UK: Arts Council wants to know grants applicants' sexual orientation

[ptyx]

Theatreland will have to give up its bedroom secrets in the quest for funding, under new Arts Council requirements. Organisations applying for grants are being asked to state how many board members are bisexual, homosexual, heterosexual, lesbian or whose inclinations are “not known”.

o_O Unfuckingbelievable.

Comments

[wikdsushi]

I wonder what would happen if everyone put down "not known?"

[ptyx]

Yeah, that's what I would reply, if I had to reply anything, but I guess those who answer that will not get any funding...

[wikdsushi]

I wonder if they can form some sort of class action if that happens? "Are you really denying me necessary moneys over my current questioning status regarding my sexuality? Must a citizen of this nation fit into a pre-determined sexual mould in order to be allowed a dignified and fruitful life?"

Man, that could get scary in a courtroom.

[ptyx]

Like whatistigerbalm suggested below, maybe this is a kind of crazy quota politics, and we're getting it wrong. Anyway, if that's the intention, I don't think they are doing it right.

[ptyx]

It's so ridiculous that I thought it was an April's fool at first! I'd choose "not known", too, but I guess I might not get any fundings if I did that :(

[sbrande]

Are they serious??? As if it's anyone but your own business. The nerve of some people.

Love sonia :)

[ptyx]

Yeah, they are serious... Maybe they had good intentions (as trying to protect the minorities), but I think the way that they did it, it's simply ridiculous.

[whatistigerbalm]

Before everyone explodes with indignation, try to understand it in the light of PC gone mad in the UK. They probably have a quota that has to go to sexual minorities so that it wouldn't look like they're ignored, and their solution is as awkward as the article shows.

[ptyx]

Ahahaha, that may be the case, but it's funny (and wrong), anyway. (Some people may disagree, but I dislike any kind of quota politics.)

[whatistigerbalm]

Oh, I agree that it's all flavours of misdirected, but it's really not a case of identification for nefarious purposes.

[ptyx]

Their intentions might have been good, but the form can be used for nefarious purposes, too. I haven't seen any artists defending it so far. (I've googled for it and read another two or three articles.)

[sistermagpie]

That's incredibly kooky. Even if it was trying for a quota, you'd think anybody could just lie. But it's still ripe for abuse.

[ptyx]

Agreed!