Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Why is it that all gender or racial diversity approaches start from the (prejudicial) premise that this necessarily entails over representing women and ethnic "minorities" at the direct (and unrepentant) expense of White Anglo-Saxon (or whatever, Norman then) or those perceived to be (as is often the case with Welsh, Irish and Jewish candidates, just ask Ben Shapiro)?
Balance is (or should be) the goal: persons employed because they are the best in their own right and not because they are the most feminine or the furthest from white English in origin or outlook. An all male firm sounds horrific to me as a male solicitor, but an all female firm is just as intimidating and as hard to justify on the principles of representative diversity.
What then of the ever increasing number of all female or 80:20 female to male firms? How are they to be measured against this standard? Or is diversity only relevant when a woman stands to benefit?

Your details

Cancel