The Male White Gaze and Its Impact on Black and Ethnic Minority Women

The "male white gaze" is a term that encapsulates the pervasive influence of white male perspectives in shaping societal norms, cultural narratives, and media representations. This gaze, rooted in historical systems of power and privilege, has profound implications for how black and ethnic minority women are perceived, represented, and treated. By examining its historical roots, contemporary manifestations, and psychological and social consequences, we can better understand its enduring impact—and the ways in which black and ethnic minority women are resisting and reclaiming their narratives.

The male white gaze has deep historical origins, closely tied to colonialism, slavery, and the systemic exploitation of black and ethnic minority women. During the colonial era, black women were often depicted as exotic, hypersexualized, or subservient, serving the interests of white male dominance. These representations were not merely descriptive but were tools of oppression, reinforcing the idea that black and ethnic minority women existed for the consumption, control, and pleasure of white men.

For example, the "Jezebel" stereotype, which portrayed black women as inherently promiscuous, was used to justify sexual exploitation during slavery. Similarly, the "Mammy" archetype, which depicted black women as nurturing but asexual caretakers, erased their individuality and humanity. These stereotypes were not just harmful myths; they were mechanisms of control that perpetuated racial and gender hierarchies.

Contemporary Media and the Male White Gaze

In modern media, the male white gaze continues to shape the representation of black and ethnic minority women. Whether in film, television, advertising, or social media, these women are often portrayed in ways that cater to the fantasies and expectations of white male audiences. This can manifest in two primary ways: hyper-sexualization or invisibility.

Black and ethnic minority women are frequently reduced to objects of desire, their value tied to their physical appearance rather than their intellect, talent, or humanity. For instance, a 2021 study by the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Mediafound that black women are overrepresented in roles that emphasize their sexuality, often appearing in revealing clothing or serving as plot devices for male characters. This hypersexualization not only limits their opportunities in the entertainment industry but also reinforces harmful stereotypes that affect how they are treated in real life.

When black and ethnic minority women are not hypersexualized, they are often rendered invisible. This erasure sends a damaging message: that their stories, experiences, and perspectives are not worthy of being seen or heard.

The male white gaze doesn’t just affect how black and ethnic minority women are seen by others—it also shapes how they see themselves. Constant exposure to media and cultural narratives that prioritize white male perspectives can lead to internalized racism, self-objectification, and a diminished sense of self-worth.

Many black and ethnic minority women feel pressured to conform to Eurocentric beauty standards, such as lighter skin, straight hair, and narrow facial features. A 2019 study published in the Journal of Black Psychology found that 70% of black women reported experiencing discrimination based on their hair texture, leading to feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt. This pressure to conform can result in significant psychological distress, including anxiety, depression, and body image issues.

In social and professional settings, the male white gaze can manifest in ways that limit opportunities and perpetuate inequality. Black and ethnic minority women often face microaggressions, stereotyping, and discrimination that stem from ingrained biases. For example, in the workplace, black women are often subjected to the double bind—penalized for being either too assertive or not assertive enough. According to a 2023 report by Lean In, black women are significantly less likely to be promoted to leadership roles than their white counterparts, despite being equally qualified.

Resistance and Empowerment

Despite the pervasive influence of the male white gaze, black and ethnic minority women have long been at the forefront of efforts to challenge and dismantle these oppressive structures. Through activism, art, literature, and scholarship, they are creating new narratives that reflect their own experiences and perspectives.

Movements like #BlackGirlMagic and #SayHerName have gained traction, celebrating the resilience, beauty, and strength of black women while calling attention to the systemic injustices they face. These movements have not only empowered black women but also shifted public perceptions, challenging the narrow stereotypes perpetuated by the male white gaze.

In the arts, black and ethnic minority women are using their creativity to subvert the male white gaze and tell their own stories. Filmmakers like Ava DuVernay and actors like Viola Davi* are pushing for more diverse and authentic representations in Hollywood. Writers like Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and Roxane Gay are exploring the complexities of identity, race, and gender in their work, offering nuanced portrayals of black and ethnic minority women that defy stereotypes.

Scholars such as bell hooks, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Patricia Hill Collins have provided critical frameworks for understanding the intersections of race, gender, and power. Their work has inspired countless others to challenge dominant narratives and reclaim their agency.

Addressing the male white gaze requires a collective effort to challenge and dismantle the systems of power that sustain it. Here are some actionable steps we can take:

1. Amplify Diverse Voices: Support media, literature, and art created by black and ethnic minority women.

2. Advocate for Representation: Push for more diverse and authentic portrayals in film, television, and advertising.

3. Educate Ourselves and Others: Learn about the historical and contemporary impacts of the male white gaze and share this knowledge with others.

4. Support Organizations: Donate to or volunteer with organizations that empower black and ethnic minority women.

The male white gaze is a powerful force that shapes the lived experiences of black and ethnic minority women in myriad ways. While it continues to exert influence, there is a growing movement to challenge and dismantle these oppressive structures. By amplifying diverse voices and perspectives, we can move toward a more inclusive and equitable representation of all women—free from the constraints of the male white gaze.

Let us commit to creating a world where black and ethnic minority women are seen, valued

My journey to work with a bigoted taxi driver

Why I Write About Black Women?

Stories shape the way we see the world. They dictate whose voices are heard, whose experiences are validated, and whose lives are deemed worthy of exploration. As a Black woman, I write about Black women because our stories deserve to be told—fully, richly, and without limitation.

For too long, narratives about Black women have been flattened into stereotypes or erased entirely. We are often seen through the lens of struggle, hypersexuality, or servitude. Yet, our realities are far more expansive. We are warriors, thinkers, lovers, innovators, and creators. We exist in joy, in complexity, in vulnerability, and in power. Writing about Black women is not an act of exclusion—it is an act of reclamation.

I write to counteract the erasure. In a world that often overlooks or distorts our experiences, writing becomes a tool of resistance. It allows us to define ourselves on our own terms, rather than being defined by those who do not understand our lives. Literature, media, and storytelling are powerful forces, and we must use them to elevate our voices and assert our place in history.

I write to celebrate. Black women’s lives are not solely a series of battles against oppression. We experience love, ambition, friendship, and the everyday moments that make life beautiful. Our stories deserve depth and nuance, reflecting the full range of who we are. I want to show the joy in our laughter, the bonds of our sisterhood, and the quiet triumphs that define our journeys.

I write to inspire. Representation matters. When Black women see themselves reflected in literature—not as side characters, but as protagonists with agency—it affirms that our voices belong in every space. Whether in fantasy, historical fiction, or contemporary narratives, we deserve to see ourselves in all the ways we dream. When young Black girls read stories where they are the heroes, it tells them that their aspirations are valid and achievable.

Some may call this focus essentialist, but I see it as intentional. Writing about Black women does not mean ignoring others; it means ensuring that Black women are seen. It is a commitment to truth, to justice, and to love. Our voices are not a niche—our stories are as universal and necessary as any others.

Black women have always shaped history, culture, and storytelling. From the oral traditions of those gone to the ground-breaking works of today’s authors, our narratives have always been rich and varied. My work is simply a continuation of that legacy. I write about Black women because our stories matter, and I will continue to write until the world listens.

And even then, I will keep writing.

Exoticism and the Women of Colour Paradox: A Barrier to Professional and Personal Progression

The Deceptive Allure of Exoticism

In professional and social spaces, women of colour frequently encounter the term exotic—a descriptor that, at first glance, appears to be a compliment. The term is often used to describe physical features, accents, and cultural heritage, reducing racialized women to objects of fascination. Yet, exoticism is more than an aesthetic judgment; it is a racialized and gendered construct deeply rooted in colonial histories, Orientalism (Said, 1978), and structures of white hegemony (Ahmed, 2012).

While mainstream discourse might suggest that being perceived as "exotic" provides social or professional advantages, the reality is quite the opposite. Exoticism:

Positions women of colour as perpetual outsiders, reinforcing the idea that they do not fully belong in Western professional spaces.

Undermines credibility and leadership potential, as racialized women are often valued for their difference rather than their expertise.

This blog critically examines exoticism as an insidious form of racial and gendered othering, exploring its impact on career progression, workplace interactions, and the self-concept of women of colour.

Impacts self-perception, leading to internalized struggles with identity, assimilation, and hypervisibility.

Exoticism as a Colonial Inheritance

Exoticism is not a neutral term. It is a remnant of colonial and imperial ideologies that framed non-European women as mysterious, hypersexualized, and primitive (hooks, 1992). During the colonial era, European explorers, anthropologists, and artists constructed racial hierarchies that positioned white, Western femininity as the standard of purity and respectability, while non-European women were depicted as hypervisible spectacles of racial difference (McClintock, 1995).

Orientalism, as theorized by Said (1978), remains a critical framework for understanding how exoticism functions today. Just as the colonial gaze positioned Eastern, African, and Indigenous cultures as objects of fascination, contemporary professional spaces continue to cast women of colour as “diversity assets” rather than legitimate contributors.

Example: The fashion and entertainment industries frequently tokenize women of colour, celebrating their "unique" features while erasing their voices from leadership roles (Bhabha, 1994).

Yet, exoticism is not confined to aesthetic industries—it pervades academia, corporate sectors, and public institutions, shaping the way racialized women navigate their careers.

The Professional Penalty of Being ‘Exotic’

1. The Intersection of Exoticism and Workplace Bias

Despite increasing diversity rhetoric, professional spaces remain structured around Eurocentric ideals of leadership, professionalism, and intellectual authority (Bhopal, 2018). Within this framework, women of colour experience a paradox:

They are hypervisible in discussions around diversity, but invisible in decision-making spaces. They are praised for their uniqueness, yet excluded from positions requiring perceived authority and neutrality.

Example: A Black British academic may find herself frequently invited to speak on panels about race and diversity, yet when applying for promotions or research grants, her work is scrutinized more heavily than that of her white colleagues (Morley, 2020).

This reveals how exoticism functions as a soft barrier to career advancement—women of colour may be acknowledged, but their credibility remains conditional and contested.

2. The ‘Accent Bias’ and Linguistic Exoticism

For women of colour who speak with non-Western accents, the professional penalty of exoticism is even more pronounced. Research has consistently demonstrated that accent bias influences perceptions of intelligence, leadership ability, and credibility (Creese & Kambere, 2003; Piller, 2016).

Example: A Nigerian-born professor in the UK may find that her students and colleagues frequently question her expertise—not because of her credentials, but because of the way she speaks.

This aligns with Ahmed’s (2012) argument on institutional whiteness—professionalism is still measured through a Eurocentric lens, where accents, names, and cultural markers that deviate from the white norm are subtly devalued.

3. The Burden of Representation: Tokenism vs. Authentic Inclusion

Exoticism often places women of colour in the role of “diversity representatives” rather than valued professionals. This means they are disproportionately expected to engage in institutional diversity work—often without recognition or reward (Ahmed, 2012).

Example: A South Asian woman in corporate leadership may find herself repeatedly asked to lead inclusion initiatives, despite her primary expertise lying elsewhere.

This burden of representation reinforces the idea that women of colour are included because of their difference rather than their expertise, further marginalizing them in their fields.

Self-Perception and the Psychological Toll of Exoticism

1. Internalized Othering: The Struggle to Belong

Exoticism shapes how women of colour see themselves, often forcing them into a negotiation between assimilation and hypervisibility. Many feel pressure to:

Assimilate by minimizing cultural markers—adopting Western beauty standards, changing their names, or altering their accents.

Perform their exoticism—leaning into racialized stereotypes to fit expectations.

Both options create emotional exhaustion and a persistent feeling of not fully belonging anywhere (Crenshaw, 1991).

2. The Hypervisibility-Invisibility Paradox

Women of colour experience a double bind of hypervisibility and erasure:

Hypervisibility: Their racial and gender identity is constantly remarked upon, making them objects of scrutiny.

Invisibility: Their professional skills and intellectual contributions are often overlooked.

Example: A Black Caribbean woman in academia may be frequently complimented on her “fascinating background” but find that her research is undervalued compared to that of her white peers.

This paradox contributes to imposter syndrome and self-doubt, reinforcing the psychological burdens women of colour must navigate.

Beyond Fetishization: Moving Towards Structural Change

1. Challenging Racialized Compliments

Rather than accepting exoticist language as harmless, women of colour and allies must interrogate the power dynamics behind such comments:

“What do you mean by exotic? Why does my presence seem different to you?”

Encouraging critical reflection forces individuals to confront their implicit biases.

2. Structural Overhauls in Workplace Inclusion

To dismantle exoticism in professional spaces, institutions must:

Address hiring and promotion biases that disadvantage women of colour.

Acknowledge accent bias and linguistic discrimination in hiring and leadership evaluations.

Shift from performative diversity initiatives to genuine inclusion—ensuring that women of colour are not just present, but meaningfully empowered.

3. Centering Women of Colour’s Expertise, Not Just Their Identities

Institutions must value women of colour for their intellectual and professional contributions, not just their diversity. This means:

Elevating their voices outside of diversity work. Ensuring leadership representation that is not tokenistic. Recognizing racialized labour and compensating it accordingly.

Exoticism is not a compliment—it is a form of racial and gendered othering that limits professional advancement, credibility, and self-worth for women of colour. By challenging exoticism as a colonial relic, we move toward a professional and social landscape where women of colour are valued not for their difference, but for their expertise, leadership, and full humanity.

Race-Washing in Advertising: Diversity for Profit or Real Change?

In today’s world, diversity has become a powerful marketing tool. From fashion to tech, companies are showcasing Black and brown faces, mixed-race families, and cultural symbols in their advertising more than ever before. On the surface, this shift seems like a step forward—an acknowledgment of the diverse society we live in. But beneath the glossy campaigns, a deeper issue lurks: race-washing.

Race-washing occurs when brands use diverse faces in their marketing while failing to address racial inequalities within their own workplaces. It’s an insincere attempt to appear inclusive without making any real effort to challenge systemic racism. This tactic is similar to greenwashing (where companies falsely promote themselves as environmentally friendly) and gender-washing (where businesses claim to support gender equality but do little to improve workplace conditions for women).

The key question is: Is this newfound diversity in advertising a reflection of real progress, or is it just another way for companies to profit off the image of inclusion?

The Business of Diversity: Why Companies Are Race-Washing

The rise in race-washing isn’t accidental—it’s strategic. Consumers today expect brands to take a stand on social issues, and diversity sells.

· A 2023 Nielsen report found that 64% of consumers prefer to buy from brands that promote diversity in their advertising.

· The Gen Z and millennial markets, in particular, actively support brands that appear to align with their values on race and social justice.

· The Black buying power in the U.S. alone is estimated at over $1.8 trillion, making it a demographic that businesses are eager to attract.

With these numbers in mind, companies have realized that featuring Black and brown models in campaigns can boost sales. However, true diversity isn’t just about representation in advertisements—it must also exist within hiring practices, pay structures, leadership roles, and company culture. Many brands fail in these areas, making their public commitment to diversity appear hollow.

Race-Washing in Action: When Brands Get It Wrong

Many well-known companies have been accused of race-washing—presenting an inclusive image to the public while maintaining racially discriminatory practices behind the scenes.

1. H&M: The “Coolest Monkey” Controversy

H&M came under fire in 2018 when it released an ad featuring a Black child wearing a hoodie with the words "Coolest Monkey in the Jungle." The backlash was swift, with many accusing the company of racial insensitivity. The incident highlighted a bigger issue:

· Lack of internal diversity. Critics pointed out that if more Black executives were present in H&M’s leadership, this ad might have never been approved.

· Performative damage control. H&M issued an apology and hired a diversity consultant, but there was no significant restructuring to improve Black representation at decision-making levels.

This case showed that simply hiring Black models for campaigns doesn’t mean a company understands or values racial inclusivity.

2. L’Oréal: #BlackLivesMatter vs. Firing a Black Activist

In 2020, L’Oréal posted a #BlackLivesMatter message on social media, expressing support for racial justice. However, model and activist Munroe Bergdorf quickly called out the brand’s hypocrisy.

· Bergdorf, who had previously worked with L’Oréal, was fired in 2017 for speaking out against racism.

· She accused the company of exploiting Black struggles for profit while silencing Black voices when it wasn’t convenient for them.

After public pressure, L’Oréal rehired Bergdorf and pledged to donate money to racial justice initiatives, but the situation left many questioning the sincerity of corporate activism.

3. The Fashion Industry: More Diverse Faces, But Little Internal Change

High-fashion brands like Gucci, Prada, and Balenciaga have all increased the number of Black and brown models in their campaigns. However, the 2022 Business of Fashion Diversity Report revealed that:

· 85% of top executive roles in the fashion industry were still held by white individuals.

· Many brands had no Black executives at all despite using Black talent in their advertisements.

This imbalance shows that while companies are happy to profit from Black culture and aesthetics, they often fail to create opportunities for Black professionals within their ranks.

The Hidden Harm of Race-Washing

Race-washing isn’t just about false advertising—it has real consequences. When brands engage in race-washing, they contribute to systemic racism in three key ways:

1. It Creates a False Sense of Progress

By promoting diverse marketing images, brands make it seem like real change is happening. However, if these same companies refuse to pay Black employees fairly, fail to promote them into leadership roles, or do nothing to address workplace discrimination, then diversity is nothing more than a mirage.

2. It Exploits and Alienates Communities of Colour

Black and brown consumers are not just a market demographic—they are real communities with lived experiences of discrimination. When brands tokenize them for profit without addressing deeper issues, it feels like exploitation.

For example:

· A makeup brand may showcase diverse models in an ad but still offer very few foundation shades for darker skin tones.

· A sportswear company may sign Black athletes as brand ambassadors but fail to take a stand against racial injustices in the industry.

This kind of performative activism leaves many consumers feeling disrespected and disillusioned.

3. It Distracts from Structural Racism

One of the biggest dangers of race-washing is that it shifts the focus away from real systemic change.

· A company might appear “inclusive” by running a campaign featuring Black models, but if they still pay white employees more or overlook Black candidates for promotions, they are upholding workplace racism.

· By focusing on “feel-good” advertising, companies avoid discussions about racial pay gaps, hiring discrimination, and workplace culture.

Race-washing allows businesses to avoid making difficult but necessary changes to dismantle racism within their organizations.

What Needs to Change?

If companies truly want to support diversity, they must go beyond advertising. Here’s what they should be doing instead:

1. Commit to Transparency in Hiring and Pay Equity

· Companies should publicly release data on racial diversity in hiring, promotions, and pay.

· Consumers and activists must demand transparency to hold brands accountable for their claims.

2. Diversify Leadership and Decision-Making Roles

· Representation must go beyond models and marketing—Black and brown professionals should be present in executive roles, creative direction, and boardrooms.

· Without diverse leadership, companies will continue to make culturally insensitive mistakes.

3. Invest in Communities Beyond Marketing

· Brands should support scholarships, mentorship programs, and funding for Black-owned businesses.

· Simply putting a Black face in an ad isn’t enough—companies must invest in creating real opportunities.

4. Call Out Performative Activism

Consumers must become more critical of corporate activism. Before supporting a brand, ask:

· Do they actually practice what they preach?

· Have they faced accusations of racism in hiring or workplace culture?

· Do they have Black and brown executives, not just models in campaigns?

Websites like Glassdoor and independent diversity audits can reveal whether a company truly values inclusion or is simply race-washing for profit.

Final Thoughts: Real Change or Just Marketing?

Diversity in advertising should not be a marketing trend—it should reflect real progress. Representation matters, but only when it is accompanied by real workplace change. If brands truly believe in racial equity, they must prove it through action—not just through carefully curated images.

Consumers have power. By demanding more from brands, supporting businesses that practice real inclusivity, and calling out race-washing, we can push for a world where diversity is not just a selling point—but a standard.

Who Really Benefits from Diversity Programs in the UK?

Diversity and equality programs are designed to create fairer workplaces, ensuring marginalized groups have equal access to opportunities. But if we look closer at the UK’s corporate, political, and educational landscapes, a pattern emerges—these initiatives disproportionately benefit white women while Black women and other women of colour remain underrepresented.

How did we get here? Why do white women seem to gain the most from diversity programs? And what does this mean for true equality? Let’s break it down.

1. The Feminism That Forgot Black Women

To understand why white women benefit the most from diversity programs, we have to look at how gender equality movements have historically operated in the UK. The early feminist waves—focused on voting rights, workplace equality, and reproductive freedoms—primarily centered on the experiences of white, middle-class women.

For example, the Equal Pay Act of 1970 was a landmark victory for women’s rights, ensuring women were legally entitled to the same pay as men for the same work. However, what it didn’t account for was the racial pay gap. Even today, Black women in the UK earn significantly less than white women, with research from the Office for National Statistics (2023) showing that Black African and Black Caribbean women face some of the lowest median wages across all racial groups.

Who Gets Left Behind?

Feminism that focuses only on gender and ignores race has led to policies that uplift white women without addressing the specific struggles faced by women of colour. While white women have made major strides in politics, business, and media, Black and Asian women continue to face racial discrimination on top of gender bias.

A 2021 report by The Fawcett Society found that Black women in the UK are more likely to face barriers in leadership roles, experience workplace discrimination, and be overlooked for promotions compared to white women. Despite this, many diversity initiatives lump all women together, assuming that their challenges are the same.

This is why programs designed to support women often end up benefiting white women the most—because they do not consider the intersectionality of race and gender.

2. Corporate Diversity: A Numbers Game?

One of the most common ways companies try to address inequality is by setting diversity targets. Many UK companies have introduced policies to increase the number of women in leadership positions. But if we take a closer look at who’s actually getting promoted, it’s predominantly white women.

FTSE 100: More Women, But Who Are They?

The UK government recently celebrated the fact that 40% of board members in FTSE 100 companies are now women (UK Government, 2023). While this is an improvement in gender representation, the problem is that only 1.1% of these women are Black.

This means that while companies can claim they have improved gender diversity, racial diversity within those gender initiatives is still severely lacking. The reality is that white women, who already have more access to education, professional networks, and leadership opportunities, are the first to benefit from these changes.

The Glass Ceiling vs. The Concrete Ceiling

White women often talk about breaking the "glass ceiling"—the invisible barriers preventing them from reaching top positions. But for Black women, the ceiling is not just made of glass—it’s concrete. While white women may struggle to rise in male-dominated spaces, they still have racial privilege that gives them greater access to mentorship, networking, and sponsorship opportunities compared to Black women.

A 2020 McKinsey report found that while white women face gender-based discrimination, they are still twice as likely as Black women to have senior leaders sponsor their careers. In contrast, Black women report being shut out of these networks, making it harder for them to climb the corporate ladder.

3. Bias in Hiring and Promotions

Even when Black women enter the workforce, they often encounter racial and gender biases that white women do not experience. A 2020 study by the Centre for Social Investigation at Nuffield College found that Black-sounding names are significantly less likely to receive interview callbacks compared to white-sounding names with identical CVs.

"Not a Cultural Fit"—Code for Discrimination?

Once hired, Black women face additional hurdles in career advancement. Many report being told they are "not a cultural fit" when they apply for leadership roles—a phrase often used to mask unconscious racial bias.

A Guardian report in 2021 highlighted how Black women in the UK’s legal profession are disproportionately stuck in junior roles despite having years of experience. Meanwhile, white women with similar qualifications are more likely to be fast-tracked for leadership positions through mentorship and sponsorship programs.

This is why diversity programs that focus only on gender fail to address the deeper issue of racial bias in hiring and promotions.

4. The "Safe Diversity" Choice

Corporations want to appear progressive, but they also don’t want to challenge the existing power structures too much. White women are often seen as a "safe" diversity choice because they represent change without making leadership teams too uncomfortable.

The Media’s Role in Reinforcing "Safe Diversity"

When UK brands or institutions feature women in leadership campaigns, who do they usually showcase? A white woman. Even when discussing gender pay gaps or leadership diversity, the face of these movements is usually white.

This sends a message that diversity is welcome—but only if it’s within certain racial limits. Black and Asian women, who might bring different cultural perspectives and experiences, are often excluded from these mainstream narratives.

5. The Overlooked Reality of Intersectionality

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality explains how different forms of discrimination—gender, race, and class—overlap to create unique experiences of oppression.

For example, a company might proudly announce that 50% of its leadership is now female. But if all those women are white, does that truly reflect diversity?

Black women experience both gender discrimination (like pay gaps and workplace bias) and racial discrimination(such as microaggressions and being overlooked for promotions). Yet, diversity initiatives often treat these as separate issues rather than interconnected ones.

This is why programs that only focus on one aspect of identity—like gender—end up benefiting those who already have racial privilege.

6. Lack of Accountability in Diversity Programs

One of the biggest flaws in diversity programs is the lack of accountability. Many organizations treat diversity as a box-ticking exercise rather than a genuine commitment to change.

A 2022 CIPD report found that while many UK companies have diversity hiring policies, there is little follow-through on ensuring racial inclusion. This means that while white women are often promoted under these initiatives, Black women remain disproportionately underrepresented in leadership roles.

Without real accountability—such as tracking racial disparities in hiring, promotions, and pay gaps—diversity programs will continue to fail women of colour.

So, What’s the Solution?

If diversity programs are truly about equality, they need to address racial disparities as well as gender disparities.

What Needs to Change?

· Race-Specific Initiatives – Companies should create programs specifically aimed at Black and ethnic minority women, rather than assuming one-size-fits-all solutions work.

· Transparent Promotion Processes – Employers must publish data on racial disparities in hiring and promotions to hold themselves accountable.

· Mentorship for Women of Colour – Black women need more mentorship and sponsorship opportunities to help break into leadership roles.

· Tackling Bias in the Workplace – Companies need to actively dismantle racial biases in hiring, performance reviews, and workplace culture.

Final Thoughts

Diversity and equality programs in the UK have made progress, but they often uplift white women while leaving Black women behind. If we truly want inclusivity, we must move beyond gender-only approaches and tackle racial disparities head-on.

Let’s stop treating diversity as a PR stunt and start making real, systemic changes. Because until then, the so-called "diversity wins" will continue to be victories for some, while leaving others in the shadows.