Chapter 11.
“If you are free, you need to free somebody else. If you have some power, then your job is to empower somebody else.” — Toni Morrison
At the core of human experience lies identity—the intricate tapestry woven from our self-perception, our relationships, and our place in the world. Among the most fundamental threads are gender, sexuality, and race. These are deeply personal attributes that, for countless individuals, have become a battlefield of judgment, discrimination, and exclusion. These identities are not private matters; they are fundamental axes along which power is distributed, exercised, and denied. This chapter will explore how systemic power structures create and perpetuate exclusion based on identity, compelling conformity or concealment and examining the impact on human agency and societal progress.
Before understanding exclusion, we must first examine the societal “norm.” For over half of humanity—women—the societal blueprint has historically manifested as systemic exclusion from positions of power and equitable resource distribution. As of early 2024, a mere 10% of FTSE 100 CEOs in the UK were women, a figure that highlights the persistent glass ceiling (FTSE Women Leaders Review 2024).
This disparity extends to religious institutions, where many major denominations systematically exclude women from decision-making roles and ordained leadership. The Roman Catholic Church explicitly prohibits women from being ordained, and while the Church of England has ordained women as priests and bishops, they still represent only about one-third of paid clergy. This exclusion is not confined to Christian traditions; many non-Christian religions also present varying degrees of exclusion, rooted in traditional interpretations or cultural norms. Orthodox Judaism generally doesn’t ordain women as rabbis, and many interpretations of Islam have historically led to restrictions on women’s public roles. While classical Hindu and Buddhist texts can present complex views, contemporary societies often exhibit conservative norms that lead to discrimination.
These prescribed roles, often rooted in patriarchal structures and religious dogma, painted a stark picture: men were to be dominant and public actors; women were often confined to domesticity. This social conditioning underpins the idea, famously articulated by Simone de Beauvoir in The Second Sex, that “one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” As Judith Butler would later explore in Gender Trouble, gender itself became a performative act, with deviation inviting sanction. Anything outside these prescribed roles was often deemed aberrant, immoral, or even a mental illness.
Economically, men have, on average, £92,762 more in total wealth than women in the UK (Women’s Budget Group, 2023). Men hold nearly three times the value of UK shares and have an average of £83,879 more in private pension wealth, a 90% gap. The median gender pay gap for all employees in the UK stood at 13.1% in April 2024 (ONS, 2024), meaning women earn, on average, 87 pence for every pound earned by men. This disparity is significantly influenced by traditional gender roles: women disproportionately undertake 75% of the world’s unpaid care work, a contribution valued at an estimated $10.8 trillion annually (UN Women, citing ILO 2023).
Beyond the male-female divide, these blueprints also financially penalise non-conformity. UK research indicates that LGBTQ+ employees, on average, earn £6,700 less than other workers, a 16% pay gap (Startups.co.uk, 2024). Gay men, for instance, often face barriers to senior leadership positions, even while earning 4-5% less than heterosexual men. This financial disparity is compounded across the community: Lesbian women frequently face a double penalty, experiencing both the gender pay gap and the sexuality pay gap. Bisexual individuals often encounter unique challenges, including invisibility and persistent stereotypes that contribute to economic instability and barriers to senior leadership positions, even while earning less than heterosexual men.
Transgender and non-binary people face disproportionately severe economic exclusion; UK surveys show that over a quarter (26%) of trans individuals reported experiencing discrimination when looking for a job, and many endure unemployment rates significantly higher than the general population, often leading to deep economic precarity. This exclusion extends acutely to healthcare: systemic underfunding has created crippling waiting times for Gender Identity Clinics (GICs), often exceeding five years for an initial appointment in England, effectively denying timely, essential healthcare.
While gender forms an axis of exclusion, race stands as another fundamental dimension, deeply ingrained in historical and contemporary power structures. The concept of “race” itself is a social construct, a means to categorise and control populations, often justifying domination as explored by Omi & Winant in Racial Formation in the United States. The impact of race on economic well-being is stark and persistent. In the UK, the Runnymede Trust’s “Colour of Money” report highlights that Black African and Bangladeshi households have 10 times less wealth than White British people. Even with similar educational qualifications, ethnic minority graduates often face an “ethnic penalty” in the labour market, earning less or being in non-graduate jobs compared to their White counterparts.
Access to safe housing is another critical area of racial exclusion. Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation reveals that Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities in the UK disproportionately spend more of their income on housing. Overcrowding is also significantly higher, with 24% of Bangladeshi and 18% of Pakistani people living in overcrowded homes compared to just 2% of White British people.
Racial bias in healthcare leads to significant disparities in health outcomes. The NHS Race and Health Observatory highlights that people from Black and minority ethnic groups experience inequalities in health outcomes and access to care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shocking 85% of doctors who died were from ethnic minority backgrounds in the UK, pointing to systemic vulnerabilities. Beyond healthcare, racial bias is also deeply embedded within criminal justice systems. In the UK, non-white individuals account for 37% of those stopped and searched, 23% of those arrested, and 27% of the prison population. The Lammy Review (2017) and the Baroness Casey Review (2023) identified significant disproportionality and institutional racism within the criminal justice system and the Metropolitan Police.
Exclusion is not confined to gender, sexuality, and race; it operates powerfully along the axis of disability and difference. This includes physical impairments like mobility or sight loss, sensory impairments such as hearing loss, and neurological differences, or neurodivergence, such as autism or ADHD. The societal norm often assumes an abled, neurotypical individual, rendering those who deviate as ‘other’ and leading to systemic failures in accessibility and equity, a phenomenon often analysed through the lens of the social model of disability.
Despite legislation such as the Equality Act 2010, disabled people in the UK face severe economic and employment disparities. In 2024, the employment rate for disabled people was 53.7% compared to 83.5% for non-disabled people, creating a significant 29.8 percentage point gap, a persistent marker of exclusion. Disabled workers, on average, earn 14.9% less than non-disabled workers, a median difference of £2.10 per hour. This gap is compounded by other identities; for example, disabled women face a double disadvantage. Adults with autism have some of the lowest employment rates of any group, with UK research indicating that only 29% of autistic people are in paid work, despite many being willing and able to work. Unsurprisingly, disabled households are far more likely to experience poverty; the proportion of disabled people in relative poverty is 49% higher than non-disabled people.
Systemic exclusion also manifests in access to essential services and resources. Disabled people often encounter significant barriers in accessing appropriate healthcare, from lack of accessible facilities to insufficient understanding of complex health needs, leading to poorer health outcomes. For instance, people with learning disabilities often die significantly earlier than the general population—up to 27 years sooner for men and 26 years sooner for women. Additionally, disabled individuals are disproportionately affected by housing that does not meet their needs. While around 9.9 million UK households contain at least one person with a disability, only 9% of UK homes meet minimum accessibility standards. This lack of suitable housing can restrict mobility, independence, and employment opportunities.
The psychological toll of navigating an inaccessible world is profound. The concept of ableism—discrimination and social prejudice against disabled people—forces many to conceal their conditions or difference, a practice known as masking, to avoid prejudice in social and professional settings. For neurodivergent people, this constant effort to conform can lead to burnout, severe anxiety, and depression. The stigma associated with non-visible conditions, such as mental illness or neurodivergence, often makes seeking essential support challenging, adding another layer of silent exclusion. UK surveys often reveal a lack of understanding or persistent prejudice, with nearly one in five British adults admitting to avoiding conversations with disabled people because they worry about saying the wrong thing. The experience of exclusion for a disabled Black queer woman, for example, is not merely the sum of ableism, racism, homophobia, and misogyny, but a distinct, intensified experience at the intersection of all four, making the challenge of dismantling these systems all the more complex.
The real power of these norms coalesces when they are formalised into legal structures. Law possesses the unique ability to transform social disapproval into state-sanctioned persecution. Legal codes have criminalised same-sex relations and prohibited gender non-conformity. For women, this legal codification meant systematic curtailment of rights: they were denied the right to own property, control their earnings, or vote. These legislative acts didn’t just reflect existing prejudice; they actively engineered and enforced it.
One of the most chilling examples of this legal codification is the life of Fritz Bauer, the legendary West German prosecutor. A homosexual man, Bauer lived under the shadow of Paragraph 175 of the German Penal Code, which criminalised homosexuality. This paradox—a man battling state-sponsored evil while living under state-sanctioned prejudice—perfectly illustrates how deeply insidious the system can be. Bauer’s story is a stark reminder that legal frameworks don’t just define crimes; they define who is allowed to exist freely, as explored by Michel Foucault in The History of Sexuality.
Beyond explicit laws, the system spins informal, yet damaging mechanisms of exclusion that permeate daily life. One of the most pervasive forms is social stigma and ostracization. This operates through an unwritten code of conduct enforced by society itself, leading to a deep psychological toll, manifesting as chronic stress, anxiety, and depression. The constant vigilance required to “pass” or conceal one’s true self is an exhausting burden, as detailed by Erving Goffman in Stigma.
This informal pressure underpins more formal discrimination, creating what Iris Marion Young identified as various “faces of oppression.” This includes employment barriers, with a 2025 Ciphr report indicating that 45% of UK adults have experienced workplace discrimination. Housing discrimination is also a pervasive issue, as LGBTQ+ individuals often encounter prejudice. There are even significant healthcare disparities, where the medical system can become another site of exclusion. Educational environments also often fall short, becoming hostile environments where bullying and a lack of inclusive curricula can severely impact students.
This division is compounded by internal political friction: tragically, not all groups within the broader LGB community acknowledge and affirm the identities of their trans members, adding a painful layer of intra-community exclusion to the burden.
The system isn’t a flat, single-layered construct; it’s a complex, multi-dimensional matrix. To truly understand exclusion, we must introduce the concept of intersectionality, a framework articulated by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw. Intersectionality explains that individuals hold multiple social identities that can converge to create unique and compounded experiences of discrimination. A Black queer woman, for instance, might face discrimination not only because she’s a woman or queer, but also because of the unique intersection of all three identities. Her experience of misogyny might be racialised, her homophobia compounded by anti-Black racism, and the cumulative effect is greater than the sum of its parts. Understanding intersectionality is crucial for developing genuinely inclusive solutions, as it highlights that a one-size-fits-all approach to equality will invariably leave the most marginalised behind.
Despite the formidable nature of the system that engineers exclusion, humanity has consistently demonstrated a remarkable capacity for resistance and social change. The history of exclusion is paralleled by a powerful journey toward liberation. Early forms of advocacy were often clandestine, operating in defiance of severe legal penalties. These fragmented efforts coalesced into organised social movements, driven by immense personal courage and collective determination.
In the UK, the gay rights movement was a sustained fight that culminated in a powerful political force. Early activism was pivotal in the passage of the Sexual Offences Act 1967. Decades later, a new generation of activists mobilised to protest against Section 28, a campaign that fundamentally transformed public discourse and was the catalyst for subsequent legal reforms. A crucial lever has been legal reform. While laws historically codified prejudice, they can be repurposed as instruments of liberation.
Landmark legislation, such as the UK Race Relations Act 1976 (now superseded by the Equality Act 2010), sought to dismantle legal segregation. These legal advancements were hard-won battles, the direct result of decades of tireless activism and public education. Parallel to these shifts, significant cultural transformations have occurred, with increased visibility of diverse identities in media, arts, and public discourse. This has helped to normalise and humanise these experiences, contributing to what Jeffrey Weeks describes as the “remaking of erotic and intimate life.” Beyond formal changes, the role of civil society—from grassroots LGBTQ+ organisations to human rights groups and racial justice organisations—cannot be overstated. These organisations are the engines of social progress, transforming individual pain into collective action and holding power structures accountable.
The journey of navigating exclusion is a testament to both the enduring power of societal norms and laws, and the indomitable resilience of the human spirit. The story of Fritz Bauer serves as a poignant reminder of the pervasive reach of such power—how it compelled concealment even from those committed to fighting injustice, and the immense personal cost of denying one’s authentic self. Yet, despite this history, significant progress has been made. The fight for full equality and inclusion is far from over. True societal progress is not merely about accumulating wealth but about ensuring basic necessities, safety, and the uninhibited right to flourish for all. Dismantling these exclusionary power structures requires continuous vigilance, unwavering advocacy, and a commitment to empathy. We must strive to create a truly equitable system where all identities are not just tolerated, but celebrated; where authenticity is a strength, not a vulnerability; and where every human being can live freely, love openly, and contribute fully to society without the burden of concealment.
Next Chapter: Wealth: More than a Matter of Money
Bibliography
Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. New York: Vintage Books, 1974.
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Collins, Patricia Hill. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Goffman, Erving. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1963.
hooks, bell. Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. Boston: South End Press, 1984.
Kendi, Ibram X. How to Be an Antiracist. New York: One World, 2019.
Lorde, Audre. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Trumansburg, NY: Crossing Press, 1984.
Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the United States. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge, 2015.
Weeks, Jeffrey. Sexuality and Its Discontents: Meanings, Myths & Modern Sexualities. New York: Routledge, 1985.
Young, Iris Marion. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990.
Reports and Data Sources
BMA. “Doctors from ethnic minority backgrounds disproportionately affected by Covid-19 deaths.” British Medical Association, 2021.
Ciphr. “Workplace Discrimination Statistics UK.” 2025.
Economics Observatory. “Is the UK criminal justice system racist?” 2023.
Fawcett Society. “Pay Gap App.” 2024.
FTSE Women Leaders Review. “FTSE Women Leaders Review 2024 Report.” 2024.
Institute for Fiscal Statistics. “Education outcomes and ethnic minorities in the UK.” 2022.
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF). “UK Poverty 2021/22: The full report.” 2021.
LGBTQ+ Welfare. “LGBTQ+ Housing: Challenges and Solutions.” 2023.
MHCLG (Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government). “English Housing Survey 2017-18: Headline Report.” 2018a.
MHCLG (Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government). “English Housing Survey 2019-20: Headline Report.” 2020a.
Ministry of Justice. “Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System 2021.” 2021.
NHS Race and Health Observatory. “Key findings from the NHS Race and Health Observatory.” 2023.
ONS (Office for National Statistics). “Census 2021 data on sexual orientation and disability.” 2023.
ONS (Office for National Statistics). “Gender pay gap in the UK: 2024.” 2024.
Pay.UK. “Gender Pay Gap Reporting.” 2024.
Pew Research Center. “Religion and Society.” (Various reports on religious demographics and practices).
Runnymede Trust. “The Colour of Money: How racial inequalities obstruct opportunities for wealth creation.” 2019.
Startups.co.uk. “LGBTQ+ Pay Gap in the UK.” 2024.
UBS. “UBS Global Wealth Report 2023.” 2023.
UK Parliament Research Briefings. “Ethnic minorities in education.” 2023.
UN Women, citing ILO. “Women’s economic empowerment: The time is now.” 2023.
University of Kent. “Sexual orientation and earnings: New evidence from the UK.” 2019.
Women’s Budget Group. “The Wealth of Women: The gender wealth gap in the UK.” 2023.