For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
Idk if this belongs here but I saw this thumbnail and thought it was slop-worthy
I didn't click the video because I don't want that poisoning my feed, but I checked his channel and he's just another chud but with a focus on whinging about open source. I guess there's a niche for everything.
Here's the link if you want brainrot I guess.
What is DEI?
Diversity, equity, and inclusion. Basically it's an organizational concept about cracking down on sexism, racism, ableism, ageism, homophobia, transphobia, and other such bigotries. Like all such concepts, effectiveness varies depending on implementation.
You can see immediately why the chuds are livid about it. They're throwing their usual temper tantrum about not being the centre of the universe anymore.
"diversity, equity and inclusion"
HR buzzword that chuds consider synonymous with woke (they aren't exactly wrong but I'm not going to give them any credit)
Let's not fail to mention the pivotal point that the likes of DEI policies are only needed because when you leave male crackers in charge of hiring and promoting without any kind of course correction, they are only capable of hiring and promoting other male crackers.
And it makes sense that male crackers are mad about that, because their privilege of being fast tracked to the front of the line by the single virtue of being a male cracker is at risk.
The new version of 'SJW'.
Also, it's rather silly how they obviously try to pretend that measures like trying to hire more marginalised people somehow means that better candidates aren't hired when we know that what happens otherwise is that the better candidates from the pools of marginalised groups aren't hired.