It’s all too easy to mock comment pieces over on the Gruniad’s comments make free – but I’ve never been afraid of going for easy targets and this recent piece just amused me too much.
Jane Fae is it seems convinced that “an unstoppable impulse is about to sweep away traditional ideas of gender – and we’ll all benefit”. It’s nice to see that they’ve noticed that the marriage equality bill didn’t bring equality as quite a few people observed at the time, though not from quite such a narrow perspective as Ms Fae is concerned about.
However enough of that the two things that really amused me where the following pronouncements:
Now there are many arguments to be made as to why any given social change should come about but that it would be cruel to not let a minority get what they want isn’t the most convincing I’ve ever come across. Without a bit more detail as to just what it is they’re being denied that is so cruel this argument could really be extended to any social change you like. Also historically the precedent for societal change on the basis of the minority thinking it cruel isn’t that good.
The gem of Ms Fae’s piece though is this:
Why? In a society where gender is allegedly no longer an issue, whose business is it of anyone but the individual concerned and those closest to them? “
Now I actually utterly agree with Ms Fae whose business is it what gender someone is or how they identify. But firms have to ask that question because the “equality” agenda so long championed by the Gruniad and the likes of Ms Fae has demanded that any aspect of life they’ve set their sights on must not only be equal but must prove it’s meeting the standards of equality that they demand. So how do prospective employers make sure they won’t come under fire from the “equality” police for not being equal enough, why by asking that very question Ms Fae objects to and recording it. Once upon a time they didn’t bother, they just (in the large) tried to hire the best candidates, which is surely what equality would be about, but because there some employers preferred one sex over another (and many womens only businesses still do) the equality enforcers demanded that the employers be able to proof that they were conducting their business in an approved of fashion – so they had to start asking about gender and race and all sorts of other things to make sure they were suitably diverse. So Ms Fae if you want such irrelevant questions to stop being asked I suggest you might want to start campaigning to let people and businesses just treat everyone as people and on their merits without having to record which artificial pigeon holes the current fashion of diversity demand everyone fit into.
Just a thought.