Libs of TikTok going after Cohen and Auburn Athletics

[ckDOG]

Most people apparently know this to be an example of moral exhibitionism. There really is a psychological need for some to announce to the world how moral and ethical they are. If you treat people equally, you don't need to morally preen. If you are prone to stereotyping others, then you likely want to see some public evidence like one of those silly "In this house, we believe..." yard signs. Some of us are just tired of the irritating self-righteousness of it all and we know that equity and inclusion often involves discrimination.

It's everywhere. And nothing new really but we probably just see the more ridiculous elements more with the interwebs. Yard signs, flags, the music we listen to, our religions, and on.

Don't bother with assessing my beliefs based on how I act, I have a welcome mat!

 

[patdog]

Auburn is trying to find a way to rid themselves of Cohen. He’s tanked there AD dept with hires and lack of understanding and involvement with NIL. He’s basically been all in on one sport… and we know which one that is.

How hard could it be to get rid of him? Walk in, say pack your stuff and get out of here, your buyout will be paid according to the terms of your contract.

 

[Podgy]

I didnt read this directive in the screenshot. Is this listed elsewhere on their website?

The screenshot says Auburn Athletics will abide by established rules and work to manage money responsibly, educate students, and win championships. And it says they will do this because it matches the University's mission and because doing so helps support equitable treatment of students and staff, inclusion of students and staff within the Department, and diverse student and staff.


- So they are going to encourage inclusion instead of exclusion as a department. Um...OK, that doesnt seem bad as part of a general mission. I dont know anyone who has been like 'I want to work for a company that proudly excludes as part of their Mission Statement!'

- So they are going to encourage equitable treatment of students and staff. Um...OK, that doesnt seem bad as part of a general mission. Equitable treatment just means people will be treated as they need to help ensure the overall success of the department.
Students receiving more tutoring as needed is equitable treatment.
Students receiving more medical assistance as needed is equitable treatment.
Staff receiving a standing desk for a health accommodation is equitable treatment.
Staff that is salaried but expected to be at late night or weekend events being able to offset that by coming in later or leaving early during normal work hours is equitable treatment.

- So they are going to encourage diversity instead of uniformity/homogenity. Um...OK, that doesnt seem bad as part of a general mission.
When utilized effectively, a diverse staff can result in better problem solving, unique ideas, and growth.
When utilized effectively, a diverse student athlete group can expand the brand's geographic reach, open up recruiting opportunities in otherwise untapped areas, and generate increased fan interest and participation.

Why use the modifier "when utilized effectively"? What doesn't work when used effectively?
When utilized ineffectively, a diverse staff doesn't result in better problem solving. See how easy that is when I deliberately frame it in a way that confirms my biases?

When utilized effectively, a non-diverse staff can solve problems, develop unique ideas and grow (see inventions in American history, Samsung, Toyota, Honda, BMW--all non-diverse corporations)

When I use my pickleball paddle effectively, I win more points. When I don't utilize my pickleball paddle effectively..

I could go on. There's nothing inherently wrong or good with either non-diverse and diverse staff. What I find silly is the "Look at me. I'm Mr. Super Whitey and I love diversity because it's super awesome and I'm morally superior to the bad white people" sorts of statements.

FYI, studies of the most livable cities typically result in the least diverse cities being in the top 10.

BTW, lots of progressive, white Americans live in some pretty segregated, ethnic enclaves around other white people and some Asian Ams sprinkled in.

 

[Son_of_34]

Presented without comment

So what's the point here? Let's be mad at something that's really a non issue.

You do realize DEI isn't "hire this person because they are this" it's more "how do we get those who usually wouldn't go into this field to take a look"

biggest benefactors of DEI...white women

 

[Podgy]

This post is well thought out and reasonable. It is the opposite of the claim you made earlier, which was a total misrepresentation of what was on the screenshot from Auburn's website.

As for your statement that equity and inclusion often involve discrimination, well that goes to the last sentence in my earlier post- "They can be misused, and that should be addressed when it happens."
Just address misuse when it happens. Same goes for any discriminatory practice- race, gender, sex, age, height, etc etc. As you said in a subsequent post- discrimination should be opposed on moral grounds regardless of who is being discriminated against.

If you have academic standards and entrance requirements, you can't be as inclusive as you want without discriminating unless you just invent some other standards or claim to be using holistic methods or some other ********, undefined term to evaluate candidates. Is Auburn's defense really inclusive? It looks a bit non-diverse so I'm not sure if it can be utilized effectively. Again, this is a personality issue. Lefties like expressing their morals publicly (in this house signs, rainbow flags) in a similar way to MAGA types wearing Trump gear.

 

[Podgy]

So what's the point here? Let's be mad at something that's really a non issue.

You do realize DEI isn't "hire this person because they are this" it's more "how do we get those who usually wouldn't go into this field to take a look"

biggest benefactors of DEI...white women

We've been encouraging all sorts of people to broaden their horizons before DEI became a fad. Also, what's your source for white women being the biggest benefactors of DEI? If that's true, maybe it isn't, aren't you admitting that there's some racial and gender discrimination inherent in DEI policies?

 

[mstateglfr]

Why use the modifier "when utilized effectively"? What doesn't work when used effectively?
When utilized ineffectively, a diverse staff doesn't result in better problem solving. See how easy that is when I deliberately frame it in a way that confirms my biases?

When utilized effectively, a non-diverse staff can solve problems, develop unique ideas and grow (see inventions in American history, Samsung, Toyota, Honda, BMW--all non-diverse corporations)

I could go on. There's nothing inherently wrong or good with either non-diverse and diverse staff. What I find silly is the "Look at me. I'm Mr. Super Whitey and I love diversity because it's super awesome and I'm morally superior to the bad white people" sorts of statements.

FYI, studies of the most livable cities typically result in the least diverse cities being in the top 10.

BTW, lots of progressive, white Americans live in some pretty segregated, ethnic enclaves around other white people and some Asian Ams sprinkled in.

I used 'when utilized effectively' because it helps show that initiatives around diversity, equity, and inclusion are not inherently bad/dangerous.
I mean, these words are the boogeyman to some and a handful of state legislatures even viewed them to be so dangerous that they had to legislate them out of existence on state websites and in the classroom.

For example, the word 'diversity' is not good or bad, though it sure does trigger a large portion of Americans and I am confident many of them would actually say the word itself is bad.
In reality though, it is not good or bad. How it is used in practice is what makes the result good or bad.
So yeah, I said 'when utilized effectively' because it shows it can be good and can be beneficial. That shows it isnt just inherently bad/dangerous.

Diversity for the sake of diversity is dumb. It can often result in worse results in the workplace.
Diversity as a way to increase ideas, increase solutions, increase customer reach, etc can be good. It can often result in improved results in the workplace.


I agree with you that good results can come from a homogenous staff. Totally agree.
There is a difference between 'support diversity'/'promote diversity' in staff and 'require diversity' in staff.
Your initial comment that I responded to in this thread was an extreme hypothetical that in an example of ineffective use - that dozens of very qualified people were passed over for unqualified(less qualified) people.

So me pointing out that it can be beneficial when used effectively is just me countering your hypothetical which shows it can be detrimental when used ineffectively.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

If you have academic standards and entrance requirements, you can't be as inclusive as you want without discriminating unless you just invent some other standards or claim to be using holistic methods or some other ********, undefined term to evaluate candidates. Is Auburn's defense really inclusive? It looks a bit non-diverse so I'm not sure if it can be utilized effectively. Again, this is a personality issue. Lefties like expressing their morals publicly (in this house signs, rainbow flags) in a similar way to MAGA types wearing Trump gear.

As far as standards, it could in theory cause a higher ed institution to look at admission requirements and their dependency on standardized test scores and find space to include some grade based admissions that do not have higher test scores. I have, and will always, contend that things like the ACT measure knowledge, but only to the extent that the person taking it is great at fast reading comprehension. It selects for BOTH fast reader AND knowledgeable in subject area.

Plenty of people have the knowledge but don't test well because they are slower readers. They should have ample opportunity to continue their education. Such a potential change should be applied equally. It also wouldn't be wrong to measure similar applicants metrics and try to understand if there was any other bias being applied. One bad admissions person could cause a lot of negative impact if they, for example, didn't like white people, or Asians, or people who drive Chevys.

As for yard signs, I much prefer the "Jesus is my Lord and Trump is my President" yard signs. It quickly identifies non-critical thinkers for me...

 

[mstateglfr]

If you have academic standards and entrance requirements, you can't be as inclusive as you want without discriminating unless you just invent some other standards or claim to be using holistic methods or some other ********, undefined term to evaluate candidates. Is Auburn's defense really inclusive? It looks a bit non-diverse so I'm not sure if it can be utilized effectively. Again, this is a personality issue. Lefties like expressing their morals publicly (in this house signs, rainbow flags) in a similar way to MAGA types wearing Trump gear.

I provided you with very real examples of how D, E, and I can be beneficial for an Athletics Department for staff and students.
Nowhere in those examples does it require academic standards to be lower. Nowhere in those examples does it require hiring qualifications to be lower.

As for academic entrance standards, is Auburn guilty of denying entrance to students who have higher scores than other students? Or are you wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities that get like 12x more applications than they can admit, and you dislike how some of those schools have handled admissions in the past?
If you are wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities- save it. That horse is so beaten that it was already dragged away and sent to the glue factory.

You are consistently arguing the extreme is all that should be considered.
I agree with you- the extreme is not ideal. If people are unqualified then they shouldnt be hired over qualified people. If that is happening, then address those situations.
That doesnt mean an institution of learning and employment should stop promoting equity in the workplace and classroom. That doesnt mean an institution of learning and employment should stop trying to be seen as inclusive as a general concept to staff and students.

Did you just ignore the very real examples of D, E, and I that I provided earlier?
A student receiving more tutoring to help them succeed in the classroom is not bad.
An employee using a standing desk as a health accommodation is not bad.



You keep bringing up the cringe yard signs that list what people in that house believe. Why? I get it- you think those are eye-rollingly performative. I dont like em either.

 

[Podgy]

As far as standards, it could in theory cause a higher ed institution to look at admission requirements and their dependency on standardized test scores and find space to include some grade based admissions that do not have higher test scores. I have, and will always, contend that things like the ACT measure knowledge, but only to the extent that the person taking it is great at fast reading comprehension. It selects for BOTH fast reader AND knowledgeable in subject area.

Plenty of people have the knowledge but don't test well because they are slower readers. They should have ample opportunity to continue their education. Such a potential change should be applied equally. It also wouldn't be wrong to measure similar applicants metrics and try to understand if there was any other bias being applied. One bad admissions person could cause a lot of negative impact if they, for example, didn't like white people, or Asians, or people who drive Chevys.

ACT, SAT, MCAT scores are great indicators of who is more likely to be successful academically. There's a library of studies showing that and you're seeing universities that abandoned those tests during the Great Awokening returning to using them. Should med schools accept less knowledgeable, slow readers over those with great test scores, grades and experiences? Are you thus implying some groups are likely to be slow readers with less knowledge than other groups? Should slow runners get track scholarships?

"As for yard signs, I much prefer the "Jesus is my Lord and Trump is my President" yard signs. It quickly identifies non-critical thinkers for me..."
That and rainbow flags are in-group signals. Stereotyping reveals preferences (but stereotypes are true to some degree).
Can you direct me to some studies showing non-knowledgeable, slow readers do as well in professional schools as knowledgeable, fast readers?

 

[Perd Hapley]

They are pointing out evidence of Auburn violating state law. I'm not sure it's good evidence. But "promoting diversity" has almost universally been used by schools as justification for racial discrimination. Not sure whether Auburn athletics department is actually engaging in racial discrimination and/or intentionally teasing that they may be violating state law, or if that's just a throw away line that has not been cleaned up.

My personal opinion - regardless of words on a website…..an athletic department that openly hires Hugh Freeze and Steven Pearl to its most prestigious positions could not be further from DEI if they tried. Nothing screams “ignore everything else and hire the conservative white guy” more than those 2 hires. And both hires put forward quite a robust legal defense against any alleged DEI-ness.

“Mr. Cohen, the prosecution accuses you of 1st degree wokeness, along with 2 counts of misdemeanor TDS. How do you plea?”

“Not guilty, your honor. I hired Hugh Freeze”.

“Noted. Case dismissed”

 

[johnson86-1]

My personal opinion - regardless of words on a website…..an athletic department that openly hires Hugh Freeze and Steven Pearl to its most prestigious positions could not be further from DEI if they tried. Nothing screams “ignore everything else and hire the conservative white guy” more than those 2 hires. And both hires put forward quite a robust legal defense against any alleged DEI-ness.

“Mr. Cohen, the prosecution accuses you of 1st degree wokeness, along with 2 counts of misdemeanor TDS. How do you plea?”

“Not guilty, your honor. I hired Hugh Freeze”.

“Noted. Case dismissed”

I don't think anybody really believes that athletic departments are hiring coaches (or extending scholarship offers or team sports) based on race. Maybe they discriminate for some back office positions that aren't viewed as directly impacting performance. I'm sure race plays a factor in positions where interacting with recruits and players directly when it's believed it gives them an edge, and technically racial preferences of customers/clients/other employees does not legally mean that is not discrimination based on race or otherwise permissible racial discrimination, but I don't think people are really worried about that.

 

[Podgy]

I provided you with very real examples of how D, E, and I can be beneficial for an Athletics Department for staff and students.
Nowhere in those examples does it require academic standards to be lower. Nowhere in those examples does it require hiring qualifications to be lower.

As for academic entrance standards, is Auburn guilty of denying entrance to students who have higher scores than other students? Or are you wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities that get like 12x more applications than they can admit, and you dislike how some of those schools have handled admissions in the past?
If you are wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities- save it. That horse is so beaten that it was already dragged away and sent to the glue factory.

You are consistently arguing the extreme is all that should be considered.
I agree with you- the extreme is not ideal. If people are unqualified then they shouldnt be hired over qualified people. If that is happening, then address those situations.
That doesnt mean an institution of learning and employment should stop promoting equity in the workplace and classroom. That doesnt mean an institution of learning and employment should stop trying to be seen as inclusive as a general concept to staff and students.

Did you just ignore the very real examples of D, E, and I that I provided earlier?
A student receiving more tutoring to help them succeed in the classroom is not bad.
An employee using a standing desk as a health accommodation is not bad.



You keep bringing up the cringe yard signs that list what people in that house believe. Why? I get it- you think those are eye-rollingly performative. I dont like em either.

"I provided you with very real examples of how D, E, and I can be beneficial for an Athletics Department for staff and students."

You just pointed out accommodations universities and businesses have been doing before DEI statements on websites became a thing. The ADA already required some of that. That's like me saying the bathrooms at my house are gender-neutral because I have a DEI policy in place for my family and friends.

And you didn't point out how DEI benefits athletic programs. Should athletic teams really be more ethnically inclusive? Accommodations for slow guys who can't tackle or dribble as well as others? We do allow people in wheelchairs to get two bounces at the local pickleball club. Maybe we need something like that for SEC teams.

"If you are wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities- save it. That horse is so beaten that it was already dragged away and sent to the glue factory."
Pointing out the truth isn't a rant, and fyi brevity isn't your strong suit, but I understand why you don't want to exclude some topics from discussions.

"Did you just ignore the very real examples of D, E, and I that I provided earlier?
A student receiving more tutoring to help them succeed in the classroom is not bad.
An employee using a standing desk as a health accommodation is not bad."
No one is opposed to this and if that's only what DEI is then it wouldn't be controversial. It's the laundering of race and gender ideology into discriminatory policies by using nice-sounding labels such as inclusion and equity.

It's easy to defend DEI when you define it only in positive terms instead of how it's actually been implemented in America. One can provide reasonable accommodations without announcing them as resulting from an explicit DEI program.

"As for academic entrance standards, is Auburn guilty of denying entrance to students who have higher scores than other students? Or are you wanting to rant about the handful of highly selective universities that get like 12x more applications than they can admit, and you dislike how some of those schools have handled admissions in the past?"
As someone who has spent a little time working with college admissions, I'd say yes for graduate and professional schools. There really is an incentive to do so because of a past of racial discrimination, and sexual, and a desire to find some remedy or at least mitigate some of the residual effects of America's and the South's past.

FYI, those schools are still engage in those practices, btw.

 

[johnson86-1]

So what's the point here? Let's be mad at something that's really a non issue.

You do realize DEI isn't "hire this person because they are this" it's more "how do we get those who usually wouldn't go into this field to take a look"

biggest benefactors of DEI...white women

That is practically never the way DEI works in practice. It takes work to expand the pipeline. And there's no good way to do it so that the people footing the bill will be the ones that reap the benefits. It's much easier for everyone to lower standards so that's mostly what schools and corporations and government entities do and then pat themselves on the back and put out some marketing material.

 

[Podgy]

That is practically never the way DEI works in practice. It takes work to expand the pipeline. And there's no good way to do it so that the people footing the bill will be the ones that reap the benefits. It's much easier for everyone to lower standards so that's mostly what schools and corporations and government entities do and then pat themselves on the back and put out some marketing material.

And saying, without proof, that it benefits white women the most is an admission that DEI discriminates by race and sex and that some people can game the system better than others.

And attributing reasonable accommodations and changes to a commitment to DEI suggests that can't happen otherwise. MS didn't need a DEI program to eliminate the Confederate flag on the state flag (something I think took too long to do). It was pressure but also ordinary people realizing what the Confederate flag represents. We now have a better looking flag too.

 

[Podgy]

BTW, I've heard that libz of tiktok gal speak and she sounds remarkably ignorant. But she does have power. Look at how quickly Auburn caved. Why didn't Auburn respond by saying they support DEI and their version of DEI involves things such as right-sized desks in classrooms and extra tutoring?

 

[Maroon Eagle]

My personal opinion - regardless of words on a website…..an athletic department that openly hires Hugh Freeze and Steven Pearl to its most prestigious positions could not be further from DEI if they tried. Nothing screams “ignore everything else and hire the conservative white guy” more than those 2 hires. And both hires put forward quite a robust legal defense against any alleged DEI-ness.

“Mr. Cohen, the prosecution accuses you of 1st degree wokeness, along with 2 counts of misdemeanor TDS. How do you plea?”

“Not guilty, your honor. I hired Hugh Freeze”.

“Noted. Case dismissed”

Hugh Freeze: DEI Hire **

 

[Willow Grove Dawg]

Right on que - The Libs of TikYok discovered Nelle on the Book of Face

 

[Darryl Steight]

You do realize DEI isn't "hire this person because they are this" it's more "how do we get those who usually wouldn't go into this field to take a look"

 

[dickiedawg]

 

[Bulldawg77]

That couldn’t be further from the truth.

It’s 100% true

 

[Bulldawg77]

Golf?

I mean it’s a non rev sport so might as well be

 

[GloryDawg]

I wish nothing but bad things for Auburn and Cohen. Auburn has replaced Alabama as my second-most hated team in the SEC. That said, be careful what you laugh at. Mississippi State also has university nondiscrimination language that applies to athletics. The wording is not identical, but Auburn was hardly alone.

Ole MIss is number one for me then everyone else is number two.

 

[mstateglfr]

BTW, I've heard that libz of tiktok gal speak and she sounds remarkably ignorant. But she does have power. Look at how quickly Auburn caved. Why didn't Auburn respond by saying they support DEI and their version of DEI involves things such as right-sized desks in classrooms and extra tutoring?

I dont speak for Auburn, but I assume they didnt push back because the law that bans them from having that verbiage was enacted on outrage and vibes, so they knew a tempered and rational discussion was unrealistic.
If they were in violation of the law, they didnt have a legal justification to keep it. It doesnt matter if they support it or not.

This seems like an obvious conclusion to draw.
Are you genuinely wondering why Auburn didnt respond with what you posted?

 

[olblue]

It’s 100% true

 

[mstateglfr]

View attachment 1377083

This makes me recoil in cringe, so it is spot on with the real thing.


As for what it says?...yeah, I will support the MAC keeping Wednesday night football games.

 

[Podgy]

I dont speak for Auburn, but I assume they didnt push back because the law that bans them from having that verbiage was enacted on outrage and vibes, so they knew a tempered and rational discussion was unrealistic.
If they were in violation of the law, they didnt have a legal justification to keep it. It doesnt matter if they support it or not.

This seems like an obvious conclusion to draw.
Are you genuinely wondering why Auburn didnt respond with what you posted?

Of course not. They caved quickly. But if DEI is important to them and it's merely about some positive policies that most reasonable people would accept, then stick up for it. Make an argument and defend it.

 

[dickiedawg]

This makes me recoil in cringe, so it is spot on with the real thing.


As for what it says?...yeah, I will support the MAC keeping Wednesday night football games.

It’s merch from Sickos Committee, which is a Twitter account run by people who love the intersection of weird stuff and college football (and also sports more broadly, to a lesser extent).
All of those lines are basically in-jokes.
It’s definitely not everyone’s cup of tea.

 

[Curby]

glfr clearly got his panties in a wad over this.

Not sure who reads all his dissertations that dissect all of our comments.

I just want the best persons for the jobs to be hired, regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ..etc. etc.

That's clearly not what's happening in many cases.

 

[vhdawg]

This is evergreen content

 

[mstateglfr]

Of course not. They caved quickly. But if DEI is important to them and it's merely about some positive policies that most reasonable people would accept, then stick up for it. Make an argument and defend it.

Again, that is an absurd expectation. If they are violating the law, what is there to argue and defend? They have to change it to comply with the law. There is no appealing to reason since the law is set and implemented...likely a couple years ago with the outrage rolled through a handful of states.

 

[MagicDawg]

As much as I dislike what they did to MSU, I'm so sad and sorry for the loss of their daughter to the mind virus.

 

[mstateglfr]

It’s merch from Sickos Committee, which is a Twitter account run by people who love the intersection of weird stuff and college football (and also sports more broadly, to a lesser extent).
All of those lines are basically in-jokes.
It’s definitely not everyone’s cup of tea.

I understood half of them, I just cringed because it was all too similar to the actual banners. They nailed the vibe.

 

[Yeti]

Right on que - The Libs of TikYok discovered Nelle on the Book of Face

I’m out on Auburn Cohen and DEI but this is a bridge too far. That’s not Auburn that’s his family. See once again left nut, right nut , same nut