BY FRANK HAVILAND
‘Diversity is our strength’ as we all know, but unfortunately for Generation X, our formative years were spent in the absence of such wisdom. Indeed, I often attribute the cataclysmic failures of my life to my diversity-barren childhood; a nightmare from which only the bravest millennials would have survived.
My brothers and I were ritually force-fed egg and chips every Saturday. How was my poor mother to recognise that the zeal with which we scoffed it down was mere self-flagellation; a cry in the dark for the lentils and mung bean loaf that was never to materialise? There was no diversity of bedtime in our house, nor was there the slightest encouragement for any of us to explore our polysexual, pansexual or asexuality.
Regrettably, it appears that many of our noble institutions have also missed the diversity boat. Oxbridge is woefully short on diversity, for which academic excellence is hardly compensation. The US Marine Corps discriminates against women and wimps like me, deliberately making their physical fitness tests much too arduous. Meanwhile countries like Poland and Japan will never make much progress up the international terror attack leaderboard, if they fail to diversify their populations.
Of course the diversity badge comes with many advantages, not least of which is getting a free pass from the ‘racism’ Gestapo. Celebrities like Angelina Jolie are naturally at the forefront of such accusations.
As contemptible as the diversity Olympics are, at least at the individual level you can tune out. That was until now, before the State got involved. Diversity is now the West’s favourite buzzword, and there is no hiding place for uniformity.
The State has already managed to diversify gender and race, to the point where they are not allowed to mean anything (no small achievement). So it was only a matter of time before they started inspecting the diversity of our bedrooms. If your foreplay or general hanky-panky skills are a bit lacking, perhaps you can impress the judges by getting it on with Linda Sarsour – that game has already begun.
The media which has a habit of being premature, has already made it to first base:
‘If You Would Never Date Someone With HIV, It’s Time To Question Yourself.’ (The Huffpost)
‘Is it discriminatory to refuse to date a trans woman?’ (The BBC)
‘Is it racist to have a preference in whom you date?’ (The New Statesman)
Unfortunately, the State can do little to influence our genuine opinions. The most cursory analysis of either the scientific literature or data from dating apps themselves confirms the uncomfortable truth: people don’t actually want diversity.
Broadly speaking, most people demonstrate a preference for dating within their own race1. However, having said that, there is a strong bias amongst men for Asian or White women, while women (with the exception of black women) generally prefer white men2. The lowest response rates / attractiveness ratings across all groups (except black women), were for black partners. You can debate the causes for these biases, but you cannot debate the facts. And for the record, it’s pretty hard to argue that black men prefer Asian women because of racism.
So instead of genuine change, Big Brother may have to content itself with forcing us to lie. What’s interesting is that in 2008 almost half of respondents admitted to preferring their own race. This figure was down to around 30 percent in 2014 – the underlying data however, hasn’t changed.
We’re going to have to do a lot more lying. Only this week, researchers at Cornell University declared that dating apps are racist, because they allow users to select for race – thereby depriving them of the opportunity to ‘meet diverse potential partners’. In other words, if people won’t seek diversity of their own volition, force them to. This is not a small incursion into our sovereign territory.
Having a ‘type’ isn’t yet a thought crime, but we may not be far off. Perhaps Brexiteers should date Remainers? Alcoholics hook up with teetotallers? How about Muslims and Islamophobes?
Daring to criticise the ‘diversity is our strength’ hymn, is for the most part political suicide for anyone attempting it. However, I still consider the realm of free thought and personal choice to be sacrosanct – the only genuine safe space worth defending. This is not territory we should give up without a fight.
Diversity is not our strength, which is why we must be cajoled, bullied and forced into accepting it. And that kind of diversity is hardly living up to its sales pitch. Those who genuinely seek it can have all the diversity they want. For the rest of us, could we just be left in peace, having a gentle snooze in front of the cricket as our very non-diverse Sunday roast goes down?
Frank Haviland was born in London, and educated at Dulwich College. After a brief spell in the City, he obtained an MSc in Social and Applied Psychology. He has been many things including a professional juggler, businessman, and English lecturer. Haviland is concerned that Britain (and the West generally) have fallen to the lie of equality (the false notion that everything is, and must be seen to be of equal value). He has recently finished his first book (outlining his theory), which is due for publication later this year. Frank has lived in South Korea since 2011 where he runs a small English school, and writes occasional articles about the damage of political correctness. A selection of his work can be found here:www.frankhaviland.com. @Frank Haviland