He doesn't specify that he wants white men to self-deport, but, come on, they're the people getting screwed by DEI, so they're the ones most likely to oppose it.
And his response is just to make conditions at the company unlivable for them so that they'll leave, supposedly of their own accord, thus sparing the company the need to fire them and the hazard of racial discrimination lawsuits.
Warner Bros. Discovery's Chief Global Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer Asif Sadiq recently shared his tact on how to get rid of opponents of DEI from major corporations.
As reported by News Busters, Sadiq was a panelist for an Aspen Institute webinar titled The Future of DEI in Corporate America at the end of February.
Sadiq would share his comments after Design Observer Editor-in-Chief Ellen McGirt stated, "We came up with this strategy, and I love it. It is: Find your people and ignore the person you cannot persuade. You know exactly who they are..."
You mean "straight white men"? That is what you mean, right?
"... and if you can't bring yourself to do it because of your professional orientation, give it 30 days. Ignore them for 30 days. Don't take the bait. Don't send them the clip. Don't send them the newsletter. Don't send them the deck. Just focus on the people who are willing to do the work. The new arrivals to the work. The new leaders who are preparing, as we've talked about to be better allies, to be more vulnerable, to communicate better; work preparing them. ... ''
Sadiq reacted to these comments saying, "And if I can just add on to that point because I think it's such an important point. Even beyond leaders, there's always those few people who will never change. You will never convince them. You can try up until the end of eternity and it will still not happen. We waste so much energy doing that sometimes as individuals whether you're in a leadership position or in a team and so on."
He continued, "Focus on the ones who want to change because that way you start changing culture. And if you change culture often those people who don't come around will start saying this place isn't the way it used to be and they'll leave themselves, which is great!"
Film Threat released part three of "the Disney Files," a short history of Disney's efforts to drive straight white men out of their animation studios and replace them with completely unqualified women, particularly "women of color."
They were unqualified. Of course they were. The men in these positions had pursued this career, spending tens of thousands of dollars of their own money to go to animation school.
The Women of Color Disney brought in to replace them did none of that -- they were largely untrained, "self-taught," barely-working Tumblr cartoonists. They only wound up in animation because Disney went out looking for them and slid into their Tumblr DMs to offer them jobs.
Now think about this situation: You have one group of people who has worked hard to have a career in animation, risked their future prosperity on the gamble of going into this field, and spent years and tens of thousands of dollars training this skill. Obviously this group is highly-motivated and passionate about the art form.
On the other hand, you have some bored women who occasionally post crude cartoons on Tumblr who have never made any effort to become animators and certainly have not bothered going to animation school. These people did not fight to get interviews; they were begged to take a job.
Now, who do you think is the more qualified group?
These Tumblr radicals did not bring much in terms of talent or experience, but they did bring something more important to Disney: Activism and complete contempt for their audience.
Meanwhile, up in Emeryville, Pixar had been secretly slipping LGBT characters into the background of its films. In Toy Story 4, there was a pair of lesbian mommies picking up their kids. Onward had a self-identifying lesbian cop. Lastly, Lightyear featured a lesbian commander, Alisha, who had a pregnant wife and featured Pixar's first same-sex kiss.
Right? Wrong? Such is a debate for another time. What's not being debated is the inclusion of the LGBT (exclusively L) themes was interpreted as Pixar's deliberate attempt to alienate its conservative audiences from its brand. Who needs them anyway, right? As they say, money talks, and this new direction led to a steady decline in Pixar's box office totals, which continues today.
By "Reimagining Tomorrow," Strange World was Disney's first foray into the inclusion of an openly gay character with Searcher's son, Ethan, who is an awkward teen trying to get advice from his father about what to do with his crush, Diazo....
Unfortunately, Strange World was a complete and utter failure, and Disney executives knew it would be long before the release of the film, evidenced by the slashing of its marketing budget and modest press tour and premiere. The movie came out on Thanksgiving weekend and limped in for a $18 million ($12 million domestic) weekend take. The film's LGBT theme decimated the international box office as multiple countries refused to show Strange World. This box office disaster ultimately lost Disney over $100 million when it was all finally said and done.
The return to Disney Animation after a VERY long Thanksgiving was not good. That Monday, the staff was greeted with a very "glum" Zoom call as a way to soothe everyone's feelings. One source tells us that the Disney Exec's message is essentially, "This is a bummer, but the 'message' is important, and we will press on with it..." Clearly, the LESSON WAS NOT LEARNED, and Disney Animation would suffer its subsequent massive failure with Wish.
And in the videogame industry: Racist hiring policies. A black woman who reportedly used to work for Sweet Baby Inc., and who now works for a major, major game studio, EA, openly brags to hiring no white men for their "team," because she wanted a "safe space."
She literally says she cannot feel safe unless she works only with people who are "just like me."
She says that.
Can white people decide that? Or nah?
I stress that this racist c*w is not working for some hole-in-the-wall, fly-by-night censorship/sensitivity blackmail firm like Sweet Baby Inc. now. She's working for the major entertainment company EA, and she eagerly confesses to breaking the law against racial discrimination.
Via Mike Benz: videogames are an important vector of propaganda by the Deep State.
Mike Benz
@MikeBenzCyber
The government side of the censorship industry has been working on video games for a very long time.
Kotaku's Woman of Color editor says you can be as hateful as you want towards white people, because the forbidden aspect of hate -- "racism" -- cannot exist as regards hate directed at white people:
This same specimen is also angry that many in the videogame industry are not defending Sweet Baby Inc. and DEI generally, and so actually threatens them with retribution if they remain silent.
She quotes a "neo-communist" in making this threat:
James Lindsay, number one Gay Studies author
@ConceptualJames
Re: Gamergate 2
The Senior Editor at Kotaku is quoting Neo-Communist Audre Lorde and implying a threat to gaming industry professionals.
The Communists are showing themselves, and now we have eyes to see them.