Can we, should we, stop using diversity as a selling point?
Having just listened to the news, I was pleased to hear that Diane Abbott is to stand as a potential leader of the Labour party – from what I know of her, she is not afraid of sharing her opinions and can make a good point – but my opinion has nothing to do with her gender – I’d be just as impressed with those same views and approaches from any person. So I was then disappointed to hear Ms Abbott say we “…can’t go forward with the leadership debate where there are no women…”. And could not believe my ears!
Image via Wikipedia
If someone at that potentially elevated level makes the point that being a woman means that she offers diversity what chance is there for the rest of society to grow beyond the inequality that many strain against. We can’t have it both ways! Ms Abbott has gone down in my opinion for using the point that being female (in this instance) is a positive reason for her to be considered as the next leader of the Labour party, and to me this detracts from the many real reasons that may make her a good leader that have nothing to do with her being a woman, never mind the child of immigrants, as she also mentioned.
She is worthy in her own right as a person, not because she is female. Don’t we really want a society where we look at the person, what that person stands for – irrespective of gender, race, age, whatever. It’s just too frustrating for words. It may well be that a person’s gender, age, etc has helped to build character and their ethos, but it would not be the same, necessarily, for another person of similar diversities.
I don’t care if it is naive of me to want a society that looks beyond the faces, genders, ages, race, creed – every one of us needs to just do it – be the change – not wait for there to be community-wide shift – whether that community be at business, town, county, country or worldwide level.
Honestly! If we cannot get a grip at the supposedly higher levels of the land, it’s no bloody wonder that sensible equality is still far from reality.
What do you think?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Abbott enters Labour leader race (news.bbc.co.uk)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e3abb518-b72f-4929-8c03-44e44dbc93fa)
About BabsBabs runs The Blogmistress to help people use WordPress for their websites and/or blogs. Here on Birds however she lets loose on just about any subject other than WordPress! Follow her on twitter
View all posts by Babs →
11 Responses to Can we, should we, stop using diversity as a selling point?
In her shoes: My descent in entrepreneurial hell
In her shoes is a series of anonymous posts from women in business, sharing their experience. In your comments you are asked to answer the question – What would you do in her shoes? My story began 9 months ago; it is a story of self-realisation, friendship, love and betrayal. After 11 years at home [...]
I agree with you entirely, Babs, but you have to remember that the majority of the electorate is not as well-read and educated as some of us. The fact that she used her gender as an argument to be included in the leadership race will have gone over the heads of many people; and it will weigh in her favour with others.
We do want to get past the whole box ticking exercise, but maybe our society is still not evolved enough just yet to handle this? I often wonder what the suffragettes must be thinking, as they watch how we've made such huge strides to achieve our right to get pissed as any man yet are still timorously asking permission to get involved in management issues!
I HATE typos, especially in a format where I can't either delete or correct them!!
When should we stop using diversity as a selling point? when the general public stop buying it. She's pitching for a job, and when applying for a job, you have to give your panel what they want.
Twitter: zakomedia
I'm not sure where I stand on this one. On the one hand, of course a person's gender shouldn't be an issue whatever job they are going for – all it should be about is competence to do the job.
On the other hand, when we look at the pictures of the new Cabinet, and at the ratio of men to women in Parliament and in corporate boardrooms, it becomes obvious that there is something fundamentally wrong with our society. Doesn't it?
It does, Ann, but perhaps there are no women who want the job, for whatever reason. Those people perhaps need working environment that is more conducive to how they want to live their life – whether that be as a parent, or whatever their lifestyle choice is. And if the employer, the government/political party/constituency or whatever it is, cannot provide a suitable working environment for the best people for the job, then changes need to be made.
It is a simple view, but what are we waiting for in order for things to change – if we don't say what we want then those in power cannot hear us…
Twitter: babssaul
edited (you just have to pop us a note and happy to edit – but hear your frustration, Morag.
Twitter: babssaul
Honestly, I don't know what to make of it.
Ms Abbott is very controversial. She sees her race as far more important than her gender from what I observe. I have never met her, never had dealings with her and knowing people who had, I am glad not to.
I don't think she will make a good party leader, I also think that a leadership election must have 50% male candidates and 50% female candidates before they can even think about electing someone.
Coming from East London, having been educated (somewhat badly in East London schools) to see an MP send her own child to a non state school rather than work to improve the lot of ALL the kids in the area smacks of the new Labour elitism. She has had a fab education, and she should be focusing on lifting all those kids out of the gutter, and encouraging “social mobility” instead she is not.
You're right of course, the mere fact of being a woman shouldn't be the reason to vote for Diane. And the fact that so few women can/do desire to enter parliament may be due to personal choice. But if the working environment or rules of the game need changing who is going to do that? Turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas. Unless there is a critical mass of women driving for change there never will be any.
Sorry Ann, I disagree with your second statement.
” the ratio of men to women in Parliament and in corporate boardrooms, it becomes obvious that there is something fundamentally wrong with our society. Doesn't it? “
Its very simple you are either good at your job and have the desire to lead or enter the boardroom or you are not and you dont.
Not all women have the desire to be at the top level the same as men, why is it noticed more that there are fewer women? in my opinion its because women are actualy looking for it whereas men accept the numbers on this are not important just the people.
I absolutely agree that it should always be best person for the job, regardless of race, gender or any other irrelevant factors.
But I am also very concerned about the most powerful body of people in the country only reflecting less than 50% of the people they serve and make decisions on behalf of. I genuinely feel that a more diverse team is a better team (a team, for example, comprised mainly of black women would not be good for the same reason – but I bet there would be more of an outcry about a bunch of black women running the country than a bunch of white men).
My blog elsewhere questions the decision to make Theresa May Equalities Minister. I would rather have a man in the job who genuinely believed in fairness and equality for all than a woman who didn't appear to.
Thatcher becoming Prime Minister is often hailed as a victory for women's rights, but I don't think she was the right person for the job, let alone the right woman. I would only support Diane Abbot if I thought she had the qualities required for the job. If it means the peole leading the country are more representative of the people they serve, that is an added bonus, not a necessary requirement. But I would see it as a good thing to have a more diverse cabinet.
Twitter: evenbreak
In a way it's good and in a way it's a shame that Jane's post on Theresa May's role as Equality Minister and Babs' on Diversity should follow on so closely…
Do these discussions put a different slant on the term Proportional Representation?
Twitter: Linda_Mattacks