Does diversity really come before safeguarding the rights of victims?
How can we expect survivors and victims of grooming, abuse and exploitation to come forward with their accounts when their elected representatives continue to undermine them at every turn?
Labour MP Naz Shah contends that her liking, retweeting and sharing of the following post on Twitter was an accident:
“Exactly Areeq, those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of #diversity!”
Shah has walked back on her comments since this astonishing action, but not in a way that really places any significant importance on the rights of vulnerable victims and survivors. Instead they can express nothing but shock and horror that such a high-profile MP would choose to stand against them instead of with them — meanwhile the perpetrators and assailants are quietly cheering their efforts on as an elected member of Parliament gives them cover for their abominable activities.
It doesn’t matter that the tweet was a parody account (of Guardian columnist Owen Jones) nor that she removed it and un-liked the tweet because her behaviour is unacceptable regardless of her subsequent action. It’s unacceptable for a person in her position of authority and, more importantly, it’s unacceptable to survivors and abused victims who should be free to express their opinions and reveal their accounts. What Shah will not accept is that disgusting instances of grooming, abuse and exploitation go far beyond cultural sensitivities and politically correct attempts to embrace diversity.
Diversity cannot be served by silence, especially in the wake of Rotherham and it is staggering that Shah cannot see this. What do we know from Professor Jay’s report into the Rotherham abuses? We know that cultural attitudes related to diversity stood in the way of transparency, preventative action and finding justice for approximately 1,500 girls who were abused.
It’s hard enough for victims to come forward in the first place and report abuse. Rotherham left an earthquake of dishonesty, ill feeling and mistrust in its aftermath and the survivors are still trying to embrace support networks and come forward and deal with the ugly truth of what happened to them. What does it say when a high-profile MP like Naz Shah disparages all their efforts in so flippant a manner?
How can we continue to empower victims and survivors to come forward and report these abuses when Shah believes diversity must come first? This goal is vital, despite Shah, because we need to support the accounts of those who have suffered, so as to ensure past mistakes will not be tolerated.
At the very least Shah’s actions have been grossly insensitive. There has been no apology worth the description; it has only served to undermine the trauma of what victims have already had to go through and sends a direct message to them: keeping the cultural peace comes before your suffering.
Why is it Naz Shah cannot see that issues of abuse must be prioritised over diversity?
Why is it she cannot see that it is already incredibly complex and challenging to encourage survivors to come out and speak about what happened them, and that her actions make a difficult job that much harder for everyone involved?
Professional organisations exist to help victims and survivors, they work to safeguard their interests and the assistance of politicians is a vital complement to their hard work. But Shah’s actions and non-apology sets their efforts back at best and jeopardises them entirely at worst because now victims feel that even their elected representatives don’t understand them and are not there to help them when they need them the most.
Perhaps the most appalling feature of this ugly episode is that Shah does not seem to understand how important it is to be united in fighting the evil of abuse. It is disheartening because it directly impacts the professional networks that spend so much money and material to help those in real need. It threatens to undo the huge strides they have already made and that it is why Shah cannot be allowed to escape this episode so easily.
Diversity and culture cannot be put before safeguarding the rights of those abused and the flippant approach of a high profile MP puts the hard work of the many and the few at risk. Indeed, such is the anger directed towards Naz Shah that 57,659 individuals have signed a petition urging her to be sacked for the gross insensitivity displayed in her actions online.
While Shah talks about ‘the good of diversity’ the rights of the victims continue to be undermined and it is my belief that such a position is untenable, especially when there remain far too many men and women out there who are now reluctant to come forward thanks to her immature comments.
Will diversity continue to speak for them while they continue to be exploited?
