The Gist – Episode Summary

Podcast: The Gist
Host: Mike Pesca (Peach Fish Productions)
Episode Title: Kenji Yoshino & David Glasgow: "Go Where the Pain Is"
Date: February 24, 2026
Featured Guests: Kenji Yoshino & David Glasgow, NYU Law’s Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging

Main Theme

This episode of The Gist centers on the current state and future of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, spurred by recent legal, political, and cultural challenges. Mike Pesca interviews Kenji Yoshino and David Glasgow, co-authors of How Equality Wins: A New Vision for an Inclusive America, to discuss evolving strategies for workplace equity and inclusion. The conversation covers how DEI must adapt in response to Supreme Court rulings and public pushback, the legitimacy and pitfalls of certain DEI practices, and how the movement might broaden and deepen by focusing on "where the pain is."

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Reframing DEI: From "Inclusion" to "Equality"

• Yoshino and Glasgow note that their work deliberately swaps “inclusion” for “equality” in DEI, signaling a pivot in priorities amidst recent legal and social shifts. The conversation orbits around how these changes force reevaluation of both philosophy and tactics.
  • “Kenji Yoshino and David Glasgow are back to talk about their book, How Equality Wins: A New Vision for an Inclusive America. And the book lays out seven practical strategies from revealing the stakes to supporting dissent.” – Mike Pesca [08:28]

2. Legitimate Backlash vs. Overreach in DEI

• Pesca asks which criticisms of DEI reflect needed correctives and which threaten core equity goals.
• Supporting Dissent:
  • Yoshino calls for addressing groupthink within DEI ranks, criticizing ideological orthodoxy and the shaming of innocent mistakes.
    • “We need to not just move from kind of cancelling to softer methods of correction, but also sometimes to even just let it go when people make mistakes…He’s well meaning, he’s pro gay. Let’s just let it go.” – Kenji Yoshino [10:26]
  • They intentionally avoid “cancel culture” language, instead focusing on fostering a healthier debate environment.
• On Diversity Statements:
  • Glasgow critiques the widespread requirement of diversity loyalty oaths, arguing they foster “preference falsification” and fragile, slogan-based allegiance rather than genuine moral understanding.
    • “If you force people to say stuff, oftentimes what you get is preference falsification. People will sign the diversity statement without believing anything. …You get very fragile allegiances.” – David Glasgow [12:14]
    • He invokes Natalie Wynn’s point on how slogans can short-circuit deeper thinking.

3. The Legal & Organizational Shift Post-Supreme Court

• Recent rulings (e.g., against affirmative action) and cultural pushback have created an opening for DEI to evolve:
  • Systemic, Substantive Reforms:
    • Yoshino advocates for DEI that goes beyond surface-level performativity—moving away from “heritage months” and social media statements to actual system change.
      • “A lot of DEI that organizations adopted after the murder of George Floyd … I would describe as performative…there wasn’t a lot of deep work being done inside some of these organizations.” – Kenji Yoshino [14:26]
  • Universal, Not Targeted, Approaches:
    • Predicts a move from group-exclusive programs to those with universal eligibility grounded in equality values.
      • “I suspect that what DEI will look like, say, four years from now is going to be much more of that—programs that are still thematised around promoting values of equality and inclusion, but allow universal participation.” – Kenji Yoshino [15:50]
  • On “Fig Leaf” Solutions:
    • Both caution against rebranding old practices merely to evade legal scrutiny.
      • “The Supreme Court has explicitly told us you cannot do indirectly what you cannot do directly…The court is going to tear off the fig leaf.” – David Glasgow [16:59]

4. Expanding the DEI Tent: "Go Where the Pain Is"

• Glasgow and Yoshino propose including groups historically overlooked by DEI—for example, religious groups, men underperforming in education, working-class, veterans, and first-generation college students.
  • “That’s boys are achieving less than girls in secondary and elementary school education. Men are dying by suicide at twice the rate. Simply because they’re male doesn’t mean that they’re deprived of the solicitude of DEI. …I would really love for us to move in that direction, of just going where the pain is rather than making assumptions.” – David Glasgow [17:32]

5. Implications for Measurement and Compliance

• Anticipate that to prove programs are not “fig leafs” for race-based preferences, organizations may need to show participation from majority groups (e.g., white first-generation students).
  • “Choose the white kid from Appalachia who was the first generation to go to college for your program in order to emphasize…this is really a first gen program, not a race-based program in disguise.” – David Glasgow [19:46]

6. Socioeconomic and Class-Based Equity

• Yoshino highlights that DEI efforts have historically focused less on socioeconomic status. He suggests organizations adopt hiring practices that don’t reflexively screen out the working class (e.g., by eliminating unnecessary degree requirements).
  • “There is research by sociologist Lauren Rivera that indicates that a lot of elite firms screen out individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds in order to hire the kind of economic elite into their organization.” – Kenji Yoshino [20:45]

7. Affirmative Action—Predictions vs Reality

• Pesca brings up the Supreme Court’s recent ban on race-based admissions and asks whether the feared drop in Black and Hispanic student enrollment materialized.
  • Glasgow notes that the shift was modest and didn’t cause expected “hollowing out”—suggesting both the effect was smaller and institutions had already grown cautious.
    • “When we saw the state bans on affirmative action, we saw much more precipitous drops…So it suggests the thumb on the scale…was much smaller than our opponents…would characterize.” – David Glasgow [24:00]
  • Tiebreaker preferences for underrepresented groups (“tiny, tiny thumb on the scale”) are no longer permissible.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On shaming and mistakes:
  “We as a community need to do a better job of welcoming ideas, even ones that make us feel uncomfortable.” – Kenji Yoshino [09:58]
• On fragile support:
  “You’ll get very fragile allegiances…. They haven’t really grappled the deeper moral argument.” – David Glasgow [12:16]
• On broadening the focus:
  “Go to where the pain or where the hurt is, rather than just assuming that because somebody belongs to a demographically dominant group that they're going to be dominant in every aspect of their lives.” – David Glasgow [17:32]
• On class-based interventions:
  “You could make sure, for instance, that college degree requirements are not in every job that you're posting, that you're really thinking, seriously, do we need to have a college education for this particular job?” – Kenji Yoshino [21:15]

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• Opening and Episode Theme: [01:03–08:28]
• Beginning of DEI Discussion with Yoshino and Glasgow: [08:28]
• Critique of DEI Orthodoxy and Shaming/Cancellation: [09:14–11:24]
• On Diversity Statements and Free Speech: [12:06–13:19]
• Envisioning the Future of DEI: [14:24–16:59]
• Expanding DEI to New Groups ("Go Where the Pain Is"): [16:59–19:16]
• Socioeconomic Status and Affirmative Action Results: [20:25–25:28]
• Conclusion of Interview: [25:28]

Tone & Style

The conversation is thoughtful, evidence-based, and self-critical, with a willingness to challenge sacred cows within the progressive DEI space. Pesca maintains his characteristically provocative yet reasoned style, pushing the guests to go beyond easy narratives, while Yoshino and Glasgow present nuanced, lawyerly arguments—sometimes making technical distinctions, always appealing for pragmatism and expansion of empathy.

Summary Usefulness:
This episode is highly informative for listeners invested in the future of workplace and campus diversity, or anyone seeking clarity on the legal and cultural debates over DEI. It clarifies the direction of reform—from performative acts to substantive equity, from rigid orthodoxy to open dissent, and from narrow focus on protected categories to a broader embrace of all sources of marginalization.