I think what has happened is that I may not have communicated what I had meant properly, and perhaps should have chosen my words more carefully.
Ethnicity and socioeconomic issues are both fundamental issues. I did not mean to suggest that one is more important than the other. Although I can appreciate how this may have been interpreted, given my poor choice of words.
As you, and many others, have rightly pointed out, diversity is a multi-faceted and complex topic. I think what I was trying to say was that in my opinion, more needs to be done to support those from poorer socio-economic backgrounds, as I do not believe enough is being done to support those coming from such backgrounds to enter the profession. I did not mean to suggest socio-economic issues are more important than ethnicity or other diversity issues.
I am by no means an expert, nor am I speaking for the experiences for all "BAME" or those that come from poorer socio-economic backgrounds. I never meant to insinuate that it is some "competition" between the diversity issues. I just think that firms need to start doing more for people from poorer socio-economic backgrounds. That was my main point, and I will be sticking to it.
I can see that I have not fully explained what I meant by bringing up ethnicity and socio-economic issues together. I will therefore do some further research so that I can better explain what I meant as I feel the way I communicated myself prior is not reflective of what I was trying to say and how it has been interpreted by some of you on this thread.
Thank you for respectfully responding. I appreciate your comments, and they did allow me to reflect and respond appropriately.
