Chris Brunet on X - "This week the only university in Newfoundland, @MemorialU, posted 5 tenured professor openings:
- AI-driven Navigation
- Computational Biochemistry
- Genomic Mapping
- Indigenous Knowledge
- Community Health and Substance Use
Each job stipulates that no white men may apply."
Jason Kenney ๐จ๐ฆ๐บ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ฑ on X - "1% of the male population of Newfoundland was killed in the Great War. Memorial University was given its name to be a living, permanent memorial to their sacrifice. None of those men, or those who served with them, would now be eligible to teach at the university named in honour of their sacrifice. DEI has gone too far for too long. (BTW, I wonder if the same discriminatory hiring practices apply to janitorial, food services, and facility maintenance jobs. Or does the unjust treatment only apply to "elite" tenure track positions?)"
Left wingers start off pretending that DEI is to ensure that anyone who is not a straight white man can get a job, but when you show them obvious and total racial and sexual discrimination like this, they either pretend not to understand it or immediately pivot to mocking white men for having a taste of what is supposedly their own medicine, or being whiners, or being too lousy to get a job
Dan Robertson on X - "On the first day of the Battle of the Somme, 800 (overwhelmingly “white heterosexual”) men of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment went over the top. 68 answered roll call the next morning. Now their male descendants can’t work at NL’s only university which was named in their honour."
Elizabeth on X - "Lots of people will point out "hey, you can just lie about your identity, everyone's doing it." (I love this self own for the whole project) but any man with a shred of self respect is gonna go "Why would I live and work somewhere that hates me?" as well as "What a horrible, mired and performative place that must be, no thanks." I know a couple of those verboten professors. After pounding the pavement a decade they've accepted excellent jobs at excellent schools in Istanbul and Athens. Our loss is their gain."
Time to gloat about left wing academics who are great "talent" leaving the US because they hate Trump
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms on X - "Memorial University says criticism of its “equity-only” job postings, which ban straight white males from applying, is “misinformation.” But the university admits that these “equity” targets are in place. It argues that they are not unique to Memorial, and that all universities receiving funding for Canada Research Chair positions must demonstrate progress toward nationally established equity targets. This is wrong. Governments and taxpayer-funded institutions should hire based on merit alone."
Wesley Yang on X - "It's "misinformation" when you publicize a fact that you are supposed to celebrate without celebrating it"
Air traffic controller shortage of 3,800 due to DEI practices: lawyer - "A critical shortage of 3,800 air traffic controllers is because of the Federal Aviation Administration’s DEI practices leaving a “gaping hole” in recruitment, a lawyer claimed to The Post. Over 1,000 would-be air traffic controllers were wiped out from consideration overnight because of diversity and inclusion hiring targets suddenly being implemented, according to the lead lawyer in a class-action lawsuit against the FAA. Michael Pearson told The Post his clients had completed all their training at FAA-approved institutions before they were placed in a direct hiring pool for air traffic controllers — as was standard at the time. Within months of graduating, they were informed by the FAA they would need to pass a new “biographical assessment” which, he claimed, awarded extra points to people with “no aviation experience.” “The FAA basically decided the students were too white and the schools too elite, so in 2013 knocked them off the preferred hiring list they had trained and worked hard to get onto — all because of their race,” Pearson claimed. According to the attorney, 95 percent of the previously qualified candidates he represents then failed the biographical assessment questionnaire — essentially a personality test — and were “screened out.” “They had the training and the passion and they were ready to be hired,” he said. The air traffic control issue was sharply brought into focus on Jan. 31 when an American Airlines passenger plane and a Black Hawk helicopter collided at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, DC, killing 67 people in the country’s deadliest aviation disaster in almost 25 years. The air traffic control tower was operating with 19 full-time staff, two-thirds of the 30 recommended by the FAA. Nationwide there are 10,800 air traffic controllers (ATCs), but 14,600 are needed to meet the current demand, according to the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. “The FAA engaged in staffing suicide. It takes two to five years to train as an air traffic controller and a long time to get these people through,” Pearson claimed. “Losing them meant a gaping hole was left in the ATC talent pool.” Simultaneously, a four-year near-freeze on air traffic controller hiring was also underway as the DEI policies were introduced, according to Pearson, a former air traffic controller and trainer. “The FAA, because of DEI policies, stopped hiring for three to four years and that directly correlates to the lack of staffing, and controllers being overworked and getting fatigued and burned out,” he told The Post. In 2018, the biographical assessment was “removed as a screening tool,” according to the FAA. “If the DC crash is determined to be linked to ATC fatigue or lack of awareness — it’s directly related to DEI — President Trump was right about that,” said Pearson... The FAA last year claimed it had more than 14,000 air traffic controllers after it was revealed that all air traffic control sites in the country were understaffed in 2023. However, that number includes around 3,400 controllers in various stages of training, the FAA announced at the time. While they hired 1,811 ATCs in 2024, the largest number of hires it had made in nearly a decade, it is still working to “reverse a decades-long air traffic controller staffing level decline.”"
We are still told that standards aren't lowered so there's nothing to worry about (even though we know "minority" pilots make a lot more errors and at least one activist shared exam answers. Anyhow, even if standards weren't lowered, hiring was slowed because of "equity". But of course, left wingers tell us that Trump scrapping DEI caused plane crashes so Trump is a murderer
Is Surgery Becoming Less Safe? - "I have been a surgeon for 38 years... I have never been more alarmed about the state of my profession than I am today... Every colleague whom I have spoken with has noticed the same thing: an alarming number of surgical residency graduates are unprepared for professional practice. The problem has only gotten worse... How could a surgeon have completed five years of training without learning how to do this? One of my colleagues heads a surgical residency at an elite medical institution and has served as his certifying board’s examiner for nearly 20 years, overseeing the certification of young surgeons. He has noted two changes during this period. First, many candidates for certification complete their surgeries slowly—taking, for example, seven hours to complete an operation that should take at most four. The problem is so widespread that some insurers have put a cap on anesthesia reimbursement for cases that take too long, even though it is the surgeon, not the anesthesiologist, who determines the duration of the procedure. Second, and relatedly, my colleague noted a rise in patients’ post-operative complications. This makes sense, since operating time is one of the determinants of surgical-complication rates. Additionally, he lamented that too many training programs fail to give residents adequate surgical experience. This has several potential causes: there may be too many residency positions for the available cases; some programs allow residents to list procedures that they merely observe as part of their surgical experience; and work hours for doctors in training have been reduced, giving them less time to learn. Another reason why the quality of surgeons and of surgery has declined: DEI in our medical and educational institutions. I have spoken to program directors in residency programs who say that they are afraid to correct, hold back, or drop underperforming minority trainees for fear of being reprimanded, accused of bias, or even losing their jobs. The American College of Surgeons continues to push DEI initiatives, ignoring or censoring anyone who disagrees. For example, ACS has implemented remedial training for graduate surgeons through “mentorship” programs. One challenge: finding enough experienced surgeons of the correct ethnic, racial, or gender identity to serve as mentors."
License Discipline Data Shows Racial Bias - "10 years of discipline data from the Medical Board of California shows a relationship between race and professional license discipline outcomes, so reports the California Research Bureau. Having conducted the research at the behest of the Medical Board of California (Board), the Research Bureau looked at the discipline imposed by the Board from 2003-2013. The Research Bureau analyzed 125,792 physician records and 32,978 complaint records to look for any evidence of disparate treatment for minority physicians in the Board’s disciplinary outcomes. Its research concluded:
Latino/a and Black physicians were both more likely to receive complaints than other races.
Latino/a and Black physicians were both more likely to see those complaints escalate to investigations than other races.
Latino/a and Black physicians were both more likely to see those investigations result in discipline than other races.
Asian physicians had a reduced likelihood of receiving complaints than other races.
Asian physicians had a reduced likelihood of seeing complaints escalate to investigations than other races."
Clearly, this is proof that there's a lot of racism against minority doctors, because we know that minorities are even better doctors than white people (despite having lower MCAT scores, because we know that test is structurally racist), because they had to battle so much racism to get to where they are
Canada’s first women’s wheelchair rugby championship in Montreal - "History is in the making with Canada’s first-ever women’s wheelchair rugby championship, and it’s a win that athletes say goes far beyond the game. At Complexe Sportif Claude-Robillard in Montreal, the sound of clashing chairs is a sign of resilience and for wheelchair rugby player Cory Harrower, the moment has been decades in the making... Wheelchair rugby was created in Manitoba in 1977. But according to the sport’s international governing body, the low number of female players made it difficult to have women’s teams at the time."
People were celebrating this as a big win, but I think this does not segment people enough. Montreal needs to host Canada's first Muslim trans women's wheelchair rugby championship.
Systemic Discrimination Among Large U.S. Employers - "We study the results of a massive nationwide correspondence experiment sending more than 83,000 fictitious applications with randomized characteristics to geographically dispersed jobs posted by 108 of the largest U.S. employers. Distinctively Black names reduce the probability of employer contact by 2.1 percentage points relative to distinctively white names. The magnitude of this racial gap in contact rates differs substantially across firms, exhibiting a between-company standard deviation of 1.9 percentage points. Despite an insignificant average gap in contact rates between male and female applicants, we find a between-company standard deviation in gender contact gaps of 2.7 percentage points, revealing that some firms favor male applicants while others favor women. Company-specific racial contact gaps are temporally and spatially persistent, and negatively correlated with firm profitability, federal contractor status, and a measure of recruiting centralization. Discrimination exhibits little geographical dispersion, but two digit industry explains roughly half of the cross-firm variation in both racial and gender contact gaps. Contact gaps are highly concentrated in particular companies, with firms in the top quintile of racial discrimination responsible for nearly half of lost contacts to Black applicants in the experiment. Controlling false discovery rates to the 5% level, 23 individual companies are found to discriminate against Black applicants. Our findings establish that discrimination against distinctively Black names is concentrated among a select set of large employers, many of which can be identified with high confidence using large scale inference methods."
Clear proof that without DEI, only straight white men can get jobs!
Meme - "DEI Requests in Applications for Faculty Jobs by Discipline Category
STEM 28.2% 2024 10.0% 2025
Social Sciences 29.2% 2024 14.6% 2025
Humanities 29.6% 2024 14.5% 2025
Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies 12.8% 2024 6.9% 2025
Percentage of Job Ads (%) source: heterodox academy"
So much for thinking the damage would be limited to the arts. But it's almost as bad. And the drop in 2025 isn't necessarily revealing a real change, just optics
John Carter on X - "Banning diversity statements doesn't accomplish anything. The ideologues are still entrenched, still sitting on faculty search committees. When they're legally prevented from requiring applicants to write formal ideological loyalty oaths, they just retrench to looking for the right signals in the rest of the application - the cover letter, the teaching statement, even the research statement. They can't tell applicants to include DEI verbiage, but they can quietly toss out every application that doesn't include it, and rely on applicants understanding without being told that DEI signaling is still necessary. It's exactly the same principle as not openly prohibiting white men from being hired, while quietly refusing to hire them. There is no regulatory or procedural fix to this problem. There is no way to fix it in the courts. The only way to correct it is with an absolutely ruthless purge of academic personnel. But that raises its own issue: not only are professors protected by tenure, but race communists are now so prevalent in their ranks that you'd have to fire nearly everyone, which is almost the same thing as closing the universities. Which is why the only real fix here is to go full Henry VIII. Dissolve the monasteries. Confiscate their endowments. Appropriate their intellectual property. Seize their real estate. Then use those resources to found new universities, with a savagely meritocratic and deliberately prejudicial hiring process that systematically excludes leftists. Tear down the Roman Catholic edifice and put the Church of England in its place."
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is tearing academia apart - "At UC Berkeley, for example, job candidates will receive a low scores on their diversity statements for “explicitly state[ing] the intention to ignore the varying backgrounds of their students and ‘treat everyone the same’”... DEI requirements for promotion and tenure often come in the form of evaluation criteria, rather than required statements. The California Community Colleges (CCC) system — the largest system of higher education in America, serving almost two million students — recently mandated that all faculty, staff, and administrator evaluations “include DEIA [diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility] competencies and criteria as a minimum standard for evaluating the performance of all employees.” The resolution mandating these competencies employs unmistakably ideological language. It defines “cultural competency” as “the practice of acquiring and utilizing knowledge of the intersectionality of social identities and the multiple axes of oppression that people from different racial, ethnic, and other minoritized groups face”. A college that codified these “competencies” would certainly dissuade faculty from expressing many widely-held political opinions — most obviously, opposition to affirmative action. Thus, the policy is likely illegal, running afoul of First Amendment law, which treats academic freedom as sacrosanct. Yet, from Arizona, to Utah, to North Carolina, such policies continue to be adopted and implemented. Indeed, far from any course correction, all signs suggest that DEI statements are breaking into uncharted territory. The Society for Personality and Social Psychology now requires DEI statements for submissions to its annual convention, asking reviewers to “Evaluate the extent to which the submission advances SPSP’s goal of promoting equity, inclusion and anti-racism”, while some academic journals are trying out diversity statements for paper submission. Soon, it seems, American academics can expect a choice: demonstrate a commitment to the “successor ideology” or start looking for another job."
From 2022. Anti-racism is just racism. Ditto with other left wing doublespeak
The ReidOut on X - "The number of Black American players in Major League Baseball has plummeted to just 6%, offering a warning about what can happen when institutions de-emphasize diversity. More on our #ReidOutBlog:"
Frank DeScushin on X - "Black kids have been leaving baseball for decades because they prefer basketball and football, and MLB is:
60% White 31% Latino 6% Black 3% Asian
That's quite diverse, but it's apparently not good enough because DEI's preferred group, the favored child, Blacks, are declining."
i/o on X - "The number of white male American sprinters competing in the Olympics 100 meters event has been zero in the last 66 years, offering a warning about what can happen if you just let people compete fairly on a level playing field.
Sure, we could put together population-representative Olympic sprint squads, if we wanted to — that is, if we wanted to suck."
Cynical Publius on X: "Active Duty Military and Social Media" / X - "An emerging issue amidst the Trump 47 administration is the wisdom of active duty military officers and enlisted stating their views on social media about political and military issues. Is this wise? The answer is, I think: “IT DEPENDS.” Personally, I would prefer a world where active duty military silently did their duty and followed the lawful orders of their chain of command in the same manner as if they had issued such orders themselves, without commentary. That would be a perfect world. But the world is not perfect, and it never will be. To understand this, let’s take a step back and examine the social media age since 2004 or so. The idea of active duty military opining publicly on politics did not start with Trump 47. No, it’s been with us for years and years and years, it’s just that no one in the Democrat/Media Complex saw things as being “political” until Trump took office. For years prior we were treated to active duty flag officers spouting wholly political slogans like “Diversity is Our Strength.” We had leaders across the ranks embracing highly politicized transgender ideologies. We politicized those high ranks so heavily that former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, GEN (Ret.) Mark Milley felt comfortable telling his counterparts in the Chinese Communist Party that he would alert them in advance of President Trump’s military decisions. This of course did not end with high-ranking officers—almost every installation, almost every unit, almost every public affairs office, almost every leader was quite comfortable publicly embracing the wholly political dogmas of DEI, on social media, in the legacy media, and in their private conversations. Politics were the norm in uniform, so long as those politics supported DEI and similarly “woke” concepts. (Did you ever stop to consider that every "month" our uniformed military was required to "celebrate" was just so much deconstructive, polarizing party propaganda pushed by zampolit officers and NCOs?) This was never tagged as being “political” because it represented agreement with the policies of the then-President and his ruling party, and the Democrat/Media Complex saw nothing wrong with those in uniform supporting the propaganda concepts of the day, because the D/M Complex AGREED with those concepts. Then the American people elected Donald Trump to transform the U.S. military back into a non-political, warfighting force committed to the Constitution and the American people first and foremost. To accomplish this, Pete Hegseth and his team needed to unravel DECADES of politicization in the ranks. However, Hegseth and other high-ranking political appointees need the help of the rank and file to support these depoliticization efforts. Enter soldiers like InfantryDort and Raise the Black , active duty officers who vocally support the transformational efforts of Hegseth’s team in restoring our military’s focus on warfighting. I follow both accounts closely (and others), and all they ever do is voice approval of their chain of command’s efforts to depoliticize the ranks and instead focus on being the world’s most lethal and effective fighting force. They also set the record straight with respect to media naysayers and MILBLOGDORKs who lie about what is transpiring (witness today’s article from The Atlantic alleging that judging troops based on their abilities is somehow discriminatory). Men and women like Dort and Black are not dabbling in politics. Instead, they are simply supporting their commander’s intent in a way that fends off lies and propaganda, and keeps the military focused on its core mission of closing with and destroying our enemies. To go back to the start of this short article, I wish this was not so. I wish we did not NEED active duty military to speak up apolitically for what is right and just. I wish. But the simple fact is that over the past twenty years the U.S. military has become so overtly political that it NEEDS a period of cleansing to restore it to its just, apolitical baseline. Think of it like chemotherapy—sometimes you have to engage in things you would rather not engage in so the cancer can be cut out. Defending your chain of command in its effort to depoliticize the ranks is not “politics”; instead, it’s a cleansing of politics from where it should not be. (And BTW, an active duty military member publicly speaking out in FAVOR of his/her chain of command is NOT THE SAME THING as an active duty military member publicly RIDICULING his/her chain of command; I’m not sure why this is so hard to follow for some people.) I hate politicization in the ranks. But vocally depoliticizing the ranks is a necessary antidote after years and years of deeply politicized leaders in uniform. That antidote? It’s not just Hegseth. It’s the brave men and women in uniform who saw what evils politicization wreaked during the earlier years of their careers, and now they fulfill their Constitutional oaths (in a manner wholly consistent with existing military service social media policies BTW) by speaking out against politicization on social media. Maybe at some point in the future we can restore balance in the ranks to where it once was—where you could go years and never know the politics of the guy or gal in the fighting position next to you. But we’re not there yet, so in the meantime the depoliticization effort must be vocal and strong, and we all owe a debt of gratitude to those in the ranks who stand in the fire of social media to defend what is right."
Cynical Publius on X - "My article below stirred up a lot of angst amongst the usual suspects. One of the craziest and most disingenuous arguments against what I wrote goes something like this: “U.S. military officers are smart enough, open-minded enough and well educated enough to have a meaningful debate on DEI and its applicability to the military, and it is pure, inappropriate politics to just say DEI is wrong and no longer acceptable.”
Bullcrap. For two decades (at least) the U.S. military had been fed the lies of DEI and expected to accept them WITHOUT QUESTION OR HESITATION. Challenging DEI while wearing a uniform was a certain path to charges of “racism” and “bigotry” and a GUARANTEED path to "do not promote” on an efficiency report. We were fed the lies of DEI the same way Soviet commissars fed the lies of Marxism to Red Army soldiers, and we were just supposed to take those lies good and hard, and never speak out. That’s not “open-minded discussion.” That shoving evil political orthodoxies down our throats. So to undo this, we don’t suddenly get to have “discussions” about the wisdom of DEI. Nope. Nope. Nope. We PURGE IT as the cancer it is, and we purge it in the exact same authoritative way it was shoved down our throats. Once the hate, racism, sexism and unconstitutional quest for “equity” of DEI is purged from the military, only then can we restore an apolitical baseline where “open dialogue” among “mature professionals” is possible. That’s the fact, Jack."
Aakash Gupta on X - "Let me explain exactly why parents pay $25,000 a year for youth sports their kid will never play professionally, because the math is more interesting than the headlines suggest. The $25K is buying admissions arbitrage at elite colleges. Run it both ways. Scholarship math first. The US has 8 million high school athletes. Roughly 7% play in college, 2% at D1. Total NCAA athletic scholarship spend is $3.6 billion across about 175,000 D1 athletes, mostly partial aid in the low teens per year. A family putting in $25K annually from age 6 to 18 spends $300K chasing a maximum return of about $80K. The expected value is a lottery ticket. Admissions math second. The SFFA v. Harvard trial disclosed that recruited athletes get admitted at 86%. The non-athlete rate sits around 5%. Even academically weak applicants jump to a 98% admit probability if recruited. A non-athlete with a 1397 SAT has roughly 0.08% odds at Harvard. The same kid recruited for crew has 70%+. The athletic hook is the largest single advantage in elite admissions, bigger than legacy or dean's list. Ivies don't even offer athletic scholarships. The value is purely the admissions ticket. This is what $25K buys. Year-round travel ball is the qualifier round for an admissions process operating on different rules than the one your kid's classmates compete in. The "country club sports" pipeline (squash, lacrosse, crew, fencing, golf) is a feature. Barrier to entry is the product. 90% of Ivy League squash players come from $30K-a-year private high schools. The math works because the alternative pool is small. PE arrived after the demand existed. Unrivaled Sports, Perfect Game, regional travel-ball roll-ups. Upper-middle-class parents had already turned youth sports into a class transmission mechanism. PE consolidated the supply chain and raised prices because the buyers were already there at $25K. $300K to convert a 4% admit rate at an Ivy into an 86% one. Plus the alumni network and pre-professional sorting that follows. That's the actual equation. The trade is rational at the top of the income distribution. Brutal everywhere else."
Rogue CFPB on X - "This is spot on. The day elite universities stopped focusing on grades and test scores for admissions and started focusing on demographics, was exactly the day the wealthy put their thumb on the scale through sports and the youth sports industrial complex was born. You can now largely guess which youth team will win if you know one data point; average household net worth"
The Rabbit Hole on X - "They turned against blind auditions because selecting people for talent did not produced the desired demographics."
University accused of 'anti-white discrimination' over scheme giving lower offers to Asian students - "Under a controversial new scheme, the University of Durham is lowering entry requirements for British Asians in popular subjects including psychology, law and politics. It is promising 'a guaranteed, alternative offer (typically two grades lower)' to state school pupils of 'Asian heritage/descent' who take part in a free summer school with accommodation, travel and food provided... Durham says the Asian Access programme, being run for the first time this year, 'aims to support students who are typically underrepresented in higher education and particularly at Durham'. But critics point out that Asian teenagers are already far more likely to get into university than those from other ethnic groups, with more than half of sixth-formers accepted. Official figures show that 51.4 per cent of Asian state school pupils across England got places in higher education in 2024, compared with just 29.8 per cent of white students. Only Chinese pupils had a higher rate of acceptance (66.1 per cent), with black pupils third (48)... Oxford was accused of 'social engineering' after figures showed it had taken 16 per cent of black applicants who had fallen short of their required A-Level grades in the past five years, compared with just 6 per cent of white candidates. York and Bristol are among other institutions that give 'contextual offers' to students from particular ethnic groups or from deprived backgrounds. Parents have complained that admissions officers wrongly assume that non-white candidates are disadvantaged. 'A lot of these students passed the 11+ entrance exam and have professional parents on high salaries,' one mother told The Times last year."
We're still told that DEI is about ensuring a level playing field for everyone
Time to mock white men who complain about this as racist, of deserving to know what discrimination feels like and that they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps
