Why do we ask Race and Sex on Applications?

The short answer is that the EEOC and CEI ask for it. You are allowed to decline a response, so it seems meaningless. The guidelines state that one cannot use race, sex, religion, and myriad other meritless qualities to discriminate in employment. If one cannot use these qualities, why ask for them at all? The answer, as always, lies in a complicated history of well-meaning but terrible legislation.

(Note: There were Executive Orders dating back at least to President Roosevelt regarding employment and meritless qualities. We will focus only on Affirmative Action as enforced by the EEOC in this document.)

Affirmative Action was put into effect by Executive Order of President Kennedy. This measure was to ensure employers treated and employed people without regard to their meritless qualities. This is OK. this is not just a black thing or a woman thing. It allows people to sue for discrimination irrespective of the like and kind of discrimination: blacks, whites, women, and men have all taken advantage of this (white men have taken advantage of this as recently as April 2024 [judgment] [opinion]). This is a general policy for the general welfare and can be applied without reference to special interests. We begin to see the destruction of this policy in the very next Administration.

President Johnson made subtle changes to the doctrine here. This was also by Executive Order. Johnson tasked the Federal Government with ensuring equal opportunity in recruitment, hiring, training, and other employment practices. This, on the surface, sounds reasonable; equal opportunity is a hallmark trait of a great society. However, the equal opportunity of recruitment opens the door for abuse and discrimination. It is not the Government’s place to tell a society who should be applying for jobs, it is only the Government’s place to ensure that once applied for, the job is decided upon merit. this was part of President Johnson’s “Great Society”.

Due to the emphasis on recruitment, the Government and private industry struck many deals migrating thought leadership away from Kennedy’s goal of equal opportunity and toward the “Great Society” goal of equal outcome. this caused a flurry of over-regulation, over-adjudication, extreme Government expansion, and bad outcomes contrary to the stated goal. Any one of Dr. Tomas Sowell’s books can provide a rudimentary look at these bad outcomes; a reading of his entire catalog can constitute a masterclass.

This went on for quite some time and many class action lawsuits and other challenges to business and the Government persisted. President Reagan (with Clarence Thomas, Esq. then the head of the EEOC) changed this in good and bad ways. The unintended consequences of their actions are felt to this very date. First and foremost, President Reagan’s Administration diminished the size and ability of the Agencies responsible for Affirmative Action and, at the same time, altered the enforcement of these policies and deployed the Government to regulate the regulators. In hindsight, maybe the latter portion of this plan should have been foregone.

The Reagan Administration forced the proponents of Affirmative Action to find new and exciting ways to enforce the Equality of Outcome narrative while getting around the return to Equality of Opportunity. While Reagan was campaigning in 1980, it was fairly clear he would be victorious and have the opportunity to push his ideals. A PAC was formed, the Human Rights Campaign Fund, to promote Equality of Outcome. This later became the Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRCF) and, in turn, created the Corporate Equality Index (CEI).

CEI is used to strong-arm corporations into performing DEI, meritless reporting, and other wasteful activities. They are backed by the largest funders on the planet including Black Rock, Vanguard, and State Street. What they do is push an unsanctioned government agenda by forcing that agenda onto corporations and marketing their CEI score as the end-all-be-all of corporate responsibility and equality. They have placed themselves as the sole authority regarding corporate merit.

Now, this private corporation requires organizations to provide demographic information in order to validate and certify the equality of each firm. The problem is this private organization makes the rules, and thus has the power to bend the rules. They often give low scores for companies that are largely male, and high scores for companies that are largely female. This same trend is apparent when you control for race and religion. If the goal is “Equality” shouldn’t a score drop be warranted irrespective of the direction of disparity? The goals are born out of the results, not the statements made; of this I am sure.

Further, the EEOC and similar groups use demographic information (if provided) as evidence against corporations when discrimination requests are filed. If a corporation shows it has too many whites and too many males, watch out; here comes big daddy Government to take care of our childish adults who cannot do for themselves. In this respect, Government has been weaponized to take from those who are hard-working and give to those who complain the most.

If you look around and see blacks getting ahead and women getting ahead, you have probably wondered why these questions are still asked of job applicants in the year 2024. Many of us have asked this, and the answer is not surprising in the least. This is done to divide We, the People. No further proof is required than the form of some of the questions. There is no such thing as “Black/African American”. I am an American - if you want to call me “black” that is on you; Elon Musk is an African American.