If a government or institution
does not reflect the demographics of society,
then it represents a boys club,
not the people.

Concern is often expressed for those who are discriminated against within cultural, technical and industrial communities but little thought is given to the effect demographic bias has on those left within a more dominant class of a community. We contemplate the glass ceiling while rarely looking at the glass floor. The lack of diversity can lead to a group-think mentality that not only excludes others but prevents outlier innovations from finding a foothold. In many communities this imbalance is often perceived as a post-politically-correct form of enlightenment. This narrative prevents exploration of possible benefits through diversification. Benefits to those less-represented but also those overly represented, and the greater community as a whole.

Response to demographic bias often comes in the form of Affirmative Action. Universities are required to enroll a certain number of women and minorities in proportion to a more privileged class. Grants may be given for research or cultural projects in a similar manner. Some perceive these actions as an inhibitor to self-improvement while others believe it is the only means to improve the collective-whole. This license serves as a form of communal Affirmative Action. It was developed with the belief that when we accept that we have a limited psychological capacity (a, b) we are better able to architect social constructs that favor equality while making inequality more costly.