Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) is getting called out on social media after she called out White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre a “DEI hire,” a term that many consider racist.
No, we don’t consider it racist. It is in fact racist, and in this case both racist and sexist. That is the entire point Boebert said it. Why else would she have used the term, indeed.
and in this case both racist and sexist.
Why else would she have used the term
Jean-Pierre is also LGBT.
Cool? But DEI is used as a stand in for the n word, it’s entirely about her race.
I assure you DEI is used as more than the n word
Some people might say that Boebert herself is a DEI hire, but that is not true. Uneducated, hate-filled dullards are not considered diverse candidates.
It’s a devaluing act, yes, but how is it racist?
She’s saying she only got her job because she’s black, that’s racist as shit.
How could it be devaluing? That is the point. That’s why she said it.
It’s devaluing, because Boebert named diversity as a reason to hire Karine, not her professional qualities.
You forgot the implication that black women couldn’t possibly be skilled or smart enough to be hired. Because they’re black. That’s the racist part. It’s devaluation stemming from racism.
It appears that Boebert has said that about particular women, not all of them.
So I wouldn’t necessarily imply racism here. Common devaluation - sure.
Bad chatbot. You can’t switch between sexism and racism without even attempting to connect the two.
Ok.
It appears that Boebert has said that about a particular
womenperson of colour, not all of them.
So I wouldn’t necessarily imply racism here. Common devaluation - sure.Is that better?
P.S. My first language is Russian, and we usually refer to a 3rd person by it’s gender. That’s why I defaulted with “woman” instead of more broad “person”.
you’re almost there… just explain what kind of diversity and you should arrive.
DEI is not racism (in theory). It’s a tool to fight one (in theory).
are you a bot? none of your comments seem to follow the one before
English isn’t my first language. Maybe that’s the case.
Because one, LB has no idea of the qualifications or hiring process involved. And two, even if she did, believing the DEI is not a requirement to overcome racism in hiring is continuing to empowering racism. It’s still a big problem, whether it’s impacted you or not.
Why is racist in qoutes?
Because if you don’t quote someone it sounds like you’re saying it and then you get sued
But she is a racist.
And that’s not a quote. That’s a “quote”
“Lauren Boebert” “called” ““Racist””
Truth is an absolute defense
It’s almost impossible for a public figure to win a defamation suit. Especially a politician.
Lawsuits are expensive as hell, especially for smaller publications
It is a journalistic standard.
Person is called “<quote>”
Does this work better for you?
Lauren “Racist” Boebert Outed as Racist.
Wouldn’t Boebert also fall under the DEI umbrella as a woman representing the trailer trash demographic?
No. She falls under the porn star demographic. Which isn’t a protected class.
Sex workers contribute to society, unlike Borbert
For a long while she was reducing the effect of pedophilia on her local community. Then she divorced him…
The funny thing is that, despite Boebert being racist about it, if the Biden administration hired her due to a lack of diversity in White House press secretaries, that’s a good thing.
Of course she doesn’t see it as a good thing, she thinks all the information a president puts out should be said by a white person.
There is a fundamental assumption among anti-DEI conservatives that there is only one Best Candidate for any job, one who conveniently looks like them. Anyone who look different, then, obviously can’t be the Best Candidate, so someone must have “tipped the scales” to get them in.
Diversity is important because it leads to better ideas, particularly in matters of public policy that affect everyone. I think it’s perfectly appropriate for a PR team to use, as one of its hiring guidelines, a goal to assemble people from different backgrounds, which will make everything they produce more relatable to the public. But since Conservatives don’t see the value in that at all, all they see is “They wanted to hire a black woman to tick a box”, not realizing the value that particular candidate’s lived experience brings to that team.
I don’t even think it’s that they don’t understand that a black woman can bring a different perspective than a white man. They just don’t think that perspective matters. Heteronormative white patriarchal Christian culture must be maintained at all costs.
They let other folks in now and then, as long as they play by the rules.
Just look at Clarence Thomas. By any measure, he is a smart man. Dude graduated from Yale Law school in the early 70’s when there were very few black folks there. However, major law firms did the same thing back then that Boebert is doing now, and assumed he just got into Yale due to affirmative action, to “tick a box”. Rather than blame the inherent racism at the time, he blamed Yale for admitting him in the first place. Which is bonkers, when you think about it.
Once he became a judge, he continued to work to dial back progress made in the 20th century, all because his fee-fees got hurt after law school. And the bribes, don’t forget the bribes!
No shit she’s racist. She’s a prominent member of the Racist Party.
Only for that?
Okay, cool. Shit heads can say “DEI” hire if other people get to call hiring a shit head cronyism or nepotism or bottom of the barrel hire. Like, we could have hired a talented person of color, but we’re racist so we just scraped the bottom to hire instead. Take your pick.
Racist sack of shit rat hellbent on destroying democracy for money that will be worthless by the time the country crumbles happens to be named “Lauren Boebert”
Do we think jeffw is the editor of lgbtqnation? They’re flooding the community with this source day after day. I’d’ve hoped @news had a higher standard… it’s not news that Lauren Bobert is racist.
Who is it the author says called her a racist? Nobodies on Twitter. We as readers need to respect our time and attention and downvote this junk food reporting. We owe it to ourselves.
I rely on 30+ sources. I do not work for any of them, although I (edit: pay to) subscribe to 3 or 4 (edit: NyTimes, WaPo, Philadelphia Inquirer, and Wired, if anyone cares). Every weekday, I ensure ProPublica’s work gets posted somewhere on Lemmy, that’s probably the only one I never skip.
I don’t alter site headlines and can’t force any outlet to write a better article. The news here is that Boebert said a racist thing. The low-quality journalism thing where they do the “what does twitter have to say about this?” isn’t really important.
Jeff! Your work is indispensable. Thanks for all you do.
deleted by creator
Who is it the author says called her a racist? Nobodies on Twitter.
That would only be because our media doesn’t have the balls to.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Bleep Bloop. When reading this source, please be critical. This source has been rated by MFBR as being of lower credibility. Report: Source detected: lgbtqnation.com, BSFR rating: bias: left, credibility: medium-credibility, questionable: []. Thank you for being a part of !news :D (this action was taken automatically)
deleted by creator
