People Are Complex, So Their Issues Are Too

An interesting argument that seeking gender equality, racial equality, &c. can ironically – if the underlying aim of human equality is lost – obscure the issues facing those in more than one disadvantaged group.

The same inefficiency of labels applies to privileged groups: a social structure that privileges men doesn’t mean all men are fine; just that they are much more likely to be, and will probably have an easier time becoming fine if they aren’t.

Of course, as racism, sexism, and such are at their core reducing a complex human to a single-trait Other, it isn’t really surprising that striving to see everyone as a complex gestalt of all their qualities is a strong counter.

We Don’t Mind the Language, It’s the Logical Dissonance We Don’t Need

Just trod in a post about the election of Sadiq Khan meaning Britain no longer exists; which I suppose would be why my socks are damper than usual. Of course, they didn’t mean that: they helpfully defined Britain as the bastion of a white morality stretching back to Classical civilisation and Jesus. Which is of course, equally absurd.


I already knew the differences between different people’s DNA were tiny, but this comparison gave me a better feeling for what the numbers mean:

There is more genetic diversity in 55 chimps than in 7 billion human beings.

– Juan Enriquez, We can reprogram life. How to do it wisely.

Humans are genetically almost identical: race-as-biology is trivial. The differences between us are almost all in our minds.

In both senses.

It’s a Man’s Life in the WAAF

For more years than I can count, I have (as I previously blogged) believed that – barring certain biological factors such as a womb – there is nothing about a particular group that makes them more fitted to do a specific task, that fitness is best judged on the individual’s capabilities. However, over the last few weeks I have pondered whether there are circumstances in which a social inclination justifies discrimination.