When did "woke" - i.e. "awake and not closing ones eyes to the problems in the world" become some sort of slur ? What does it say about people that use it as such?
Instead of getting distracted by what is a slur and who is using it, focus on the meat of the matter, which is discrimination in all forms beyond merit. Anyone distracting from the core topic is a part of the problem.
Don't they favor females instead of males?
A better question is: why does Python even need the PSF staff? I am not convinced it does. The staff use donations to pay themselves salaries, to achieve what exactly that is so necessary? Do they even do any of the technical work?
That's a crazy thing to say without any evidence or reasoning.
> Don't they favor females instead of males?
Doesn't most of the world favor males? Why is that not an issue in your mind?
When I look at the other opinions and values of the majority of people who say that DEI compensate unfairly and too much, I either see that 1. they don't even accept to consider that maybe there was a bias, 2. they also defend policies quite marked politically. These two things make me think there is not really a compensation that it is too big, and that it is just the people who have different values that say they disagree. If it was indeed unfairly balanced, they would be more "pro-DEI on principle" that would react on the dysfunction. (not saying they don't exist, but they are just too few)
Already males often suffer as a result.
But where is your standardized testing to prove that? Does it mean that you are not interested in finding the correct correction, but rather to push for a situation that profit you (either because it is directly advantageous, or because it says that "your side" is right and "their side" is wrong)?
This is what I don't understand. Saying "bias = 0" is as much a critical decision as saying "bias = 17". But it looks like people can both say "they say there is a bias of 17 but they don't test it enough to my eyes so they are bad, we should act as if the bias was 0, and I don't do any testing but it is ok because my critics against them don't apply to me".
(edit: also, I think that your argument "standardized testing" is just in bad faith. A lot of DEI policies come with method to measure the impact and process to adapt the correction level based on how things evolved. You may not like these methods, but these methods would simply not even exist if indeed they were not interested in finding the correct correction. It feels like it's an easy argument "they do stuff, but let's just decide it does not count unless I arbitrarily decide it does")