That’s also exactly what a good teaching statement does, and perhaps even (at a high enough level of abstraction) what a good research statement does.

The useful answer would be to describe what such conformity and assurance look like. (And I expect that many initial attempted answers will be very wrong, since the readers are going to be very different at different universities and departments.)

It seems that at least arguing that “Skin color and gender (self-identified or not) do not reliably track concrete disadvantage” within a diversity statement would be unnecessary. It would probably be better to focus on the importance and value of geographical and class diversity whilst connecting it to your experiences and your methods of helping achieve this. To do these three tasks seems to be the essence of a diversity statement, these tasks being:
1. Say you care about diversity
2. Illustrate how your experience provides some relevant experience for understanding and working with certain diversity and inclusion issues
3. Show how that leads into your actual attempts to improve diversity and inclusion and/or your plans to do so, especially as a part of the university

Your bullet points, and what you present outside of this, offers plenty for this task and some of what doesn’t can be turned into specifying focus and where you believe you can, to use a common type of phrasing, “get the most diversity and inclusion for your buck.”

I do not have good perspective on whether or not this would hurt you and to what extent, not least because it would surely depend on the university, but I at least think some carefulness and effort to stay focused on the topic rather than divert to arguing for positions that some reading a diversity statement might end up seeing as not signaling the right attitude could at least minimize harm. It is ultimately only you that can judge beyond that to what extent you wish to only make a statement you would fully stand by, along lines you would make it, outside of the context of the diversity statement or try to conform fully to perceived expectations, or some in between position.

Diversity statements and their analogues are odious, not least because they make you feel like a liar even when technically you are telling the truth. Even if you are in broad agreement with the some variant of ‘diversity’ you may well feel that the presuppositions of the question suggest an agenda with which you disagree (eg that race matters but that class doesn’t.) But I have a suggestion for Animal Symbolicum and people like him, a way to tick some of the boxes without too much sacrifice in terms of time, effort or conscience. Moreover it is a strategy that is actually fun to execute and may even improve your performance as a teacher and researcher as well as enabling you to tell an honest but career-beneficial tale when it comes to the diversity statement. Buy yourself the set of Peter Adamson (and his collaborators’) books ‘The History of Philosophy without Any Gaps’. Adamson has an amazing ability to summarise key theses arguments in an amusing way, and the endorsements of serious scholars suggest that he is true to the philosophers that he trying to represent. Read his books with a pen in hand, especially the ones that from a North American point of view are a bit more exotic, the volumes on Byzantine and Renaissance, Classical Indian Philosophy and Philosophy in the Islamic world.  Use them to introduce a bit of ‘compare and contrast’ into your teaching of a predominately Western canon. Then brag about it (honestly) in your diversity statement. 

Acquiring the necessary knowledge to do this kind thing in a competent and honest way used to be hard. Adamson has made it easy. 

What really hits me in the eye when I read these books is how often different people from different (or at least divergent) traditions adopt similar solutions to similar problems. For example quite a lot of philosophical traditions are down on desire. In order to achieve salvation, Nirvana, this-worldly serenity or whatnot you must do away with desire. But doing away with desire seems to involve a lot of effort which means that you are unlikely to do it unless you *really want* salvation, nirvana or this-worldly serenity. Contradiction! Solution: distinguish between desire (bad) and preferences (good or a least neutral). It is interesting to see Buddhists and Stoics, who will have known next to nothing about one another, doing the same kind of philosophical soft-shoe shuffle. But it is not just in the areas of ethics and moral psychology that similar problems and solutions emerge. Just yesterday I was reading a passage on about Ancient Indian Scepticism (underpinned by a theory of reference) that immediately recalled Twentieth Century debates about scientific realism between Feyerabend and Putnam.  We get some Iranian students in my department and last semester I was teaching a course at the boundaries between the Philosophy of Logic and meta-ethics, with a big focus on No-Ought-From-Is. We got to discussing Explosion or Ex contradictione Quodlibet. My Iranian student balked as the idea that from a contradiction *anything* follows arguing instead that when we get to a contradiction we should simply stop.  I was able to tell her (what she did not know) that this idea was characteristic of the Islamic logicians who flourished in her native land during the Medieval era. (Here it was not Adamson but the chapter on Islamic logic in Novaes and Uckleman’s ‘Cambridge Companion to Medieval Logic’ that was my key source.) Lots of my students (including many of my star students) have some Indian, Chinese, Vietnamese or Japanese heritage.  And it is just nice – not necessary , not vital from a social justice point of view but *nice* – if they get to learn a little something about their non-western philosophical heritages even if our primary focus is in Hobbes and Hume. Further the kind of ‘compare and contrast’ stuff can be *philosophically* illuminating. You are not just doing it for ‘diversity’. You are doing it because it improves your teaching and may inform your research. (I am really hanging out for Adamson’s forthcoming volume on Classical Chinese Philosophy.) 

I would also suggest that when teaching moral and political philosophy you acquire a nodding acquaintance with world history and employ examples drawn from diverse sources. This too will make you a better educator as well as giving yourself something to brag about in your diversity statement, once the anecdotes have begun to accumulate. So as a teacher in Aotearoa/New Zealand, I regularly employ examples drawn from European, British, American, Russian and Chinese history as well as the history of the Ancient mediterranean civilisations. Last year in the PPE class the I co-teach, we spent a lot of time on the history of the British East India Company, conceived in part as a case study in corporate government and corporate malfeasance. (Also imperialism.) Most Pakeha (white or mostly white New Zealanders) are of Scottish , Irish or English descent. (There is a lot of interracial marriage in New Zealand with lots of students having a diverse range of ancestors.) One of the things I emphasise is that Scotland, Ireland, England and Wales are different nations with different and sometimes conflicting histories. and that these conflicts have sometimes played a role in creating the modern settler societies in which many of us live. 

Going back to Animal Symbolicum’s first bullet point I would try to eliminate the (entirely appropriate but imprudent) snark, replacing it with something like this: 

• In my two-year college classrooms, although my primary focus is on Western philosophy I try to illuminate my teaching by comparing and contrasting the work of philosophers in other traditions especially philosophers in the Islamic world (which includes a fair bit of jewish Philosophy) Indian philosophy etc. [Add appropriate anecdotes.] Thus in my teaching I try to learn from a diverse range of philosophical traditions thereby honouring the cultural heritages of many of my students blah , blah blah In discussing Thomas Hobbes I bring in examples from …. 

May I suggest something else, already alluded to in some other comments:  

* I try hard to avoid stereotyping my students . Just because they have background X or characteristic Y is it does not follow that they have traits commonly associated with background X or trait Y, and I try not to make any such assumptions. 

If you were just considering two diversity statements, one that is very good with the understanding and acknowledgement of why a diversity statement matters to those who value them (as you put it) without much meat in their examples of action, and another without much focus on the broader understanding of and acknowledgement of issues but with a lot of good examples of actions taken and to be taken that, among other benefits, help create a space where the entirety of a diverse student body can feel (and of course be) fully included, which of the two would you consider superior? This is of course just a long winded way of asking which you think matters more, but the way a question is framed matters in forming an answerr and a hypothetical set of two diversity statements presents the question in a way that focuses on what I interests me in the answer.