Well, I think that's unlikely to happen, but if they're going to exist, then I think they should include the viewpoints there as well. It shouldn't just be the other categories. If I were to reform them, I would have them be based not on the general population levels but on the funnel of applicants.
I understand it. At my university, when we're thinking about our percentage of Canada research chairs, we have to match the percentage of a certain identity group in the general population, regardless of whether the pipeline to provide us those applicants is open and diverse. It just doesn't make sense. That's just bad statistics. You want to look at how many people are there. If they're not there at the Ph.D. level, the problem isn't at our hiring level but why they aren't attracted to this level. Are there barriers further down the line?
I would reform them by thinking about it and not assuming that discrimination is the problem. Where is the problem? Is it discrimination? It might be, but it might be a whole host of factors that are just assumed under the current system.