AIBU - "white, straight, able-bodied man? You cannot attend" - it's finally happened!

[enterYourPassword]

Story here

A lecturers’ union is refusing to let its officers take part in debates at an equality summit if they are white, straight, able-bodied men.

The equality conference of the University and College Union said that members must declare their ‘protected characteristic’ – whether they are gay, disabled, female or from an ethnic minority – when applying to attend.

Activists say that it means representatives who do not qualify cannot participate in all of the discussions – even though they have been elected by their union branch.

AIBU in thinking that this is exactly the opposite of what is supposed to be being achieved? It reminds me of that horrible excuse for a human Bahar Mustafa.

A Union refusing to let any officers take part (despite their jobs being working in equality) unless they have a "protected characteristic" makes no sense to me. A simplistic arguement to say that if the roles were reversed there would be an outcry but surely it should swing both ways.

It's patronising in the extreme to suggest the professionals have nothing to contribute unless they are part of a 'minority'. I've posted as my SIL (white, straight, middle class) is involved in this insomuch as she was invited to attend or perhaps invited to apply to attend (immaterial).

I personally think this is wrong. Any form of discrimination is bad and can have no positive outcome and no less so when enacted by what were a traditionally struggling minority - although they now seem to be a flourishing and powerful political force with extremely misguided attempts to create 'safe spaces' becoming the very thing they purport to be against.

Well, I'd like to see them try it!

"It's finally happened" kind of gives a clue as to what your feelings are on this sort of topic.

You havent really understood what is actually happening. You can post as much hate as you like you just keep revealing more and more your loathing and spite.

At Rape Crisis or Womens Aid, its only female rape survivors and survivors of DV that attend the sessions. Not everyone who has an opinion.
Thats not discrimination.

You can scream 'But Where Are All The Men' as much as you like.
Men who are rape survivors or victims of DV have their own groups to attend, and thats appropriate.

seek in most cases but not all. A worker can be harassed and called fag, queer, etc even if his colleagues know he is straight and it would still be unlawful. The harassment needs to be intimidating, hostile etc. Not friendly banter that the recipient worker enjoys and join's in with

seek in most cases but not all. A worker can be harassed and called fag, queer, etc even if his colleagues know he is straight and it would still be unlawful

yes, but that's what I'm saying - he doesn't have a protected characteristic, but the bullying is happening because people believe or pretend that he does!

I know many people want to live in a world where we are not allowed to talk to each other, but we'll just find ways to do that even if you force it on to us.

Scream as much and as loudly as you like, when we get together to discuss XYZ we dont want to have to explain the ABC's.

What is it about disadvantaged minorities having a safe space to explore matters applicable to that minority that upsets you so much, OP?

Yes,very good intentions,but unfortunately' the road is paved' and all that.

My son is currently being harrassed at work by management because he prefers not to disclose personal details on forms. None of their business what his sexual orientation is, in his view.

Are there break-out groups for 'none of the above'?

The only reason these breakout groups exist is because the privileged group have always been treated as if their opinion matters and they have a tendancy (not a certainty) of speaking over people who live with discrimination to explain to them what the minority group are feeling with.

It's annoying, frustrating and I honestly don't blame them at all for wanting a space where their voices can be heard.

dealing with not feeling - stupid phone!

witsender

"It's finally happened" kind of gives a clue as to what your feelings are on this sort of topic."

Absolutely. The tables have tipped too far. Inequality is inequality however it presents itself and any sane person is against it. You don't have to have "privilege" to be bigoted. Accusing the organisers of bigotry* is a little far-fetched of course but what other word is there for excluding someone purely based on their "characteristics".

PinguForPresident

What is it about disadvantaged minorities having a safe space to explore matters applicable to that minority that upsets you so much, OP

I can't see anything written here by me or another poster as sounding upset. I wasn't supposed to come across that way if I have and am not "outraged of Chipping Norton". I'm interested in other opinons which seem quite evenly spread on this thread. I am developing a tic when I hear "safe spaces" but besides that, I see it as positive discrimination and as I said above, "Inequality is inequality however it presents itself".

*blinkered or missing the point seems more apt

GoodbyeBoleyn

Ah, able-splaining? I hope you see the issue with your statement there and adding a "not certainty" doesn't nullify the massive stereotyping.

Thymeout

My son is currently being harrassed at work by management because he prefers not to disclose personal details on forms. None of their business what his sexual orientation is, in his view.

Are there break-out groups for 'none of the above'?

Do not consider for promotion due to paininthearseary group?

Assuming he isn't gay (as most other characteristics can be seen) and live in a country where homosexualness is illegal, it sounds a little like he's looking for an argument.

Enteryourpassword I used to put MYOB where sexual orientation was asked for, or religion, as it wasn't necessary for them to know. Same as when I am asked for my nationality at a Premier Inn, I put Jedi or Cornish....does it matter what nationality I am?

Taken from the article,

""She said the that break-out sessions have been dominated by those with no personal experience of the issues being discussed, adding: ‘We see in the union movement that… some people’s voices are far louder than others.’""

That's what prompted this decision.

I was working, when my DDs were still in school/nursery when the, then new Parental Leave came into being. It was impossible to have a discussion with our Manager, without it getting hijacked by people who had no need to ever use it.

There's usually a sense of outrage, or derision when a 'minority' group wants to discuss something, without a White/AB/S Man, to tell them why they're wrong.

I can think of numerous times that sort of thing has happened, throughout College/Uni as a Mature Student.

But I do feel for the White, Able Bodied, Straight man, that poor bastard has had it hard enough, since time began. When will the World think of his needs and Wants?

Do not consider for promotion due to paininthearsery group.

Yes - he can be an awkward sod.

'Just let it go, with an eye-roll,' I say. But I do think he's got a point. I don't think he's gay, but if he were why does he have to tell everyone?

Btw he gets on fine with his fellow workers. It's the bosses, looking over their shoulders at the people above them, that seem to find it a problem.

Birds

"But I do feel for the White, Able Bodied, Straight man, that poor bastard has had it hard enough, since time began. When will the World think of his needs and Wants?"

So, because they aren't a minority group, fuck 'em? Remember the 'he' you're using is probably less than 70 years old as opposed to "since time began". You're clearly only for equality when it suits you.

thyme

It's the bosses, looking over their shoulders at the people above them, that seem to find it a problem.

Hence the "not for promotion" comment. Sometimes we have to play the game. Unless he truly thinks it will be used against him (which it certainly won't) he's gaining nothing but proving an insignificant point.

As a slight aside, I wonder if MYOB would get you into these side discussions from the article?

Seriously? You believe that white, straight, able-bodied men don't have equality? They have more than equality, they have innate privilege.

cdtaylornats - Attitude? Really? One of the reasons for that is that members of the majority seem to think it's OK to hijack any event like this one, put on for members of the minority, because they feel they have the right to take part. I'm going to assume that you are a white female. As such do you really expect me to believe that you could discuss the issues facing black men? I'm not talking about something you've seen in the media, a book or by attending a social science course but actual first-hand experience? The purpose of these discussions is to share experiences and discuss ways of dealing with negative ones.
Why is it that whenever these type of events happen a certain section of society is up in arms? This isn't positive discrimination, it's an opportunity for certain groups to get together and share. They are called minorities for a reason - they are in the minority in society and may not have the opportunity to get together with others like themselves very often and if they do have the chance then some very vocal members of the majority moan! Do people think they are missing out on something special? Lets not forget that as members of the majority, you have the right to meet and discuss whatever you want, whenever you want. It's one of the many, many advantages you have.

I don't see the problem. Why would a straight, able, bodied white male want to crash a meeting designed as a space for disabled people or lesbians to discuss the issues that affect them?

Because principle. Because straight white males are the default human being, and preventing them from dominating discussions on everything is a human rights violation.

Or because hey, dictators everwhere don't like it when their subjects gather without them. It might breed revolution.

If you're really so concerned about their exclusion from certain meetings OP, why not set up a group just for privileged white, wealthy, straight, able bodied men?

We have Black History month in February here . That's when we hear " what about white history month?" The privileged ones cannot bear concessions for the under privileged.

What is it about disadvantaged minorities having a safe space to explore matters applicable to that minority that upsets you so much, OP?

For me it is not that safe spaces exist but that loud minorities of all sorts try to use them to shut down debate, most recently, like this, in Universities... e.g Germaine Greer. It is the hijacking of the idea that is most irritating.

We have Black History month in February here . That's when we hear " what about white history month?" The privileged ones cannot bear concessions for the under privileged. I don't understand how that adds anything here. That would be a ridiculous thing to do. There is no real grey area there. But in this instance, even if you don't agree with it, surely you can see that there are other concerns that have been raised, other voices that are saying that they are still not being heard because elected reprsentatives are being denied access.?

Rugby I'm a white male, and why can't a white male equality officer add things to the debate about issues facing black men? I could for example explain what discrimination looks like from my perspective, I could ask about a particular situation where I suspect discrimination and that the employee is too scared to come forward. I could ask what changes I can reasonably expect a workplace to put in place for a particular disability, I could ask for example why straight white males are apparently discriminated against in primary schools?

cdt - so in a session meant to discuss issues facing black men, you would ask why straight white males are apparently discriminated against in primary schools. That is a perfect illustration of why these breakout sessions need to be set up the way they are.