Thanks to all for your thoughts.

I think it is important to not only deal with the cosmetic, such as celebrations and such, but looking at our histories, experiences, pain, privilege, and oppression to help people understand what they don’t experience.

Its really funny (and by that I mean uncomfortable) when I’m participating in diversity education, and as a hetero, white, able-bodied, 6’5 man, when I express something that acknowledges the existence of systematic oppressions such as racism, people from dominant groups respond. When someone from a non-dominant group expresses the same idea, often in a more articulate and researched way that I, people often shut down or respond disrespectfully.

In my organization, it has been amazing to see the results with our students when other student leaders break through some of the perceived barriers of diversity education (its not my fault, I didn’t cause this, I treat everyone ‘the same’), and really start to understand that this sort of work is not about automatically disregarding the life struggles we all face, but that ‘privilege’ is really just a way to qualify those terrible things people in dominant or over-represented groups are spared from suffering.

Thanks again for the sincere and committed dialogue.

A more effective focus and goal statement might be to “build cultural competence”, which has as it’s focal point, building and competence and a skill set rather than the stifling of unwanted behaviors. With that goal in mind using the Influencer model pretty much as you’ve laid it out in the article is a great way to begin doing the same work from a (pardon the use a an overused buzz phrase here, but it fits) strength based approach. What do you think?

I had a concern reading Mr. Maxfield’s well-intended piece on racism that placed diversity education low on the list of solutions, when it should be at the top. As others have pointed out, there is a difference between unconscious blunders and unintended insensitivities by majority groups, and hate-filled behaviors. There should be zero tolerance for the latter, for sure. But the latter is generally rather easy to identify, and far less common than the former — And so, without such a diversity “crisis,” most institutions never deal with the education that could create a truly welcoming and thriving environment for all. The unconscious structural nature of the “isms” that Mr. Owens referred to is what needs to be seen in order for it to be transformed. Majority groups rarely are able to discern that easily for themselves, for they are the creators of their “norm.”

It the unconscious behaviors of well-meaning people that are so insidious and pervasive, the countless “micro inequities” that occur every day in the most workplaces — that build up and can cause people of color and women and elders and people with disabilities and gays and religious minorities, etc. to “over” react at times out of frustration — Which then causes majority groups to shut down, avoid them, walk on eggshells, resent, etc.
The education piece, well done, by groups such as PI (or my company), would help so very many workplaces to avoid this unnecessary cycle of hurt feelings and miscommunications and conflict in the first place. It’s important to get diversity trainers who go beneath the surface to look at this deeper level. Unfortunately, most diversity training does not, and therefore little is learned or accomplished, and mutual frustration remains, entrenched.

It was the “Seeking Safety” piece which was also posted yesterday that contained an especially big gap that deeply troubles me as a diversity trainer. The staff referred to in the article was mostly “not white” who, we were told, are frequently subjected by the mostly white patients to racial slurs and epithets. The counsel offered in the article was directed to the people of color and how they should deal with it. — What about the white staff there (even if there aren’t many of them)? They are in the best position to be “allies” to their colleagues and, when they witness such abuses, to let white patients know that racist behaviors are not acceptable. That is the most effective tool for combating any of the “isms”: When men call other men on their sexism, it’s far more effective than when “over-reactive” women do it. When straight people call out others on their homophobic comments, and so on.

Again, it is very concerning to me that the responsibility for addressing the racism seemed to be placed mostly on the shoulders of those who were being targeted by it. And that’s why it never stops. Because (when we are able to recognize it) we whites don’t take on racism directly as our collective problem that we need to deal with, whites talking to other white, it goes on and on and “eludes” us.
Same thing with sexism and the glass-ceiling: well-meaning men don’t use their influence with other men, learn to better discern sexism, and intervene when they do. And so it goes with all of the “isms.”

I am glad for the opportunity to share back in this forum.
I am concerned however, that there were such big missings in these pieces that has now been read by so many in your audience, many of whom won’t have the opportunity to learn of these important distinctions and the deeper education and awareness building that is so greatly needed. I’m sure Mr. Owens and I would both be happy to contribute in future Most Vital Conversations on this topic.

Veronica Adams
Riding the Wave Training & Development

Another another note, this example is when employees have been called to a meeting to do a run through or dress rehearsal for preparation of a larger meeting. In this situation the entire group is reviewing PPT slides, handouts, etc. and the minority employee begins to ask questions or contributes comments and recommends, the majority staff then begins an interuption of the minority speaking by turning his/her body to everybody except to the minority and say, “The VP wants to make sure that you proofread this Bob.” The statement sounds pretty innocent until that statement is repeated three other times during the meeting only when the minority speaks. The minority ascertains that the majority employee was allowed to say, “Shut up and your opinion is not valued.” During the meeting, the highest ranking executive in attendance should work hard to get the minority included in the conversation again. This can happen by the executive simply saying, “There is a lot of synergy in the room and I want to make sure that we get all of the recommendations recorded, Barb (minority employee), can you repeat what you said about XYZ, I did not get your complete thought down on paper. If there is a notetaker, the executive can also say, “And, notetaker will you also make sure that you get Barb’s suggestion.” By using these two statements together will give the other employees the message that the hidden racism is not tolerated.