‘Male, pale and stale’ as political rhetoric

Sir, – It’s tempting to object to Fine Gael MEP Maria Walsh’s categorisation of her political opponents on the basis of gender and skin colour as being inherently discriminatory, although Kathy Sheridan deems it, at least, acceptable (“It’s hardly surprising Maria Walsh reached for ‘male, pale and stale’ label in FF candidate row”, Opinion & Analysis, February 21st).

Furthermore it seems unfair to argue that the electorate should support her on the basis of her own fundamental traits or even to suggest that this is what diversity should mean. Indeed, I am surprised that such innuendo is so acceptable in modern media as it logically bolsters the case for old-fashioned biases.

Diversity in the sense of various skin tones, genders and ages as a goal in, say, advertising or fictional portrayals, may be justifiable. Such images appear representative of the broad sweep of humanity, making such scenes or stories more universal. But political leaders, and perhaps even board members are chosen to think, plan and analyse. The assumption that such faculties or abilities are related to one’s biology seems to harp back to discredited ways of understanding. A group of people who look different can only be assumed to think differently if we believe those parameters are linked.

As a candidate Maria Walsh might be wiser to let the fact that she differs overtly from her opponents speak for itself. Articulating how she perceives or interprets the world differently from them would be a more compelling basis to seek voter approval.