Corporations, universities, and medical societies talk constantly about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). But the other side of inclusion is exclusion, and the two always go together.
According to a Twitter post, a 16-year-old girl complained about a naked man in the girls’ locker room. When not parading around naked, he allegedly sat on a bench in a woman’s bathing suit and watched the girls change. Or some would say that she did, since the person claims to identify as a woman, and therefore “she” is a woman and must be included in the girls’ locker room.
The girl making the complaint, however, is to be excluded from the girls’ swimming team and possibly punished in other ways. If she doesn’t like to have a man staring at her while she undresses, that is her problem and she can change somewhere else.
Is she telling the truth or just making up a story to get attention or to harm someone? What happened to the “believe the woman” mantra from the “me too” days? That used the archaic exclusionary definition of “woman.” Will this alleged trans woman culprit face any inconvenience?
We hear about the virtuous exclusion of people who wear MAGA hats, wrap themselves in an American flag while others wave the “Pride” flag, wear a cross, assert that there are two genders, or use the “wrong” pronouns. They can be kicked out of school, refused service at a restaurant, rejected for medical care, called vile names, denied the right to receive their diploma at graduation, or otherwise treated like an untouchable, a pariah, or even a “terrorist.” They can be excluded from polite society (“cancelled”). Parents who complain about pornography in school libraries at a school board meeting might even risk arrest. Prolife activists have even been excluded from normal life by being imprisoned.
“Diversity” refers to skin color or ethnicity, not to philosophy or opinion. The categories used by the U.S. Census Bureau for diversity measurements include Hispanic, non-Hispanic White, Black, American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, and Pacific Islander. To improve their diversity score, universities need to exclude some better qualified applicants who happen to be White or Asian in order to include more persons from the other recognized groups who may be less qualified. The U.S. Supreme Court decision declaring admissions policy based on race to be unconstitutional, some fear, may have a “chilling effect” on “racial justice.”
Most of the hundreds of racial or ethnic groups in the world are excluded from the special preferences called “equity,” no matter how disadvantaged they were historically or are now—e.g., Italians, Irish, and Eastern Europeans.
There are people that most of us would like to exclude from our lives—and from society. My list would include voyeurs, exhibitionists, child molesters, rapists, seducers and seductresses, trespassers, vandals, shoplifters, pornographers, drug and human traffickers, etc.—no matter how troubled their childhood or what race they are.
I certainly would like to exclude bullies. Not just the nasty kids who steal your lunch money, but the activists who demand that you not only include them but also approve of or even celebrate them and their behavior—no matter how immoral, dangerous, or repulsive it might be.
I want to include people who are respectful, punctual, orderly, honest, thrifty, loyal, competent, dependable, and diligent—regardless of race or ethnicity. Don’t you? Are these characteristics of “Whiteness”? Why isn’t it “bigotry” to assume that? There are millions of non-Whites who meet or exceed these expectations for decent people in a civilized society.
I want to exclude people who are vulgar, insulting, tardy, slovenly, dishonest, wasteful, unfaithful, untrustworthy, incompetent, disruptive, or lazy. Don’t you? There are millions of White people who fit that description. But it would be “discrimination” to exclude such a person if the person happened to be “diverse.”
I want children to be taught virtue and honor—not grievances. I want them to create a better world—not tear down the work of their imperfect ancestors and leave us with chaos. I want them to live in a world of ordered liberty with equal treatment under the law—not a world of censorship, snitching, arbitrary rules, and constant fear.
Our country is sharply divided into factions about what should be included and what excluded—what is good, and what is evil. The gap appears to be unbridgeable. Ultimately, everyone will have to take sides.
