By introducing new bias and discrimination? Well, what can go wrong?
> to an action that is inherently hurting people?
Which action is that? The original biases which has been hurting people for hundreds of years or the current attempt at bias correction which has been around for, let's say, 5 years?
> The problem here is that you try to compensate injustice done to some people by doing injustice to others.
No. What's happening here is that people are trying to balance the scales by helping up the lower pan and the people on the higher pan are bleating about this "injustice".
But only one of those camps is actually correct.
> it's putting out fire with gasoline
Not even slightly.
Yes, currently. I spoke about long term effects of using discrimination to fight discrimination.
To clarify, then, is the "Right now" part of this wrong?
"Right now both of the camps will be able to say that they are discriminated by the other one."
I can almost guarantee you it was a white male that had ultimate responsibility to make the decision to take action with regard to that demographic.
And white dudes (like me) aren't ever going to fix it without actively trying to fix it, which is going to make other white dudes (like the ones in the lawsuit) discriminated against.
Who's up the org chart from her?