“I’ve seen behind the curtain. What I witnessed wasn’t equality—it was control, silencing, and bullying.” Respondent Survey of Freedom of Expression in the Arts 2025
This report, AFRAID TO SPEAK FREELY, published by Freedom in the Arts, last week highlights the extent to which two fundamental problems at the heart of diversity and inclusion need addressing:
Firstly, certain policies and practices have been overly influenced by social justice concerns and theories and,
Secondly an unhealthy groupthink culture has developed around D and I (or DEI) which discourages any debate and punishes any opposing views.
“This study describes the perilous state of freedom of expression of the arts because of viewpoint intolerance, ideological orthodoxy, and bitter punishing reprisals Examples are made and that is enough. You need your job, contract, you want to be accepted into the team, you acquiesce. You announce your pronouns at the beginning of each meeting because you have been told to although you have profound disagreement with the practice.”
The impact of certain political ideologies has led to overreach in policy and practice as well as many lawsuits and which I have written about quite a lot. There has always been tension between social justice and the business case and in the past it has usually been productive – there has been excellent academic work done on this by Gill Kirton,Anne-Marie Greene &Deborah Dean. (British diversity professionals as change agents – radicals, tempered radicals or liberal reformers? )
As an example, I am a feminist but if this had been my only credential I wouldn’t have got through the front door of any company. In fact I have never have used the word although it has undoubtedly informed the way I think and work. Yet today theories like critical race theory and gender identity theory, arguably much more contentious and contested theories, have been openly welcomed and embraced by the corporate world. If I was cynical I would say the reason is because these two relate to a very small minority of employees whereas feminism challenges the dominant patriarchal interests more. Critical race and gender identity theories often focus on performative actions and demand little major change in how organisations function whereas embracing feminism may demand more from the dominant male leadership.
It has taken the the law not public opinion to force organisations to think again. Even then following the Supreme Court ruling last month ( link to interim EHRC guidance) some organisations have flouted their intention to ignore the ruling. But the private sector is usually business focused – costly legal cases with the subsequent reputational fallout is not what they want – and some have announce a shift their policies, even if it is in name only, just like the US tech companies did following Trump’s denouncement of DEI.
Diversity and Inclusion work has never just been about legal issues, but they have always underpinned it. Many is the time I have been brought into a company because of a tribunal case. It used to go without saying that it was imperative to keep within the law even if organisations wanted to do more than the minimum legal requirement. Offering more maternity leave than the state minimum is going beyond the law but doesn’t go against the law. But when the ‘rights’ of one group impact the ‘rights’ of another then legal boundaries may have been overstepped as we have seen in one case after another.
The second issue, which this report focuses on, is that this sometimes quite radical approach (to DEI), out of step with mainstream thinking, has been enforced on employees in the name of ‘inclusion’. Any opposition is met with hostility, silencing and shaming. This censorship is not unlike that of an authoritarian regime. It is certainly every bit as chilling. Whilst threat of violence for ‘wrong speak’ may not be present, other punishments lie in wait, acting as warnings to others. The report describes what happens;
“ careers get stalled, projects quietly dropped, jobs are ended, funding and careers endangered if one crosses certain lines”.
Eighty per cent of all respondents experienced ostracism or intimidation for speaking out. The ostracisation by one’s own peer group is particularly upsetting. Unlike being the brave rebel standing up against authorities, you are cast out by your friends and colleagues, or shamed publicly on social media, our modern day stocks.
This is a terrible indictment of Diversity and Inclusion, which has made the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Do DEI heads not realise that acquiescence is not acceptance? Fear has resulted in a deadly self-censorship.
It is ironic that the more ‘progressive’ the sector the more authoritarian the culture seems to be. If only we could isolate the arts (and we already know about the universities) and say it’s over there but not here. That sadly is not the case. This culture from my understanding exists to some extent in most organisations in most sectors where there is a DEI function. The emergence of gender critical employees, via the SEEN networks is testament to that.
The report lists the five most common taboos…i.e. these topics MUST NOT BE DISCUSSED or even debated because the ‘correct’ stance has already been stated, repeated and must be shared by all employees. We can probably all guess what they are.
Number one….. Gender ideology.
Number two…..Critical race theory..
Number three Israel and Palestine ..a left wing obsession despite the many other appalling conflicts taking place in the world.
Number four Religion… but only one – Islam. Jokes and jibes about Christianity are acceptable but not about Islam
Number five …Brexit The media did a great job on calling any opposition to Brexit right wing.
Being called right wing is just about the worst thing that can happen to someone in the arts. I can only imagine that agreeing with any Trump policy will get you cast out too.
Have the DEI leaders not heard the term groupthink? It caused the financial crisis in 2008 and many other corporate calamities.
That so many in this sector do actually believe in these ideologies to the point of religious fervour is worrying and needs research in itself. It looks as though our university education has a lot to answer for. It may not be all the above issues that are taboo to challenge in your organisation but even one or two is not healthy.
The final call from the report’s authors Rosie Kay, Denise Fahmy, and Professor Jo Phoenix who have all been cancelled, is for leadership to step up and make clear statements affirming employees and artists right to express lawful opinions even if contentious. We are waiting.