Sen. Tom Cotton Fires Off Letter to Lockheed Martin in Response to Reported 'White Men' Training

(AP Photo/Danny Johnston)

Lockheed Martin’s getting looked into.

Last week, I covered the case of America’s largest defense contractor sending its white male executives to anti-white privilege training.


The classes had reportedly been provided by WMFDP, otherwise known as “White Men as Full Diversity Partners.”

Via its website, WMFDP explains our national situation:

When companies engage white males alongside their peers from different backgrounds, marginalized groups are freed from the exhausting work of coaching white men to understand their world. Most white men want to help. They just don’t know how. … Women and people of color cannot carry the burden alone.

Amid the training, the phrase “white men” was allegedly associated with things such as “anti-women,” “Aryan Nation,” “chauvinist,” “don’t listen,” and “racist.”

Straight white males were purportedly said to “minimize the perspectives and powers of people of other races,” “dismiss another’s voice with little or no consequence when he or she is the only member of their group,” be praised as a parent if they’re only “marginally competent,” not be required to be “overly attentive,” and be able to have B.O. without it being “taken as a reflection of [their] race.”

Additionally, the white guys found out Hispanics get poor school guidance counseling due to their race.

Furthermore, as it turned out, nonwhites in general have to deal with people “coming over to [their] house and asking to meet the new homeowners” and with “rudeness in retail and service settings.”

Moreover, the Caucasian dudes discovered that women drink whiskey, are pro choice, and have drive — which shouldn’t be intimidating (but commonly is).


In response to the initial report by City Journal’s Christopher Rufo, Lockheed Martin released a statement — which, so far as I can tell, didn’t really say anything:

Lockheed Martin has robust employee training programs focused on our core values of doing what is right, respecting others, and performing with excellence. Like many corporations, we employ multiple vendors and continuously evaluate the effectiveness of training programs to ensure they are aligned with our values, applicable laws and regulations, and incorporate employee feedback and best practices.

Well, now someone in Congress has something to say, and it’s Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton.

Tom’s launched a probe into Lockheed’s hosting of white-guy lessons.

Per Christopher Rufo, the senator fired off a letter to Lockheed Martin CEO James Taiclet.

Tom ran down the allegations:

Dear Mr. Taiclet

In June 2020, Lockheed Martin reportedly held a three-day diversity training for white male executives, who were referred to during the program as the “White Men’s Caucus.” The alleged training was led by a group called White Men as Full Diversity Partners. Materials distributed by this organization include lists of stereotypes about the supposed “privilege” enjoyed by various groups, including white people, males, and heterosexuals. For example, the section on “white privilege” lists the stereotypes that whites are taught to “minimize the perspectives and power of people of other races” and are less likely to die in interactions with police. The section on “male privilege” lists the stereotypes that men are “not expected to be overly attentive or to wait on people.” Facilitators allegedly encouraged Lockheed executives to “free associate” stereotypes about various groups. The stereotypes allegedly generated by your executives include that white men are “racist,” “privileged,” “set in their ways,” and “KKK.”


The senator then pointed out that the above would constitute a breaking of foundational law:

This training, if it occurred, appears to violate the principle of equal treatment that is the bedrock of American law, including civil-rights law. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in particular forbids employers from discriminating on the basis of race and engaging in any activities that “limit, segregate, or classify [their] employees.” The previous administration observed that the kind of stereotyping and scapegoating commonly found in these trainings “may contribute to a hostile work environment and give rise to potential liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

Then Tom struck a match and lit the hot seat with four queries:

With these concerns in mind, please provide answers to the following questions by June 11, 2021:

  1. Did this diversity training for Lockheed Martin executives take place as described?
  2. How many Lockheed Martin employees have been subjected to this kind of training?
  3. Did Lockheed Martin select employees to participate in this training? If yes, on what basis were they selected? Was this training given to employees who are not white men?
  4. Was the training mandatory or voluntary? Were employees told they were allowed to opt out of the training?

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

The training was a bit bold — aimed at, I suppose, destroying stereotypes by championing stereotypes.

Nonetheless, it’s certainly not out of step with goings-on in the private sector and the public education system.


Even so, hopefully, the stereotyped guys learned not to stereotype.

But they probably didn’t — that’s just how they are.

As for Lockheed Martin’s impending reply to Tom, stay tuned…there’s surely more to come.



See more pieces from me:

Gender Equality Comes for Crash Test Dummies

Outrage Erupts at Google After a Transgender Employee Is Forced to Wear a Badge Sporting Their ‘Dead Name’

Loudoun County Democratic Committee Demands Pastor Who Backed Teacher Put on Leave Recant His ‘Insidious Remarks’

Find all my RedState work here.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.



Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos