DEI initiatives and woke ideology are not making workplaces friendlier but hostile to anyone not fully on board with them, writes Raquel Rosario Sánchez in the Telegraph. “The pitfalls of diversity and inclusion drives are not theoretical to me – I’ve lived them.” Here’s an excerpt.
Kemi Badenoch is not alone in her concerns that a well-meaning push to mandate diversity and inclusion within workplaces could be “counterproductive” and detrimental to employees, particularly members of minority groups that the initiatives are meant to support. According to a report by the Free Speech Union published in March, 36% of employees witnessed colleagues being penalised for challenging Equality, Diversity and Inclusion training. 31% stated leaving a job because of their employer’s promotion of ideology.
Sharing the findings, Thomas Harris, Director of Data and Impact stated: “There is no evidence the current approach is making Britain’s offices more welcoming, friendlier places to work, and plenty of evidence that it is turning them into a hostile environment, particularly for minorities and those who do not subscribe to woke ideology.”
These pitfalls are not theoretical for me because I have lived through them. I used to be a frontline worker supporting women recovering from crack cocaine and heroin addiction. These are some of the kindest and most courageous women I have ever met. Like so many of us, they struggled to cope when life got tough and took a bad turn. This was a difficult position, but I loved my job because I care deeply about the women.
A few months in, senior management invited me to the organisation’s EDI group. Being from the Dominican Republic, I was one of the few immigrants and women of colour within the organisation, so perhaps they assumed I would feel flattered. Yet the second I read the email I was filled with a deep sense of dread. I expressed my hesitation that EDI groups tend to exist to ensure ideological compliance and cohesiveness.
I heard many statements I disagreed with, but I rarely objected because I broadly believe that being open-minded about divergent views is the bedrock of democracy. Unfortunately, this tolerance was not a two-way street. Soon enough, the group sought to mandate employees to request pronoun declarations from the service users. Aside from being compelled speech, this was the least of the concerns of the women I supported. They were worried about escaping dangerous drug dealers, homelessness and exploitation. When I questioned this, I was informed that “gender critical beliefs” (that sex is real and material to everybody’s lives) were not welcomed at this women’s service. The organisation’s “trans-inclusive” position seemed to supersede everything else, including the women it was supposed to be helping.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.