The idea that an inquiry is incapable of getting to the truth because it doesn’t have any members who have a particular skin colour, or who grew up on a council estate, is patently absurd. Identity politics at its very worst.https://twitter.com/hackneyabbott/status/994876361494933505 …
-
-
I'm gay. If this were an enquiry about the deaths that overwhelmingly involved gay people, I would expect there to be someone from my community on the panel. It's not about race or sexuality or identity politics, but shared experiences. Someone who knows what it is like.
-
OK, but why would being gay a desired qualification for the inquiry, as distinct from being left-handed, heterosexual or a shopkeeper?
-
Because a straight person can't talk about homophobia, or how it feels to be gay, or the thoughts that go through our head holding hands with our partners on the street.
-
Can't feel it, but can sure talk about it with gay friends. But that's not my point- we are all sorts living in a common society which relies on a variety of specialists. If we need a specialist, we should only care about their expertise. Else discrimination..../1
-
For example, if victims & survivors of a disaster are all heterosexual, would that justify discriminating against gay experts being on inquiry? I'd say not. Else you're not getting the best expertise, and that's selling short the idea of a best possible inquiry. /fin
-
That's clearly not what I'm saying. I'm saying that in very specialised cases, you need someone from that community who can bring their experiences to the table. It is stupid to think otherwise.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.