Claiming to be a “non-feminist” at work could be an act of discrimination, an employment tribunal has ruled.
An Environment Agency manager who claimed he was forced out of his job because of his views had his claim dismissed, with a judge saying not agreeing with equality and diversity in the workplace was a “questionable” belief that conflicted with the rights of colleagues.
Ruling against Kevin Legge, Robin Postle, the employment judge who chaired the tribunal, suggested holding such views could be in breach of equality laws.
What views on equality and diversity? That all are equal and have the same rights? Or that all other than cis white men are victoms of capitalist patriarchy?
Vey much depends on the type of feminism one is against. Certainly the whole point of diversity and inclusion is to accept differences of all type including diversity of thought. Indeed recognising differences to enable reach out and connection to a wider labour market and meritocratic approach was one of the points of D&I policy. ‘Vive la difference’ is fine, presumption of superiority not so much.
Chris, ‘Certainly the whole point of diversity and inclusion is to accept differences of all type
includingexcluding diversity of thought’.TFTFY
I incline to agree with your version Addolff.
Yeah DEI is about the precise opposite of diversity of thought.
a “questionable” belief that conflicted with the rights of colleagues
Colleagues have a right that one’s beliefs conform because otherwise they will feel unsafe and “unsafety” is the new tyranny.
DEI are having the opposite effect to that intended, ensuring that people who may have obtained a position through their own merits are viewed skeptically, because they are lumped in with obvious ‘diversity hires’ who are patently incompetent.
So not agreeing with equality and diversity in the workplace is actually an unquestionable belief that upholds the rights of colleagues.
I get very confused by this sort of thing.
I thought that it was impossible for men to be feminist because… well they are men.
Has feminist philosophy now changed so that it is compulsory to be a feminist even if one is a man ?
‘Claiming to be a “non-feminist” at work could be an act of discrimination, an employment tribunal has ruled.
An Environment Agency manager who claimed he was forced out of his job because of his views had his claim dismissed, with a judge saying not agreeing with equality and diversity in the workplace was a “questionable” belief that conflicted with the rights of colleagues.’
There’s a very significant difference between actively claiming to be a non-feminist, and not agreeing with values held by others.
Moreover, there is a distinction between those “non feminists” who merely do not subscribe to feminism, and those who subscribe to views which are inimical to feminism.
And a far bigger question of what the fuck this has to do with a quango sorting out flooding.
At one time it would have been useful and even fun for an employee under the cosh to raise such distinctions, to see what intellectual acumen the cosh-wielders can bring to bear. These days, though, it’s midwitted bigots all the way down.
Julia M
I resisted the temptation to wade in on Linkedin to an old University colleague who was arguing any criticism of an ethnic minority being promoted on the grounds of tokenism or ‘box ticking’ was motivated by racism. She mentioned Diane Abbott (who I believe was elected before Women only shortlists) but in any Female Labour MP post 1997 case I don’t see how anyone can say they aren’t the beneficiaries of discrimination. However, you have more of an insight into the mind of these people than I do.
I guess for DIE advocates we are now in the realms of ‘sunk cost’ even though it’s likely that the Coming rule of ISIS/ Hamas or their successors will consign it to the dustbin of history.
Hold on, *saying* something is an *action*? Are these fucking cunts fucking stupid?