Diversity for thee

You hear a lot of this sentiment these days:

The country’s top judge says her colleagues must become more diverse in order to better represent the public.

Lady Hale addressed the issue as she marked the centenary of the act that enabled women to enter profession.

The first female president of the supreme court called for the judiciary to increase its diversity to avoid the risk of being seen as ‘from another planet’.

This would include greater balance in gender representation at Britain’s highest court and quicker promoting for ethnic minorities and those from less privileged backgrounds, the Guardian reports.

A couple of months back I was at a seminar in which several ageing men on the stage signaled their virtue to the audience by bemoaning the gender balance of the panel, which was around 7:3 in favour of men. About a year ago I listened to another bunch of ageing men on a stage, this time in the auditorium of an oil company, saying they need to do more to promote women into senior positions. My immediate thought was, if these people considered the matter so pressing, why don’t they resign and hand their position to a more deserving female? Similarly, if pasty-white Lady Hale believes Britain’s judiciary should become more ethnically diverse, what better way to kick-start the process by replacing her with a minority?

You can be sure that anyone who has wormed their way onto a panel at a seminar, climbed the greasy pole up to executive management in an oil company, or backstabbed their way to becoming Britain’s top judge has only one person’s career in mind: their own. At every step of their career they would have sandbagged and outmaneuvered anyone who represented competition, be they white, brown, yellow, male, or female. When they were middle managers somewhere eyeing their next promotion they weren’t harping on about the need for greater representation or increased diversity. No, they were promoting themselves. But now the top job is securely under their belt and retirement is on the horizon, they want other people to sacrifice their career ambitions on the altar of diversity politics. The correct response is to either ignore their self-serving virtue-signaling, or to draw attention to their hypocrisy and mock them mercilessly.

Next time you hear someone calling for increased diversity in their organisation, you should ask why they haven’t resigned yet.


10 thoughts on “Diversity for thee

  1. Helen Lewis of the New Statesman, a self proclaimed feminist who is currently writing a book on the subject recently interviewed Jordan Peterson for GQ magazine. It should be noted that both Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan thought that this was one of the best interviews of JP. JP said it hadn’t been friendly and thought she was unprofessional at the start and this put him on edge.

    Anyway, they get on to privilege at about 17:30 and he challenges her to give up her privilege from 17:50, although I recommend listening from about 16:00 to get the full effect. She doesn’t like it, especially when he goes on about structures and challenges he on the patriarchy.


  2. Obviously, the judiciary should be exactly representative of the population at large. The same proportion of dishonest people, stupid people who don’t understand the law, those whose real interest is in Sharia, and bigoted racist homophobes.

  3. I love JP. He’s about the only person in the world in the public sphere today who tells the unvarnished truth about everything (there’s a few policians who touch on some truths, but they’re still slippery a**eholes, they are politicians after all). I love the way interviewers state ‘facts’ about modern society before trying to ask some (normally loaded) question, and he doesn’t let the assumptions lie, and attacks them, to the terrible consternation of the interviewer, who wasn’t expecting to have to defend something they assumed was a given.

  4. @Pcar,

    I linked to the embedded version in the GC article because it gave her perspective, as a lead in.

    As to JP, he has 2 personas:

    When he’s talking to the like of Joe Rogan or Sam Harris (now) he’s in his element as they explore ideas, even when they disagree. When he’s with Eric Weinstein its mind blowing.

    When he’s with journalists he comes across as angry but its more like frustration. They all think that they can come up with some gotcha, which always turns out to be lazy, uninformed, thinking. This is now insulting to JP because he’s demonstrated numerous times how well read he is and doesn’t make statements he can’t back up and shows the lack of professionalism of the journalists. The worst was Cathy Newman.

  5. The Jordan Peterson interview with Helen Lewis had a telling passage where Peterson challenged Lewis to recognise her privilege and hand her position over to someone who didn’t have that privilege. Her response was revealing of the mindset.

  6. I watched some of the JP GQ interview. He is so much faster and leading the conversation it’s incredible. She stumbles along making feel good statements without understanding how contradictory they are. More male primary school teachers is a cracking example of this about 20 mins in.

    The corker mentioned above where the voluntary setting aside privilege is asked for is stunning. I should use that at work. We have a target of more women and more LBGT people above a certain grade. All senior people at that level support it publicly but none quit to make way….. yeah.

Comments are closed.