The mania is spreading to the boardroom.

submitted by Finnegan7921 from (self.GenderCritical)

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/02/nasdaq-requirements-erase-women-require-companies-to-hire-directors-who-self-identifies-as-female/

Right wing source, obviously, but just b/c the messenger is an asshole doesn't make what he is saying any less true.

all 6 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]forwardback 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In a Monday press release, Nasdaq announced that it had “filed a proposal with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to adopt new listing rules related to board diversity and disclosure.”

Still time for a flurry of letters to protest these changes??!!

The rules would require the companies to “publicly disclose consistent, transparent diversity statistics regarding their board of directors” and require the Nasdaq-listed companies to have “at least two diverse directors” or provide an explanation as to why they do not. Criteria for a “diverse” director includes hiring an individual “who self-identifies as either an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ” and another who “self-identifies as female.” There is no mention of hiring a biological female, meaning the role could, hypothetically, go to a transgender woman — a biological male who merely identifies as a woman — and still meet the diversity requirement...

(Formatting is my own.)

So, now all diversity is proposed to be based on self-ID. Great for people like Elizabeth Warren and other transracialists, as well as the "I'm a heterosexual queer" folx, et al, who'll be using this claptrap to justify their "diverse" board.

Is this affirmative action in order to reduce T unemployment? /s Sort of, but only for the rich and want-to-be-even-more powerful.

Just when I think I've imagined the absolute worst path to happen...

I am so sorry for the young!

Edit. Matters not the source, as long as meets both criteria: 1- true and factual, and 2- information we ought/need to know. Thank you!

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This was the same thing that Maya Forstater's case was about - she was fired/not rehired for just bringing up the question on her private twitter account if it was really fair that someone who only self-identified (and that only sometimes) could be counted as fulfilling requirements for female hires in the company. It was what brought JK Rowling into the public eye on the debate - she liked a tweet or something, and was attacked for it, which led to her defending things that she might have kept quiet about if not put on the spot like that.

But yeah, this is how people think.

[–]Finnegan7921[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Some of it is preemptive on the part of the corporations, tbh; they'll change their language and hire a token to not be accused of transphobia b/c the online mob rules all things these days.

[–]our_team_is_winning 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

USA wants to be a country where people are selected based not on merit but on immutable characteristics. And people are cheering for this? And to make it worse, you can just claim to have the new Woke Olympics Winners characteristics?

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But that's not true. The top of the heap in the identity politics pyramid are people who are "trans" or with other speshul "gender identities" - none of which involve immutable characteristics.

[–]forwardback 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Egads! I'm flummoxed this post hasn't more activity. As an American, I've been following the English women and the GRA. Seemed to me, their forwarding concerns were the transitioning and indoctrination of children and self ID. This is self ID to the max!

Haven't we repeatedly read warnings of regulatory, political, and common practice capture by the Woke? Well, this is the more brazen and dangerous version come to the US!

Anytime an important, in this case economic, institution offers to self-regulate, suspicion should be raised. History has sucessfully been hand-waved away... Terrifying.