i'm not interested in a debate about diversity v. homogeneity in the way that bourgeois liberals want to define the terms; i'm an anarchist, i reject culture altogether in favour of individualist expression. i don't care where you're from or what you look like; i'm going to treat you like an individual, either way.

but, that's just it - i'm not going to interpret you as a muslim or a hindu or a sikh or a christian, because that limits your individuality and restricts the amount of diversity that exists.

nor am i going to let you use your religion or your culture as an excuse for oppressive attitudes towards gays, women, animals or anything else. diversity does not imply a rights hierarchy.

a more coherent understanding of my critique of religion - as well as my critique of capitalism - is that it destroys individuality and replaces it with these cookie cutter concepts of identity.

a black woman from jamaica should be free to listen to rachmaninov and dress like a german aristocrat, if she wants. an indian male should be free to eat beef as he curses the gods and tries out for the local hockey team, if he wants. a muslim woman should be free to work in the pornography industry, have multiple partners and reject motherhood - if she wants. and gay & trans people of every background exist, whether anybody likes it or not.

that is diversity.

a sea of hijabs and yoga mats, made by children in guatemala, is not.