Singapore Company Pushes Non-Binary Gender Disclosures

The inclusion of a “non-binary” category in SingPost’s Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Policy for the fiscal year 2022–23 aims to “promote greater inclusiveness.” However, SingPost has not disclosed the rationale behind this decision, leaving us to speculate.

Making the same arguments any woke evangelist would, Lim makes five questionable assertions in her piece:

  1. She contends that the global trend towards recognising non-binary identities is something Singaporean companies should embrace. That’s a bit like saying, ‘Euthanasia is popular in some parts of the world; why not give it a whirl?’ The appeal of an idea elsewhere does little to confirm its sensibility here.
  2. Lim argues there’s a clamour for “greater diversity” in senior management. Allow me to decode woke speak into common sense: “Greater diversity” translates to unmeritorious hiring based on arbitrary political identities.
  3. She warns them that their failure to embrace such D&I metrics will result in poor ESG ratings. The argument boils down to: play by the new rules, or see your corporate reputation suffer. When did a person’s non-binary gender identity enter the rule book?
  4. Her pièce de résistance is her claim that acknowledging non-binary identities is not just enlightened, but also a fantastic recruitment and retention strategy. Apparently, acknowledging biological dimorphism is outdated and bad for business. Nothing says ‘We’re a progressive workplace’ these days like ignoring biological reality.
  5. Another dubious incentive that she dangles is that companies will have the reputational advantage of being first-movers in the race to virtue-signal as progressive. She also suggests they would have a head start in their compliance should non-binary reporting become mandated in the future.

In The News

  • Singapore Company Pushes Non-Binary Gender Disclosures

DEI is Going Sideways

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) has taken a wrong turn, with far reaching consequences.

Global Activist Pressure to Favour Certain Affinity Groups

Powerful activist groups and international organisations show partiality to certain identities and political viewpoints and demand companies to enforce political views in the workplace.

Foreign Governments Intervening in Local Affairs

Foreign governments may pressure their companies to adopt controversial DEI policies that undermine the host country’s cultural values.

Pressure to Conform to Homogenous Values

DEI efforts may create an expectation of uniformity in values, potentially marginalising individuals with differing beliefs. Instead of promoting viewpoint diversity, DEI might impose homogenous values upon employees.

Discrimination against Companies with Different Values by Harming Investability

Rating agencies conflate sustainability with other political causes when evaluating company ESG scores. Companies that do not adopt politically controversial ideologies might suffer in their sustainability ratings.

Contradictory Policies Marginalise the People DEI Originally Intended to Support

When DEI becomes conflated with controversial politics, the result backfires and erases years of progress. True inclusion must recognise definitions of identity groups to protect justice and fairness.

Misplaced Diversity Policies Harms Service Quality, Safety & Justice

When DEI policies supersede the competencies needed in the hiring process, not only does this look patronising, it compromises the work quality of critical services.

Stay Updated