I think in your example, you shouldn't hire by quota, but you also shouldn't exclude women or introduce obstacles that exclude them. It's so weird that this has turned into such a controversial statement!

The problem is that DEI in practice tends to be the other kind of stuff. I think at this point it's actually kinda disingenuous to pretend that "DEI" is "just diversity, equity, and inclusion" (i.e. that you can just point at the dictionary definitions of these words to explain what it is). No, it's a very specific political mindset, and the label is now firmly associated with it. You can't say that "DEI is just equality" anymore so than you can say that about "all lives matter".

The problem is both are still sexist; where is the money to pay for training coming from?

If it's a government initiative then it's taking from all to only give to women.

If it's a publicly owned company, then can you actually make a convincing case that it's a benefit to stockholders?

Only in the case of a private company does this lack ethical issues, but at that point it's just some billionaires whim.