Certainly, here’s the article with clear paragraphing for easier readability:

Although it's in my bio, let me say it again: these views are my own and are not necessarily those of the Association for Women in Cryptocurrency, its Board, or its members.

As someone working towards gender equality and advocating for greater inclusion, I often see and hear the hypocrisy of people who are against DEI... unless it benefits people who look or think like them.

This incredible article by Lydia Polgreen explains the hypocrisy so well. I know many people don't like feeling cognitive dissonance when they realize their unconscious bias. I frequently have to fight my own ageism, so I get it. No one likes to look in the mirror and not like what they see, so we tend to look away and pretend we're right rather than confront ourselves and deal with why we're wrong.

Our nation's DEI narrative is on a terrifyingly toxic path. I, for one, am glad folks like JD Vance are given a leg up because of their underrepresented and socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. It makes for real diversity in thought and life experience. I was incredibly lucky to attend an undergraduate institution that believed in that and gave financial aid and admission preference to students from diverse geographic and socioeconomic backgrounds. Our school was infinitely better for it and had REAL diversity.

But the fact that it's "DEI" when it's a person of color, but it's not when it's a white person, is atrocious. I saw this all the time growing up; black people on food stamps were receiving "welfare," but poor white families on food stamps received "government assistance."

Every day, I hear from women (and men) who see situations where women are not given jobs that men have been given with far fewer qualifications. Sometimes, it’s actually senior women who judge younger women more harshly. Despite the advantages of digital nativity, greater tech experience, etc., many senior women deem junior women “not qualified enough” or “not having enough experience.” It's rarely because the junior woman isn’t sufficiently qualified. It's usually because the senior woman thinks, “It took me longer, I had to pay more dues, and it feels unfair for this younger woman to have it easier."

But that is LITERALLY what we're fighting for! So when qualified women are "DEI hires" or "quota picks," my head explodes. Because if they're as qualified as men who had the job previously, then you have to confront the fact that gender (or race, or age, or some other bias) is the reason your brain is telling you that this one is "unqualified."

Take off someone's gender, race, age, etc. If that person's background, experience, education, etc., contain the qualifications for the job (or at least 60% of them—if they're male), then by the "merit-based system" we have in America, they're qualified enough.

And if you don't think so, I pray you'll take a long look in the mirror and ask yourself why not.