Thursday, April 03, 2008
A Question of Sex
There are no corners of our private lives that Nanny does not want to stick her wizened old features into.
Our eating habits, smoking habits, drug taking habits, drinking habits and ethnic origins have all been looked into by Nanny. Now comes, not unsurprisingly, our sexual orientation.
What the fark has that got to do with her?
Well, absolutely nothing at all. However, Nanny (or rather Nanny's chums) sees it differently.
Organisations applying for grants from the new Arts Council will now have to state how many of their board members are bisexual, gay, lesbian or "not known".
The council has said it needs to know about the sexuality of applicants, in order to understand who its audience are and where the funding is going.
No it doesn't!
Whatever someone's particular sexual tastes does not affect what they like/dislike wrt art...even if you are CEO of Formula One.
Audrey Roy, the director of grants said:
"We see diversity as broader than race, ethnicity, faith and disability."
Taking that to its logical conclusion means that Nanny will also be asking us about our height, weight, hair colour, ties we wear etc.
All of these add to the individual.
Were Nanny to really want to see/understand the true diversity of those under her charge, she would have to know all of the above and more.
Ms Roy said that it is not compulsory for applicants to fill in the new section.
Yet, rather ironically, the form advises people to do so.
What is the use of this?
The council claims that all details concerning sexuality will be for Government purposes only, and will not affect decisions in allocating funding.
Will they apply the same high quality data security procedures that HMRC did to the 25 million personal data records that it lost last year?
Now here is where it becomes rather interesting, the Department of Culture Media and Sport claims that Nanny actually doesn't want this data:
"We appreciate that as a responsible public body they need to monitor their overall grant-making programmes.
But it is absolutely not the case that sexual orientation monitoring is a government requirement."
Someone is lying!
This best way to screw this up is to fill the form in with gibberish, such as revealing a taste for pandas.
The way to resist a bureaucratic dictatorship is to overload it with garbage.