't have the same adversity. Well, a lot of people came from countries that there was more adversity than you can ever imagine. Communist China, you know, North Korea. My dad's story is like that typical immigrant story. We had $0.02 in his pocket and built his wealth on his own. So don't tell me that there wasn't adversity. Right. And again, and we've talked about in other podcasts, that's what we're supposed to be promoting, saying and I hate to say it, going to sound like a jingoist, but the American dream, the American dream may not be as as wonderful as it's claimed, and there's a lot of problems with it. So you need the nuance, but the reality is the most important thing about the American or the Canadian dream, which is why people come here, is if you try hard, if you make the right decisions, if you show good judgment, you can succeed. It doesn't guarantee it, but you have that opportunity. And we're teaching children from the youngest of ages. No, you don't. No matter what you do, you'll never get ahead. So let me share a story. I'm kind of evaluating here, if I should share it in this episode or the one about victimhood, because I think it ties into both. But I think that the point that I'll illustrate with this story is the fact that this guy focused this focus on one adversity is better than the other or more important than the other, and so, so on has resulted in a great sense of entitlement, at least in my observation. So let me share this story. And it's funny because I feel like the last story that I shared was also at the airport. Lots happens at the airport because I like to travel, I guess. And this is where things happen. But in any event, so because of my visual disability, I take longer to board. I need to be able to understand my surroundings a little bit more. I need help from my family to find my seat. Long story short, I need a bit more time so I am eligible for pre-boarding and it says it on my boarding pass says Blind. And of course my family can accompany me because I can't find my seat if they're not with me. Right. So we're in Jamaica. We're getting ready to board and there's a lineup of people behind us as well. But being the punctual individual that I am, we were first in line. So it's time to start boarding. And me first, my husband behind me, my son behind him start proceeding. And there's people in wheelchairs and with other disabilities who are also doing pre-boarding. And this woman and I don't know if this is relevant, so forgive me if it's not, but she was a woman of color. She was somewhat belligerent in her way of speaking, but she was accompanying accompanying somebody who was having a hard time walking. I can't remember if he had a cane or if he had a walker. But in any event, it was very clear he had a visible, visible disability where he wasn't able to walk. So we perceive or walking, walking, walking. And this woman loudly yells at my husband and said, We need to get up there before you guys. Not everyone's privilege as you are. And we obviously all turned around and I muttered because I was just so taken aback. I'm like, Yeah, I need to pre-board as well. I'm not going to give her an explanation. She doesn't deserve an explanation with that type of behavior. But my point in sharing the story is that the level of entitlement that this woman had, that she and her partner were somehow more important and more deserving of this pre-boarding than I was, even though she couldn't see the fact that I have a very debilitating disability. I'm not going to make assumptions here, but based on my observations of the situation, it doesn't appear that this partner of hers lived with a disability his entire life. It looked like this was probably something that was acquired later in life. I won't get into details as to why, but that was my observation. So again, to assume that I'm perfectly fine and don't need this and have privilege it, it's just such a strong illustration of the entitlement that has arisen from all of this. Yeah, and you know, in previous podcasts we've talked about this, that if you'd and you know, I'll hearken back to Scott Adams, he says the same thing. It's not about anyone's race, it's not about sex, it's not about anything else. If you tell a particular group that you are omnipotent, basically you're untouchable, right? You're deserving of of an elevated status in any group or society or something like that. Anybody or the vast majority will, you know, will become entitled, as you said. Right. Not everybody, but the vast, vast, vast majority of people will. Right. So what do you think you're doing? And again, and if you're telling this to children, you're raising a bunch of not literal but colloquial narcissists because it's all about you. Your needs are are the most important and you're allowed to treat others the way that you want. Because, again, you've had all these hardships your ancestors have or something like that. And again, it's not just about and again, it's the double. There's two sides to it. It's again, not just that you've had all this adversity and so on or your ancestors have or whatever, okay, therefore you get it. But it's also that the people across the aisle, they are your oppressors, they are the colonizers, they are the whatevers, right? They're the harmful people. And again, when you're taught that us and them type of thing, that is more like and then as I said at the beginning, we are wired to see us versus them in group outgroup. We're wired to see that that's in our DNA, but it doesn't have to be so prominent. It's just it's, you know, it's our setting, the default setting. But the I proponents, they're putting that setting on. They're turning it up to 11. Right. And that's the problem. They're taking the human condition and they're making it much, much worse. They're exacerbating all the bad things about us. And again, we spent decades, decades, you know, trying to minimize that, never going to eradicate it, but trying to minimize it. It's all being wiped out with the right. And this should go without saying. But I obviously feel compelled to say this. Obviously, there are people who need to be accommodated. Obviously, there are adversities that require additional help or attention or whatever. We're not, you know, dismissing that. But again, just that the excessively heavy emphasis on all of this is what is harmful and what is problematic. Right. And one other thing, Scott Adams is not the only person that's going to be the thing to take or make of the drinking game or ignore game of the day. But but he has said as well, and according to Scott Adams, he's the only one who says this and it's hyperbole, but he's not the only one. The I've heard many people say this if you are forced if DEA forces a company, a school, you know, a government to pick a certain proportion of people, you know, to be that, you have to have this representation. If you have, let's say there has to be ten or 20% or something like that. The fact is, if you're forced to do that, well, the pool from which you're selecting the people is limited. So at first, yes, the best people are going to be chosen and then the pretty good people and so on. But at a certain point, all the best people are going to be gone. And now you're picking from the mediocre to the worse and you're being forced to do so. There's only a certain number of people who are available or who are applying for the job or have the qualifications. And again, by definition, almost by by design, virtually by design, you are guaranteeing that you're going to have more unqualified people or of people who would have been disqualified even if they have a talent, but for other reasons, maybe personality factors and so on. And I know I said this in a different podcast, but I've lost track of the number of patients who have told me I'm not going to single any quote unquote groups. Right. But they have told me that there are certain people in their company or in their school or wherever else it is, you know, who are real troublemakers. They have horrible attitudes and they're abusive and so on. And okay, let's just say there are many abusive straight white males. Yes, there are. So I'm not saying that straight white males are the answer, but the fact is they are, again, for the reasons I've just mentioned. Well, actually, no, it's either possibly that they were already this way. And again, they would have normally never been hired. But you have to choose a certain number of people that's demanded. So you take them all right. And the pool is pretty shallow. Or once again, once they're in that position, they are made to feel that they are untouchable. Then the power goes to their head. And once again, I'll say one more time. So no one tries to misconstrue what I say. Any single person put in that position. There's a high, high, high probability, regardless of any other aspect of their character or the color of skin, etc., etc., they are going to act a certain way. It's very predictable and this is got out of frame. Okay. Design is destiny, okay? If you set up a system that way you guarantee the OR you almost guarantee the outcome. Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, not that we're going to dismantle the system and rework it from the ground up, but, you know, my main observation of the problem with the way things are with DTI right now, aside from the fact that there's research that supports that, it just doesn't work. I think that people would be better served by having less mandated but a better understanding of the differences between people, how to properly accommodate people, how to have a stronger degree of empathy that would serve society much better than these, like hard and fast rules and regulations and frankly, exclusions of other groups. Exactly. And there would be far less resentment if I'm forced. And again, it's even and it's not just what they're being forced to to observe or to review in that training. In that information, there is either an implicit or an explicit statement that you are the problem. Therefore, you must. Okay. It's very different if I'm told, you know what, there are people who are different from you. Okay. And maybe you might consider A, B and C, okay, great. As you say, that's just, you know, a bit more mindful compassion. And so they will look into it more. But if I'm told you must do that because you're a scumbag, because of the color of your skin or whatever else like that, do it, you piece of shit because you are destroying the world. Yeah, I'm going to resent everything about that. Yeah. It's so counterproductive. It is. And as you mentioned, one of our guests previously showed that the research is clear. It's it's been demonstrated clearly. It's unequivocal. It is beyond counterproductive. It's destructive. Yeah. Yeah. So to our listeners, what do you think about DTI being harmful? Do you agree with us? Do you disagree? Do you have other observations? Let us know what you think in the comments. And on that note, until next time, keep your eyes on the road and your hands upon the wheel.