McKinsey Study That Spawned Corporate DEI Programs Unravels

I smelled a rat in that study as soon as it came out -- and said so.

https://pcwatch.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-case-for-inclusion-and-diversity-in.html

I am pleased now that it has imploded


As the wind slowly goes out of the sails of corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, it’s worth noting just how much purveyors of this nonsense have peddled their ideology under the false premise of data, science, and research.

The Wall Street Journal published an article Friday about how the consulting firm McKinsey announced in 2015 that it had “found a link between profits and executive racial and gender diversity.”

This research was “used by investors, lobbyists, and regulators to push for more women and minority groups on boards, and to justify investing in companies that appointed them.”

It certainly has paid big dividends for peddlers of DEI.

Within five years, there was a massive shift in how many companies hired and conducted their business. In 2020, the DEI ethos metastasized. Companies not only embraced the “racial reckoning,” they began to implement full-scale—and almost certainly illegal—racial quotas.

The study gave corporations air cover to promote ideologically motivated diversity programs while saying that it was simply “good for business.” It wasn’t. What it was good for was transforming the world of Big Business into an outpost of academia.

In that sense, it worked.

But the original pro-business justification has turned out to be a scam.

According to The Wall Street Journal, “academics have tried to repeat McKinsey’s findings and failed, concluding that there is in fact no link between profitability and executive diversity.”

The only thing that the study found was that profitable companies ended up with more diversity—after they had succeeded, not before.

That makes sense in a lot of ways.

Big companies that are highly profitable could more easily afford to simply promote DEI with fewer consequences. A company that’s scrambling to launch itself doesn’t have that luxury.

The authors of the McKinsey study say they’ve found a way to prove correlation between DEI programs and profitability, but even that is in doubt. The Wall Street Journal noted that McKinsey won’t release the names of the companies it used for the study, and it was unable to show benefits from diversity on a large range of metrics.

There was just no link at all between diversity and corporate success.

Now, that may not seem like a big deal. What’s one sham study among many other spurious studies?

One would think it would take more than one study to persuade companies with billions of dollars on the line that using race, gender, and identity over merit is a risky proposal.

But in this case, it matters a whole lot. Not only did many companies adopt the research as true, but the most powerful financial and governmental institutions with vast powers over the market picked it up and used it to foist DEI on corporate America.

From the Journal:

McKinsey’s research figures first in BlackRock’s references for supporting a board diversity target of 30% in its proxy voting guidelines.

It featured prominently among studies used by a Securities and Exchange Commission commissioner in 2020 to explain why she supported corporate disclosure of diversity metrics. Nasdaq cited it as evidence when the exchange applied to the SEC for a rule requiring companies it lists to have minimum diversity on boards, or explain why they don’t.

It has been cited by dozens of campaign groups pushing for rules to support consideration of social issues by pension funds and others, too.

BlackRock, according to the Journal, cited the study as evidence that diversity created financial benefits when it created an exchange-traded fund that tracked a diversity index. That index has done quite poorly, “returning about 55% against more than 70% for the global index without diversity conditions.”

BlackRock has gotten into hot water over its corporate practices and has announced that it is stepping away from environmental, social, and governance investing.

We’ll see if that continues.

What’s been clear to me from the beginning is that DEI is not merely about “diversity” in the general sense. It’s about ensuring a certain mindset.

Paradoxically, the DEI industry is about creating a conformity of worldviews where every institution, every CEO, every employee is roped into the same left-wing beliefs and swims in the same direction. Those who dissent are punished and ostracized.

There is now a growing counter movement to prevent this full-scale transformation. And it’s getting harder for businesses to justify their ideological commitments when they are bleeding money.

Nevertheless, the DEI ethos has dug deep into America’s powerful institutions—and that includes corporate America—despite its increasing unpopularity. Don’t count on its purveyors to suddenly give up after real world failures.

They undoubtedly will say that true DEI hasn’t been tried and will find new ways to impose their ideology on the American people.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/03/bogus-study-heart-corporate-dei/

*******************************************

Cruel and Unusual Punishment for Female Inmates
Sending in “gender-confused” male inmates to rape and bully them is awful

Back in 2021, investigative journalist Abigail Shrier broke the first stories of what women were experiencing inside prisons where gender-confused men were permitted to be detained. What should be common sense to everyone — i.e., men and women should be in separate prisons — is trumped by the radical gender ideologues’ sense of what is “fair.”

We’re halfway through 2024, and the horror stories coming out of female prisons are vile.

Last week, it was announced that a male double murderer was finally being moved back to a men’s prison. The convict, Bryan Kim, murdered both his parents and was convicted. However, Kim had declared that he was actually a woman, and the judge agreed to let him go to the Washington Corrections Center for Women. For the three and a half years that he was there, he had a clean disciplinary record, though he was eventually caught having sex with his cellmate.

He was put into solitary confinement while the woman was released back into the general population. Kim, of course, said this was discrimination because other prisoners engage in sex acts and don’t get disciplined like he did. Many of the other female inmates disagree — the men in their midst are generally an oppressive force.

According to National Review, a “female inmate said she and her friends inside hope that the [Department of Corrections] takes the same action against other male offenders who are disturbing the female population and making them uncomfortable and intimidated in their home. Many incarcerated women, vulnerable and battered from past experiences, need a stable environment for rehabilitation, not to have more chaos introduced, she said.”

It is a fact that many incarcerated women are victims of abuse from men. It is also a fact that being able to put their lives back together is stunted when they have to deal with a threatening male in their community. Women’s rights and lowering recidivism rates are severely ignored and jeopardized by those who have permitted this travesty to occur.

Another recent story from Reduxx entails another trans-identifying murderer. The man allegedly murdered his former lover (who was also a trans-identifying male) and was caught attempting to move the body. In Minnesota, he has been charged as a female and is currently in a female facility.

Of course, not every trans-identifying male who asks to be imprisoned with females is a wolf ready to be set loose amongst the sheep. Some are just mentally unwell and genuinely messed up about sex and sexuality. However, do the biological women in these facilities deserve to have a male inmate as their cellmate? One who could easily overpower and rape them?

Even one male predator in a women’s prison is one too many. Permitting this perversion of the law is cruel and unusual punishment and, therefore, violates the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. The women who are affected are being silenced by those in authority and by the men preying on them. Thus, they are invisible.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/108247-cruel-and-unusual-punishment-for-female-inmates-2024-07-08

**********************************************

California Courts ‘Sealed My Case to Hide Their Corruption’ as Ex-Wife Seeks ‘to Castrate My Son,’ Father Warns

A Texas father is fighting in court to prevent his ex-wife from subjecting their son to experimental transgender medical interventions after she moved to California, seemingly taking advantage of the Golden State’s “transgender sanctuary” law.

A California judge has taken the extraordinary step of hiding the entire case from the public in the lead-up to trial, and even preventing lawyers from accessing case documents.

“My ex-wife, Anne Georgulas, wants to castrate my son, James,” Jeff Younger, the father, told The Daily Signal in a statement Wednesday. “Judge Michelle Kazadi denied me access to my own case records. She illegally sealed my case with no public access.”

He also blamed Presiding Judge Shelley Kaufman and Judge Mark Juhas of abusing the system against his claims.

“Judge Shelley Kaufman’s court has misrouted orders to the wrong address,” he added. “Judge Mark Juhas denied me access to crucial evidence by setting a too-early trial date. I can’t even get an independent medical exam of my son.”

“The corrupt Los Angeles courts sealed my case to hide their corruption as they castrate my son,” Younger concluded.

Jeff Younger has been fighting to preserve the bodily integrity of his son, James, since 2018. That year, Georgulas filed a restraining order seeking to prevent Younger from entering James’ school and referring to James as male. A jury declined to give Younger or Georgulas full custody and required Younger’s consent for any medical procedures.

Younger’s legal case drew wide attention, and the father ran for a seat in the Texas House of Representatives, advancing to a primary runoff, which he lost in 2022.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an official opinion on Feb. 18, 2022, stating that performing any sterilizing medical procedure on a child constitutes felony child abuse. Georgulas later described Texas as having a “dangerous political climate,” and she moved to California in November 2022. Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., had signed state Senate Bill 107, turning California into a “sanctuary state” for “gender-affirming care.”

Younger appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, warning that Georgulas intended to subject his son to irreversible transgender interventions. The court rejected Younger’s case after Georgulas told the court she did not intend to subject her son to those “treatments.” However, in February, she filed a motion in Los Angeles County Superior Court, aiming to dissolve the protective order preventing her from subjecting James to “gender-affirming care.” Georgulas’ motion cites the opinions of psychologist Brigid Mariko Conn, who stated that James “is interested” in “puberty blockers,” estrogen, and “bottom surgery,” i.e. the removal of his penis and testicles.

In April, Younger filed a conflicting expert report from Dr. Miriam Grossman, who stated her opinion that James is not suffering from “gender dysphoria” and that “gender-affirming care” is not effective to treat such a psychological condition, even if he had it.

According to court documents obtained by The Daily Signal, Kazadi filed a motion on May 30 to “deem the case confidential and seal all court records” and to “close all hearings in this matter to the public.”

Juhas subsequently filed a motion on June 5 to modify the case to “confidential,” rather than sealed, but Younger’s attorney, Tracy Henderson, told The Daily Signal that Juhas’ order has not been carried out.

Henderson formally urged the court to reverse the order in a June 28 filing.

“Judge Michelle Kazadi violated the constitutional rights of Respondent Jeffrey Younger, and of the public at large, by issuing the Star Chamber Order — a blatantly illegal decree ‘sealing’ the entire case (both retroactively and going forward), while deeming the entire case “confidential” (closing the courtroom to the public and the news media),” Henderson wrote in a memorandum. “Within hours, an unknown person or persons in this court’s administration caused the entire public-facing record of the case (‘Case Access’) to be deleted, disappeared, and blocked the ability of the public to download any documents from ‘Case Document Images.'”

Younger “has not been able to access the docket to even learn when the civil clerks are setting motion hearings or obtain copies of court orders” and the court sent documents to an address Henderson “has not used in years.”

Henderson’s court filing claims that the sealing of Younger’s case resembles the “top-secret, closed-to-the-public tribunal” in medieval England that became known as the “Star Chamber.” This “Star Chamber helped to maintain tyranny by dispensing with established court procedure,” and this abuse of justice inspired the Anglo-American distrust for secret trials.

“Any argument supporting sealing the entire matter and closing the courtroom fails, as the entire history of American jurisprudence teaches us that a courtroom open to the public is a fundamental component of the justice system itself,” Henderson wrote. She also cited the California Supreme Court’s stringent rules for closed proceedings, adding that “none of these standards were articulated by petitioner, nor found by the ruling court.”

https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/07/california-courts-sealed-my-case-hide-corruption-ex-wife-seeks-castrate-my-son-father-warns/

*********************************************

Federal Court Blocks Title IX Expansion to Include Gender Identity in Texas and Montana

A district judge has granted Texas and Montana’s request for a preliminary injunction against the federal government’s attempt “to impose a sweeping new social policy” that allows for Title IX coverage for gender identity.

The ruling follows others in which federal judges have brought Title IX revisions to a halt.

In the most recent decision, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle for the Eastern District of Texas ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) can’t force state health care providers to fund gender-affirming care by threatening them with the loss of federal funding.

In May 2024, HHS issued a statement on its Final Rule, which expanded the definition of Title IX protections in 2016 to include “discrimination based on the basis of gender identity” to fit in with Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Title IX was initially established in 1972 to protect women from discrimination in public education.

“When Congress enacted the ACA in 2010, no agency—or court—had ever interpreted ‘on the basis of sex’ to mean ‘on the basis of gender identity,’” Judge Kernodle wrote. “But in 2016, HHS began to do so, issuing a rule purporting to implement Section 1557 and prohibiting discrimination on the basis of ‘gender identity.’”

Texas and Montana, two states that exclude gender-affirming care procedures from their Medicaid programs and prohibit doctors from performing them on minors, sued HHS, arguing that the federal health department has no authority to mandate that the states adhere to these revisions.

HHS said in its statement that the regulations were updated to prevent “dehumanizing beliefs” surrounding medical treatments and conditions such as gender dysphoria.

“The Department will approach gender dysphoria as it would any other disorder or condition,” HHS said in its Final Rule. “If a disorder or condition affects one or more body systems, it may be considered a physical or mental impairment.”

HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said the Final Rule’s intent is to “strengthen protections” and ensure “equal access to this nation’s health care system and its social service programs for people with disabilities and their families.”

“It is comprehensive in scope, advancing justice for people with disabilities and helping to ensure they are not discriminated against under any program or activity receiving funding from HHS just because they have a disability,” Mr. Becerra said.

Judge Kernodle wrote in his order that the Final Rule proposes an “absurd” policy in that health care entities are prohibited from limiting services exclusive to one sex, such as providing a prostate exam.

The Final Rule would also allow men who identify as females to be allowed in “female-exclusive facilities, including shared hospital rooms.”

The Final Rule also affects health insurance coverage such as Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Judge Kernodle wrote.

“As applied to state-sponsored insurance plans like Medicaid and CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program], the Final Rule has the effect of requiring states to pay for ‘transition’ and other ‘gender-affirming’ procedures,” he said.

As in other rulings on this issue, the primary reason for Judge Kernodle’s decision was that the states demonstrated that they would face irreparable financial harm by failing to comply with HHS’s rule.

Both states receive billions in federal funding, he wrote, which would “likely be withheld for violating the Final Rule,” he wrote.

Plaintiffs in up to 15 states, including Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, and Mississippi, filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Mississippi.

Judge Gurioloa said the plaintiffs have proven that they would “incur substantial costs” by losing federal funding if they didn’t comply with the Final Rule, which was the deciding factor in his order.

“As a result, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have established all four elements for imposing a preliminary injunction and stay,” he wrote.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/federal-court-blocks-title-ix-expansion-to-include-gender-identity-in-texas-and-montana-5680960

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)

https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***************************************