Election Shortlists - Limitations and Self-Identification

I've moved this opening post from another thread where it was off-topic. Rather than have it languish in AAH, I think the post raises some interesting points for discussion about election shortlists and about self-identification, so I've made a new thread for that discussion.

Posted By:Agatha

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aber (Post 13380561) Now apparently sacked from the SNP front bench; interesting to see what happens next.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rolfe (Post 13380179) This is tangentially relevant to the current discussion. Break out the popcorn. The National Executive Council of the SNP, which hasn't been as thoroughly recovered from the woke element as had been hoped, appears to have decreed that the top spots on the d'Hondt AMS lists for each region in the May elections should be reserved for BAME and disabled candidates. There are eight regions. They have chosen four to have BAME candidates topping the list and four to have disabled candidates topping the list. Now I can almost hear the chorus of but, but, but here, and there are a lot of buts. But the best bit of all and the reason for the popcorn is that being both BAME and disabled will be a matter of self-identification which cannot be challenged. The woke activists who have pushed for this out of self-interest have already got their self-ID diagnoses lined up. Apparently being diabetic counts, as does having Tourette's syndrome (this, apparently, to explain the string of abusive tweets vilifying women that that candidate is responsible for) and who knows what else. I'm dying to know who will be the first peely-wally Scot to self-ID as BAME.

This is all part of a much bigger row. There isn't enough popcorn on the planet.

via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/3tf4iX3