Equality and Diversity Laws, should these be scrapped??

David49

Discrimination and equality has gone mad there is only one group that is not vulnerable, white males, assuming they are not gay, disabled or some other disadvantage.
It doesn't affect me Im old and vulnerable now, so enjoying the advantages, that women, migrants, ethnic this or that and all the other groups have been getting.

Are you serious, or are you just trying to wind up women on a site where we generally feel comfortable chatting amongst ourselves?

Vulnerable white males?? Look at the crime statistics before making such crass statements. Yes, there are systemic problems surrounding a subset of that group - working class males with flawed or no male role models - they are not best served by the education system, and society expects them to find roles despite their disadvantages, but in general white men are at a massive advantage. I can’t believe anyone would say otherwise (however big the chip on their shoulder) and believe it to be true.

Please could you explain, David. The way I see it men have historically had the upper hand in a number of areas and they're not happy about losing it.

You are surely not arguing that white male supremacy should be brought back in order to pacify some groups who "aren't coping" with the competition?

White men are not excluded from protections. A white man can be discriminated against because of his age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or even because he is male. Equality law protects everyone.

Positive discrimination is against them in all areas every company has to have their quota of every other group, white men have been the losers.

I realize that in this predominately female forum you are going to disagree, but if you want a reason for male behavior deteriorating and Reform gaining support it should be high on your list.

David49

Discrimination and equality has gone mad there is only one group that is not vulnerable, white males, assuming they are not gay, disabled or some other disadvantage.
It doesn't affect me Im old and vulnerable now, so enjoying the advantages, that women, migrants, ethnic this or that and all the other groups have been getting.

I don't think equality has "gone mad." What has changed is that society has become more aware that different groups can face different barriers, whether that's because of sex, race, disability, age, sexuality, or other factors.

White men are not excluded from protections. A white man can be discriminated against because of his age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or even because he is male. Equality law protects everyone.

The purpose of diversity and equality measures isn't to give some groups advantages over others. It's to try to ensure that people have a fair opportunity regardless of their background. Sometimes those measures are imperfect and should be debated, but that's very different from saying that one group has no protection while everyone else receives special treatment.

Rather than seeing equality as a competition between groups, I'd rather focus on creating a society where nobody is disadvantaged because of characteristics they cannot change.

This is a purely political act and a very dangerous one. When Kemi Badenoch talks about Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) rules, she is primarily trying to appeal to the tribalism of several overlapping groups of voters:

Conservative voters who dislike "identity politics"
Voters considering Reform UK
Working-class voters across ethnic backgrounds

Removing measures such as the Public Sector Equality Duty would weaken safeguards against discrimination and make it harder to identify unequal impacts on different groups. What it will not do is improve the lives of the groups who are likely to find her words appealing - it may well make life worse for them too.

twaddle

David49

Discrimination and equality has gone mad there is only one group that is not vulnerable, white males, assuming they are not gay, disabled or some other disadvantage.
It doesn't affect me Im old and vulnerable now, so enjoying the advantages, that women, migrants, ethnic this or that and all the other groups have been getting.

In my opinion, that's a gross exaggeration.

White males are the largest group voting for Reform, not just high earners, working class too, they are very dissatisfied, this spills over into the riots we see in Southampton and Belfast. They are fed up with discrimination against them in many many ways, not least by women taking many of the jobs.

Rosie51

Equality and equity are often very different things needing different approaches. One size definitely doesn't fit all!
If only there was a more common sense approach in all areas rather than dogma.

That is exactly what the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), which Badenoch wants to scrap, is designed to do. It obliges public bodies to consider and reflect on their policies and practices in relation to equality and to come up with "common sense" solutions. She is not calling for the Equality Act itself to be abolished.

Equality and equity are often very different things needing different approaches. One size definitely doesn't fit all!
If only there was a more common sense approach in all areas rather than dogma.

Common sense should rule but there’s no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater as regards equality, if the rules were that everyone would be judged the same when it comes to crime/ jobs that would be good.But we do need laws against discrimination so that transport and employment protects those with visible and invisible problems.

David49

Discrimination and equality has gone mad there is only one group that is not vulnerable, white males, assuming they are not gay, disabled or some other disadvantage.
It doesn't affect me Im old and vulnerable now, so enjoying the advantages, that women, migrants, ethnic this or that and all the other groups have been getting.

In my opinion, that's a gross exaggeration.

Yes. You said this so much more eloquently than I, but this is what I mean.

In the United States, white women have benefitted the most from DEI policies.

www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-list

It is beneficial to be cautious of who exactly is affected by removal of certain policies.

(You only need to talk as I do to some young women in sectors of work still dominated by men that not only discrimination but also mocking and bullying still does take place).

Remember the report on attitudes as regards race and gender in the Fire Service not too long ago? Quite shocking. There is very much still work to be done

It shouldn't be a "scrap them or not" issue.

To me it's an issue of enabling all to be able to work, travel, live without feat of harm. To level the playing field when before there was advantage for male, white, able bodied, married or not, having children or not being a carer or not. To take any needful steps to level that paying field

and to maintain that level playing field, because although in some cases one might say awareness has been raised and the field levelled, its my opinion in many areas that it is constantly in danger of being eroded, and therefore without being OTT, quietly and firmly maintaining boundaries.

so, for example: the travel assistance one if you have a rail disability pass, and making sure your local buses are as accessible as possible, takes continual oversight:

for a person of limited or no sight, overseeing locally that facilities needed for those people to work remain available,

that women can have children and don't lose their jobs: that there is adequate protection for women and any other vulnerable people in the workplace against abuse:

that work is still done in higher education to take in students with great potential but lesser qualifications as opposed to someone privately educated:

to check that discrimination is not still taking place in terms of the world of work and institutions as regards ethnicity (as regards this, so much has been done, but make no mistake, it still happens).

No going over the top: reasonable, steady approach.

David I do know white males who grumble as their expectations of getting this or that position in society are threatened by women in particular: misogyny does still exist, ad does take this form.

Discrimination and equality has gone mad there is only one group that is not vulnerable, white males, assuming they are not gay, disabled or some other disadvantage.
It doesn't affect me Im old and vulnerable now, so enjoying the advantages, that women, migrants, ethnic this or that and all the other groups have been getting.

I don't think she's in the running to have her way, though.
Regardless of her stance, mine will remain the same.

MissAdventure

Ensuring every single person has access to public transport is as it shouldd be.
Whether by using ramps, wheeling their chair at certain points, using a hoist, lift, or whatever it takes, is as it should be.

Its public transport, for all members of the public.

But public authorities wouldn't need to consider that kind of equality of access, if Mrs Badenoch had her way.

Ensuring every single person has access to public transport is as it shouldd be.
Whether by using ramps, wheeling their chair at certain points, using a hoist, lift, or whatever it takes, is as it should be.

Its public transport, for all members of the public.

No, thee exact opposite.

Replying to MissAdventure…..
. This is ‘preferential treatment’ as not everybody needs assistance to get on and off a train. Are you saying that this should not be allowed?

One example is…. One of my family needs assistance when travelling by train, to get on and off. This right to assistance is enshrined in Equality law. It is bad enough now, the haphazard nature of this help, imagine if there wasn’t a law to make train companies offer it and disabled travellers had to rely on train staff just using common sense!

You have to treat people as individuals, that's all.
It shouldn't mean preferential treatmenr, in any way, shape or form.

E&D (in my opinion) only becomes divisive when not used or applied correctly.

It’s not just about skin colour it’s about levelling the playing field for a whole host of minorities, not just ethnicity.

Positive discrimination has utterly backfired, but that doesn’t mean prejudice and discrimination doesn’t still exist in many areas.

All people should be treated fairly, not one section get preferential treatment over another. Then Martin Luther’s dream will become reality where it matters not what the colour of your skin is but what you are inside. EDI doesn’t achieve that and imo makes for more divisiveness plus costing a fortune which could be better spent elsewhere.