Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Kemi Badenoch: Diversity obsession has led to Kafkaesque madness (KB for PM?)

526 replies

IwantToRetire · 30/07/2023 18:17

Another really straightforwarded down to earth practical commentary of where chasing the rainbow has led us. And ideas on how Government cant, without being dictatorial help solve the mess.

The root of the problem is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Equality Act 2010, often exploited by those with a separate agenda. The Equality Act is a shield, not a sword. It is about preventing discrimination, not social engineering. There are no protected groups in the act, only protected characteristics. A white man is just as protected on the characteristics of race and sex as a black woman, yet many believe the act is there just to protect minorities, when in reality it protects us all.

Many companies’ diversity and inclusion activities are falling foul of the law; for example by confusing legal positive action and positive discrimination, which is illegal — except when selecting political candidates (a handy get-out-clause Labour devised to use all-women shortlists). Encouraging people from underrepresented backgrounds to apply for a job or go for a promotion is positive action, and legal. Restricting applications for a position to a certain group is positive discrimination and most certainly isn’t. This has led to increasing calls for the Equality Act to be scrapped. The act is 13 years old and could be improved but the issue is not the law. It’s bad actors misrepresenting it to suit their agenda.

Many of these laws were written at a time when institutions knew how to self-regulate. Someone proposing a terrible idea would be checked by colleagues in the organisation. Today, those colleagues are scared of being called bigots for disagreeing, so they say nothing. What the Farage and Sawers cases have done is show that this problem is getting worse. Long-held tenets of liberal democracy — freedom of association, freedom of conscience, the presumption of innocence — are being tossed aside in favour of dubious inclusion strategies that themselves fall foul of the law. In some cases they’re cancelling people before any wrongdoing occurs, leaving them with no way to prove their innocence.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kemi-badenoch-banking-scandal-natwest-niigel-farage-wdp3mmq0w
Also available via archive.ph

Kemi Badenoch: Diversity obsession has led to Kafkaesque madness

I became very uneasy reading this month that NatWest Group had closed the account of Professor Lesley Sawers. Why had this accomplished businesswoman, appointed an OBE for services to equalities and business, had her bank account closed after 25 years?...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kemi-badenoch-banking-scandal-natwest-niigel-farage-wdp3mmq0w

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
dcbc1234 · 30/07/2023 18:30

She's not wrong. I often include men's sex based rights as also being under threat. It is though a poor law as it is so poorly understood across the board and then can easily be taken out of context by bad faith players like Stonewall. Many people including judges don't understand how to correctly apply the comparative characteristics correctly to any given situation. Equally it is obvious to me that gender reassignment was never meant to apply to those under 18. Kemi is right with Kafkaesque. Think law needs clarification and do we really need GRA at all anymore now gay marriage is recognised in law. People can present as they wish.