Positive action is designed to correct historical imbalances by encouraging underrepresented groups to apply, offering targeted support, or using tie-breaker preferences. Its purpose is fairness: widening access and dismantling barriers. Yet the paradox emerges when these measures, while aiming to include, inadvertently exclude others who also face disadvantage.
A Black man, for instance, may find himself overlooked in hiring contexts that prioritize gender diversity. Although he belongs to a marginalized group, the emphasis on women as the “underrepresented category” can leave him sidelined. This creates layered injustice: the very structures meant to expand opportunity can narrow it. Appearance bias and rigid credential requirements compound the problem, filtering out capable candidates for reasons unrelated to skill.
Employers often justify this focus by pointing to visibility and measurability. Gender balance is easier to track than racial or socioeconomic diversity, and global diversity initiatives frequently prioritize women first. The result is a cycle where positive action for one group produces negative outcomes for another, undermining the broader goal of equity.
Folly of Man.