...or claim that they are identical concepts?
I don't understand the mindset behind the obsession of diversity, whether this be pertaining to gender, race, nationality, religion, or otherwise. While diversity can be an effect of equality, a lack of diversity is not necessarily indicative of a lack of equality.
Forcing diversity, in fact, undoubtedly causes more inequality by discriminating against (perceived) majority groups, due to their associations. Some seem to argue that, due to a "lack" of "oppression", this is not a problem. (the type that claim that reverse racism/sexism exists, that racism/sexism requires prejudice and power) Logically, this is no different from discriminating against minority groups for bearing an association that is that of a "minority group", and I struggle to see how one could think otherwise. All discrimination, of any kind, has negative effects in some form.
In the end, trying to enforce diversity by means of a quota, or otherwise, creates more discrimination and inequality, rather than ensuring that equal opportunity is present. It gives the impression of solving a problem, but in reality it just worsens it by tipping the scales the other way. If true equal opportunity is present, diversity may or may not occur naturally. If it doesn't, it is a non-problem, as there is equal opportunity.
Therefore I perceive the obsessive thirst for diversity, typical within society, (typically with those who pertain to the left wing) as simply misguided. Diversity isn't a thing we need to strive for in society, in my opinion. I'd be interested to hear others thoughts regarding this.