Another reason people don't like diversity initiatives is that whenever you try to have an honest conversation about its problems, you get accused of ridiculous things, like being racist/sexist/etc or thinking nepotism is good.

Nobody thinks nepotism is good (or at least, nobody on this thread does). But there are more- and less- threatening versions of it.

I don't understand what your point is. A company hiring a woman with no relevant experience because she's the niece of the CTO is bad. A company hiring a woman with no relevant experience because she's the niece of the CTO but it's ok this time because she's a woman also seems bad. The former is "garden variety" nepotism, and we all agree it's bad. The latter is the new "woke" nepotism, but it's really the same as the former, with the "woke" part being used as an excuse.

How does that benefit anyone other than the people doing the nepotism?

I don't think anyone is contesting that, but the point seems to be that the people who push these initiatives undeniably think nepotism is, in fact, good because that's what their actions tell us.

Seems like the word "woke" is doing the job of establishing "the kind of critique of nepotism that I find threatening" in your own case...