Diversity?
I’m not sure when it became a thing that we were told by the ‘someones’ who begin such foci that we must value and appreciate diversity as if diversity were something newly discovered by the enlightened and wise ones. When did that happen? Also, while I’m at the question asking thing, why did that happen?
Was it as a direct consequence of the ‘someones’ noticing a growing lack of tolerance of anyone from a different location because individuals or groups approach situations or life in an alternative way to the ‘me’ or the ‘us’? Or did the ‘someones’ notice that frustrations were arising towards those who have made different life choices regarding self/belief/sexual orientation to the ‘me’ or the ‘us’? Or did it become necessary to highlight the need to celebrate diversity because individuals and groups of people couldn’t cope with (or process) the visible or hidden medical/emotional/learning/mental health needs in others and any associated behaviours demonstrated?
Alternatively, was it that those who categorised themselves as being connected to and a part of whatever people-group they felt passionate about or believed was being over-looked by society in general, wanted their differences more readily acknowledged by those without that particular difference?
Maybe it was a combination of all of those things (alongside potentially countless others) that influenced the move towards the more visibly named celebration of diversity. Maybe it was a genuine attempt at breaking down the walls that divide a person from a person or a group of people from another. Maybe.
We now live in a society (from the little I can see) that promotes diversity by ensuring (as far as is possible) that there is the visible and noticed representation of as many individuals from as many different people groups (once they’ve been stuck into whatever category) as is possible in any given organisation or situation. Is that progress or is that a box ticking exercise which is really causing more of a divide between individuals and groups of people? I don’t know, but I do wonder.
I have witnessed some examples within education over the years. Some (many) schools count (and present to those ‘outside’ the school) how many nationalities are represented by their school community as if this data collection exercise is a demonstration of their ability to positively engage with diversity. And this is while the children (and staff) at the schools continue to struggle with each other as they learn (often slowly) to tolerate the behaviours and ways of each other just as part of their own learning about life and people (irrespective of any known difference of race, need or belief etc).
In other schools, it has become a key focus to ensure the governing body of the school and the staff teaching at the school also have as many different people groups represented as possible on the team. They often say it is good for the school (and the children) to ensure there is diversity visible and in action within the school.
Of course, I see there can be value in this. In a school where many of the children are from families who work for the Armed Forces, for example, it would make a lot of sense to have someone representing those families who really knew what was going on for those families. There might indeed be practical situations that are similar for families who have high mobility. That makes sense and has the potential to be of benefit. But attempting to be seen (for the sake of being seen) to have representatives from as many different types, age, race, culture, belief and identified need group (etc) is bordering on ridiculous. It fundamentally becomes just a tick box exercise. Surely.
I am a white, British, female, autistic, working/middle class human (to name a few of my categorisations). I am no more like another white, British, female, autistic, working/middle class human that I would be any other human from any other mixture of categorisations.
We teach the children in most schools that they are unique and there is no one like them. There is only one of each of us. This I fully agree with. Why then do we follow that up with a focus being on all the different categories, groupings, labels, we can think of at the time? I am clear in my own mind, because of my own experiences, that a white, British, female, autistic, working/middle class human has as much trouble identifying with another white, British, female, autistic, working/middle class human as she does with anyone from another group. In fact, truth be told, she often finds those who fit into the same categories as her the most annoying because there somehow exists an underlying expectation that there should be more similarities. But it is likely that there won’t be. Why? Because, by Design, everyone is created to be the only version of them. That’s diversity at its point of origin, isn’t it?
There will continue to be demonstrations, marches, events and all manner of ‘get togethers’ for those belonging to all kinds of groups of any sexual orientation, belief, race, culture or identified need grouping. These groups will keep on seeking recognition or rights or support or representation. Why? Because often many people seek out those who they hope will be like them. Aren’t we all searching for a level of understanding or a place of belonging? Isn’t there some part in all of us that seeks those who are (seemingly at least) of like mind in some ways? Isn’t that part of the human condition?
It’s logical. I get it. I do it. But maybe I’m more aware than I have been ever before that it’s vital that I don’t place the emphasis on the grouping or the label or the collective noun for whichever category of people groups there might be. The emphasis must be that each life is an individual created to be themselves for a purpose that is only about their place in this world.
If we could help each other to be the individual that we are, if we could encourage each other to be happy with who we are and how we are and who we are becoming as we live our lives, if we could actually accept each other as different and loosen our grip on the need to somehow prove a difference or need exists (when the differences and needs are ever present everywhere always), what would the impact be? I do wonder.
It is now often written (in whatever context) some kind of variation of this kind of statement: “We are a diverse group of people who…..”. Yes. You are. You don’t have to prove it. As soon as it is more than just you or just me, we are that. Diverse. Simple. Maybe……