It used to be that we strove to judge people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character, but we’re way beyond that now.
“Princeton Introduces ‘Diversity’ Search Filter for University Vendors,” by Aaron Sibarium, Washington Free Beacon, August 9, 2022:
Princeton University has created a “supplier diversity” tool that allows staff to search for vendors with “diverse attributes,” part of a multiyear plan to inject diversity quotas into the school’s procurement process.
The tool, a screenshot of which was circulated on social media, lets users exclude suppliers outside a boutique cross-section of identities. A department buying office supplies, for example, could restrict its search to businesses owned by LGBT African Americans, Native American veterans, or “Asian Pacific American” women, among other combinations.
The tool is available to all Princeton faculty and staff, the university’s Office of Finance and Treasury said in a November newsletter. It came online after Princeton pledged in April 2021 to direct 10.5 percent of its expenditures to “certified diverse firms,” according to a procurement plan posted on the school’s website.
Princeton University declined to comment for this story….
At Princeton, these trends have fueled the growth of an already massive bureaucracy, creating new jobs for diversity apparatchiks on the Ivy League campus. The school announced in May that it had hired Michelle Thomas—formerly a contract officer at the Federal Bureau of Prisons—to be its “associate director for supplier diversity.” Thomas oversees the implementation of the procurement plan, which calls for Princeton to “engage a diversity advisory firm to assess program effectiveness.” Success will be gauged, according to the plan, by the “proportion of total purchases that are made from certified diverse businesses,” meaning businesses “at least 51 percent owned and operated by minorities, women, veterans, or members of the LGBTQ community.”
somehistory says
Quoting Charlie Brown: “Good grief.”
Ex Sgt Brown says
+1
Check Burry says
Sounds rather discriminatory to me.
somehistory says
The laws on discrimination only apply these days if one is White and doesn’t claim any special *things* as *facts* about them selves. If one is of a special category, they are beyond being able to discriminate against another, and any rule applied to keep them ‘special” is not discriminatory against the normal “non-special” person.
gravenimage says
Yep.
SKA says
Used menstrual rags from lesbians makes better pulp for paper?
gravenimage says
Hispanic lesbian paper company wanted: Princeton introduces ‘diversity’ filter for vendors
………………………………..
Grimly not surprised–the government has been doing this kind of thing for decades now.
The engineering company my husband works for is run by a fine engineer–who is also Chinese-American. While the company is ultimately picked for the quality of their work, they are often only in the running because they are minority-owned.
I formed a graphics company in the 1990s, and a city employee at the library where I was volunteering counseled me to just list myself as owner and not myself and my husband, even though he occasionally helped on projects. Why? Because the city would favor a company that was 100% woman-owned. The library wanted to use me anyway because they liked my work, but knew there would be little chance of my getting any of my bids approved if the company was just 50% woman-owned and not minority.
All very depressing.
Emilie Green says
Just wait until for the demands to be judged by a jury of one’s peers.
“I demand a jury of non-binary, left-handed people with facial tattoos and purple hair who are between 50 to 60 years of age.”
Feel free to add your own qualifiers.
mortimer says
They are wasting the money of people who pay for the university or donate money to it.
It’s not the race of the provider, it’s the value of goods and services that counts. The board of directors should shop around for the best value for the university’s dollar. Not to do that is irresponsible, and in this case, stupid.
Either goods and services are good value for money or they are not good value. If they are not good value, then call someone else. Even uneducated people know that.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, this sounds like merit. Don’t you know that the idea of merit is intrinsically racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and colonialist? sarc/off
somehistory says
OT’
There was a story some months ago…or at least, weeks about Canada and people being euthanized.
this is from today LA Times
“Experts troubled by Canada’s euthanasia laws”
The example they give right at the outset is horrible. What they are doing to the disabled is ghoulish, to say the least.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/experts-troubled-by-canada-s-euthanasia-laws/ar-AA10zgRA?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=c351c2e5590f497b8d77ac5e4627bb
gravenimage says
*Deeply* disturbing, Somehistory. He was euthanized due to *hearing loss*? There are many happy, fulfilled people who are completely deaf. I am far from deaf, but due to a series of severe ENT infections as a child I suffered some hearing loss. I would not look forward to losing my sense of hearing, but I certainly would not ask to be euthanized even if I lost it all.
This fellow sounded as though he was suffering from depression. A prescription for Prozac and a few visits to a good therapist would have been better than killing him off.
When I first heard about state-approved euthanasia I was concerned, but thought it *might* be a good thing for the few terminally ill people whose pain cannot be controlled with painkillers. But everywhere this has been tried it has quickly devolved into questionable and just plain evil practices–in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Canada.
Getting rid of the elderly, of people with dementia, of people with serious but not immediately life-threatening diseases like MS, of mentally ill and just despondent young people.
For instance, there is a dementia patient who had to be drugged and restrained by her “doctor” who killed her. A woman was euthanized because she was still grieving the death of her husband after 12 months. A child who had been raped and abused was euthanized because a couple of years later she was depressed and anorexic.
Just evil stuff. As warranted as euthanasia might be in a few cases, it is too obviously a slippery slope to be a moral policy.
SKA says
Since the COVID19 plandemic (insidious plague with only a 99.7% survival rate) became the pretext for a surge in the grasp of the authoritarian state covert euthanasia has become routine: Britain eliminated thousands of its pensioners by administering Midazolam (a respiratory depressant) to elderly COVID19 patients. Fauci demands that publically fund hospitals administer Remdesivir (57% fatality rate) to COVID19 patients. And why the emphasis early on in vaccinating people over 65? Euthasia is cool if you keep it covert.
James Lincoln says
Yes, gravenimage – you made some excellent points.
Bottom line:
A very slippery slope.
Andrew Blackadder says
So the top people in various Universities are exercising their white privilege by letting everybody know that they personally are not at all racists and that they realize those without that privilege are way to stupid to be equal to those who have that privilege because they feel racism is bad and as Old Joe once said that poor kids (black) are just as smart as white kids.
By jove I think Ive got it.
tgusa says
You don’t really need to wonder what princeton administrators are doing behind closed doors. Yuck and creepy but not necessarily in that order.
Infidel says
Can I start a paper company, self-identify as a Hispanic lesbian (although I’m actually neither Hispanic nor a woman nor homosexual) and apply for this gig? 😈
tgusa says
Better yet. Open up a paper recycling company and wear some underwear on your head (and nothing else), male of female, however you feel at the time and you will get the contract. Color doesn’t matter, you can identify as a white Hispanic a brown Hispanic or a black Hispanic or even a green Hispanic. The absolute must is to portray yourself as completely nuts so focus on that.
tgusa says
I have a friend who is a nurse that moved from a nice several acre mountain property in Colorado to a new location in the state. Took a new job at one of those smaller clinics you see these days. She wrote me a letter, freaking out. She doesn’t know what to call anyone fearing complaints. Mr. Mrs. Miss, Dude, Chick, doesn’t matter. So to avoid any issues she just calls the next patient by saying, hey you.
somehistory says
The last name works.
tgusa says
Good idea but, NO. Not an option. Some want the be called by their specific pronouns and she never can tell who that might be. Scary. Can you imagine? I can.
somehistory says
I’m sorry she’s in that position. I wouldn’t do it. I’d say, freedom of speech and if they want to be called a specific ‘pronoun’ then they need to tell her first, and also, they are stupid. the court…the supreme guys, have said to force someone to call another by something like that is violation of the freedom of speech.
Every doctor I’ve ever seen, had staff that called me by name. this has been for decades if not centuries, and it has always worked. Not that i personally have been around that long, haha.
Infidel says
Or just address that person by its full name. Leaves no room for any pronouns
Incidentally, he/she/zie… is only applicable if one is talking about the person in question in third person. If I’m addressing you, tgusa, or somehistory, I’ll only be addressing you as “You” or by your names. Even if, hypothetically, you did choose a pronoun, in English that pronoun would be for the third person, since our linguistic overlords have yet to replace ‘I’, ‘You’ and ‘We’ w/ any gender specific words. Maybe they should have filled in their ‘zie’s and ‘zim’s and ‘zer’s as replacements for ‘I’ and ‘You’ 😈