“Interesting” — one word from Elon Musk yesterday resurrected a study from earlier this year. Media and Twitter liberals predictably feigned shock and outrage. Yet the study on how “nonbinary gender pronouns” affect one’s job prospects wasted time and money to produce obvious results.
Interesting
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 5, 2023
In a preliminary survey, the researcher found that “80 percent of nonbinary people believed that identifying as nonbinary would hurt their job search.” He then tested this sentiment by submitting two sets of resumes to 180 entry-level jobs. The resumes were identical in every way, except that one included “they/them” pronouns. The experiment found that the “they/them” resumes received 8 percent less interest than the control. (RELATED: College Tells Students Not To Use Terms Like ‘Mother’ And ‘Father’ To Be More Inclusive)
Even though the study showed that America is a pretty damn tolerant society — over 90 percent of businesses failed to discriminate against even the most absurd leftist identity trend — the corporate media predictably ran with the study as an opportunity to reflect on the insidious biases lurking around every corner of American society.
CNBC offered its readers some delectable moral preening. “Inclusivity shouldn’t just be present in the workplace — it should be practiced during the hiring process as well. But unfortunately, nonbinary job seekers are facing clear biases during their job search,” the business outlet lamented.
MSN framed the story around Musk, whom they paint as a nefarious figure with a “history of critiquing ‘woke’ culture” and objecting “to the use of ‘they/them’ pronouns.” It detailed a host Musk’s past comments that the left has used to label Musk a “far-right activist.” The article implies that objecting to silly pronouns is a radical, right-wing position.
The “grassroots” left responded to Musk too, unable to fathom how anyone could have scruples with the “diversity is our strength” mantra.
Hiring managers who filter they/them should be demoted or fired. The company will miss out on many young, smart, and creative candidates.
— Magnanimity.com (@MagnanimityCom) July 5, 2023
One couldn’t resist bringing up Donald Trump. She argued that anyone with the characteristics associated with Trump supporters should face discrimination in hiring instead.
the words
“christian”
“straight”
“conservative”
“religious”
“football”
“trump”
“republican”
“maga”
“southern”
“baptist”
“country music”seem like they’d be much more major red flags than someone going by a different pronoun than i do lmao.
— moe lester (@sweeterplacess) July 5, 2023
Despite leftist moralizing, the study itself tells us why the findings are unsurprising.
In the survey, an overwhelming majority of they/them people believed they would be discriminated against in the hiring process. Yet the findings showed that at most, only 8 percent of employers actually discriminated. This massive discrepancy between actual and perceived discrimination has a simple explanation.
Whereas traditional transgenderism is a medical condition capable of being diagnosed, there is no scientific basis for being “nonbinary.” The latter “identity” is inherently political, being based on constructing new ways to personally fit themselves into a worldview of identity-based victimhood and oppression. Their obsession with their own identity makes them self-centered, but their worldview conveniently validates their narcissism as an altruistic crusade for social justice.
Thus, hiring someone using they/them pronouns invites a walking liability into the company. Given that such people have a wildly skewed misconception of how much discrimination they face, they are likely to police speech in the office, inject social justice issues into company decisions, and always be on the hunt for “microaggressions.” This not only creates an unproductive and unpleasant work environment — it is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
While it beggars belief that any manager would hire someone like this, it appears only 8 percent are opposed. While many likely recognize the risk, it is not unsurprising that they would choose to ignore it. (RELATED: CBS News Guest Repeatedly Calls Women ‘Menstruators’ When Discussing Periods)
America’s diversity, equity and inclusion framework has a stranglehold over corporate America. Anti-discrimination laws are so overbearing and complex it can be tough to even know how to comply. Financial incentives like ESG and the Corporate Equality Index use carrot-and-stick tactics to push diversity, while companies also face intense social pressure from activists to support the latest left-wing fads. For many managers, it may feel like a safer bet to hire the “nonbinary” person; at least you can point to them to show the mob how inclusive your business is.
The outsized reaction shows how America is so compulsively tolerant that the left must grasp at straws to find something to be mad about. For now, their outrage dictates the norms of the corporate world and businesses seem mostly willing to go along with it. That is, until they start ending up like Bud Light.