Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dheepa" data-source="post: 72779" data-attributes="member: 1572">I agree with Dan here. If the point of BAME groups and general affirmative action initiative is to increase representation than naturally what falls under the ME category depends heavily on who is underrepresented. However, I don't think the criticism being made here is against a broad categorisation of the ME group though. Instead I view it as an issue with the white vs non-white narrative that lumping any and all BAME people into one group creates. The fact of the matter is the issues I face as South Asian is very different from the issues a Black person would face, and likewise is very different from the issues that a person of East Asian descent would face. It's simply not productive to deal with such a broad range of issues purely under one category. Any BAME person can tell you that even within one of those communities there exists a multitude of prejudices/harmful stereotypes against other drastically different ethnic communities, so if the creation of real diversity is the goal then you need to be able to openly address these nuances.I also have a friend in the US who recently pointed out the same, that POC or increasingly BIPOC (black, indigenous, people of colour) is the term that's used. I think in the US, a lot of it is centred on skin colour because well, the US population in general is heavily made up of white immigrants (from Europe for example) from all over the world. But the fact that someone is say of German descent wouldn't necessarily change the structural privilege they benefit from due to being of a certain skin colour.I realise I'm saying things many people may not agree with here so please feel free to throw in your two cents as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dheepa, post: 72779, member: 1572"] I agree with Dan here. If the point of BAME groups and general affirmative action initiative is to increase representation than naturally what falls under the ME category depends heavily on who is underrepresented. However, I don't think the criticism being made here is against a broad categorisation of the ME group though. Instead I view it as an issue with the white vs non-white narrative that lumping any and all BAME people into one group creates. The fact of the matter is the issues I face as South Asian is very different from the issues a Black person would face, and likewise is very different from the issues that a person of East Asian descent would face. It's simply not productive to deal with such a broad range of issues purely under one category. Any BAME person can tell you that even within one of those communities there exists a multitude of prejudices/harmful stereotypes against other drastically different ethnic communities, so if the creation of real diversity is the goal then you need to be able to openly address these nuances. I also have a friend in the US who recently pointed out the same, that POC or increasingly BIPOC (black, indigenous, people of colour) is the term that's used. I think in the US, a lot of it is centred on skin colour because well, the US population in general is heavily made up of white immigrants (from Europe for example) from all over the world. But the fact that someone is say of German descent wouldn't necessarily change the structural privilege they benefit from due to being of a certain skin colour. I realise I'm saying things many people may not agree with here so please feel free to throw in your two cents as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Search

Search

Reply to thread