A Prejudice By Another Name Just Isn’t The Same

I’ve been struck by, well, a number of things in the past month. However, the most striking dynamic has been the consistent hypocrisy of Palin supporters crying sexism when Obama’s camp has been slammed for uttering race time and time again. Initially, I laughed (“Oh, now when it’s convenient, it’s OK to point out inequities.); then I was dumbfounded (“Seriously? You’re going to play the gender card after blasting Obama and Clinton for mentioning their identities?”); and now I think I’ve got it.

It was a common theme post-Palin-announcement and Cindy McCain, along with others, claimed that Palin was the target of sexism. If talking about all those cracks in the ceiling weren’t enough, such a claim certainly “injected” gender into the campaign. I use that term only because it was used when Obama was accused of injecting race into the campaign after mentioning that he does not look like all of our previous presidents (link to Who’s Playing Who). I, personally, think it’s laughable to say that a person is injecting something that is fully a part of who they are. It’s like the elephant in the room. Don’t talk about the fact that Obama is multi-racial or that Palin is a woman. Ridiculous. So, I am not suggesting that we ignore Palin’s gender. However, I am suggesting that it’s hypocritical to criticize Obama for mentioning his race. It’s also contradictory to vilify the spouse of one candidate for lamenting about the missteps of our country and not even blink- or better yet- rally behind the spouse of the other when she feels sexism is afoot.

Yet, I should not be surprised.

My observation of these dynamics is that the reactions parallel the stereotypes embedded in the isms (i.e. racism and sexism). We have a stereotype of women as docile, conciliatory, soft and so injecting gender into the campaign does not seem so threatening. We can tame that beast. It can even work to our advantage. Let’s talk about gender and then show how Palin takes the beauty queen role and flips it on its head. She’s a lady who is also ready to lead. How quaint.

On the other hand, we have a stereotype of Black men as aggressive, dangerous and unruly. Therefore, injecting race into the campaign brings with it a host of issues. We don’t want to engage or even admit to those ideas. If we allow that discussion, we fear it can’t be tamed. It will become out of control and dangerous- note the parallel. Pro-Obamas don’t want to further tie their candidate to the negative connotation of what it means to be Black in America (especially given the recent polls regarding racial attitudes), and anti-Obamas fear being called racists. Not so quaint.

Let me be clear, I am not in the business of ranking isms. I honestly feel that they are inextricably linked. Both isms are problematic. However, the conversations about race become heated much more quickly and are volatile from the outset, because we have created such a toxic picture of what it is to be Black. It’s all the more interesting to note that Obama is multi-racial and not Black or African American as we have traditionally defined the group. Yet he is just as entangled in the stereotypes of Black men, which speaks to the larger issue of how we label people in our society.

You might be remembering that Hillary Clinton got a pretty hard time for naming sexism. My analysis is that she was at a disadvantage, because she did not fit our idea of a woman closely enough. She was perceived as harsh and unfeminine in her power suits and told to suck it up and to stop crying fake tears. Palin is perceived as a caring mother of five, beauty queen who could pass as a librarian in her frames and skirt suit. With that, she can fight the political status quo without being called unfeminine. It seems that injecting gender into the race might even be to her advantage. Since she fits and fights the female image at the same time, perhaps the hope is that she will be embraced by all for whichever suits their fancy.

So what have we learned? At the very least it seems that it is much more acceptable to talk about gender if you are female republican VP candidate than if you are a multi-racial democratic presidential candidate. It’s more acceptable to talk about sexism in our society than it is to talk about racism. As we race to see which targeted group will go down in history as the first, let’s not kid ourselves that we don’t see the relevance of Obama’s race or Palin’s gender. I don’t purport to know why the double-standard exists, but I have certainly seen a great deal of it lately.

Post 9/11 Misperceptions Linger

As we reflected on the tragedy of 9/11, my mind shifted to the psychological aftermath of hypervigilence and misperceptions. The reality is that in a number of ways we “went after” those who looked like our perpetrators long before the Bush Doctrine. Muslims and people of Arab descent were targets of hate crimes, satire, comedic insult, distorted media images and the like. In some ways it seemed reminiscent of the climate, which I can only imagine, that preceded the Japanese internment camps. Assumptions were made based on the color of a person’s skin, and in this case, the professing of a certain religion. Never mind that on September 10^th these individuals were considered our neighbors and fellow Americans. Muslims and Arab Americans became “them”- no longer “us”- post 9/11.

Although seven years have passed, I’m not sure that our perception of Muslims has changed. One way we can expand our knowledge, and subsequently our perception, of Muslims is to learn about the culture. It is indeed a culture, a way of life, much more than a religion the way Americans conceptualize it.

I recently attended a Ramadan service led by the Muslim Students’ Association on my campus. Ramadan, the ninth month, is a month of fasting and realignment. It includes the most holy night of the year and is filled with fellowship. Students shared the meaning of Ramadan and their experiences growing up and at college.

During this service, I was struck by the parallel between Ramadan and Lent. Both seasons have an element of sacrifice- through fasting- meant to strengthen your relationship with a higher power. Through this practice the hope is that you will be renewed in your faith. Both periods of time involve recognizing the less fortunate, connecting with others in the faith community and culminate in a festive celebration. Of course they have their differences. Ramadan is considered a holy time because it was during this time that the Qur’an was revealed. Lent represents Jesus’ time in the desert prior to Easter.

You might ask, “So what?” You might even call me sacrilegious for making them. I raise the issue to say that it has become so common place to perceive Muslims as “the other” that it was a surprise to me when this connection popped into my head. Despite the attempt by some media outlets to portray real-life stories of Muslims the most common portrayal is not meant to help us see ourselves as similar. This reality is unfortunate, because as I said earlier Muslims are Americans. The questioning of this fact was only heightened post 9/11.

Getting back to my story- this personal account forced me to realize I had been keeping my distance from Islam. I have lived in a Muslim country, had numerous Muslim friends, yet I had let the distorted images of Islam cloud my ability to connect with the humanity of the religion. This prior knowledge did not make me immune to the distortions.

Yet the need to keep this distance serves our purpose as a country. In order to be at war, we need to see the “enemy” as the “other,” “them” “different from us.” It’s easier that way. Psychologically, we are less willing to wage atrocities on our neighbors or those we feel are similar. Yet it’s all a tangled mess, because we are not at war with Islam or Muslims in general. I share this personal example to say that we need to be careful about what messages we are taking in. This process can happen unconsciously, but through awareness and self-reflection you will see it rear its ugly head in your thoughts and actions. Psychology suggests that we think about “us” differently than we think about “them.” Once we’ve drawn those lines, we continue to see evidence to support the distinction. The roles of “us” and “them” change with time, but I would argue that we’re still feeling the aftermath of 9/11 in relation to our misperceptions of Islam.

Diversity in the Business World

Many people think that diversity in the business world is solely a numbers game. It can be conceptualized that way, but it usually fails. The first step is to define your terms. What do you mean by diversity? It is often helpful to have a broad definition, which can be broken down to focus on specific areas. For example, if you define diversity as “all the ways in which we differ,” you will need to then provide specifics that are relevant for your group. It might also be important to examine what aspects of diversity are represented in your community, potential customers, vendors, etc. These are populations which often go unexamined when discussing diversity. Increasing diversity in these areas might not immediately affect your bottom line but over time can make a real impact.

Training is essential. Trainings not only educate and motivate but also foster growth. In my consulting, I have found that some people refuse to get on board with diversity initiatives, because they don’t see the relevance. Take race for example, where I often here: “Race is no longer and issue,” or “I’m colorblind.” However, quality training can provide evidence for the unfortunate fact that 1) race continues to influence the distribution or wealth and resources in our country and 2) the construct affects us all to varying degrees. During one training, I showed a film of two professional discrimination testers- one White and one Black. Hidden cameras followed them as they attempted to get a job, buy a car, find a place to live and shop in the mall. Basically, the Black man experienced overt and covert racial discrimination. For example, the White man went to look at an apartment and was given the master key. When the Black man came, the apartment was “unavailable since a woman put a hold on it that morning.” This film was an “ah-ha” moment for several White males in the training. What struck one of the men the most was that these instances were real and unambiguous. He had heard people complain about discrimination but assumed that they were hypersensitive, overreacting or misinterpreting the situation. Not only were these instances that he witnessed occurring, but without the cameras we would have had no way of knowing due to their subtlety. Beyond the discrimination experienced by the Black man, the trainee also became aware of ways he might have been advantaged in unknowing and unsolicited ways. He left that training more aware of the ways in which race influences daily experiences.

Once you get people on board, through education, personal revelation or simple economics, you can begin moving forward with initiatives. Nothing is worse than individuals feeling as if diversity is being shoved down their throats. If you push ahead without buy-in, you are in for resistance and push-back. It’s no small feat, but it is essential to make it clear that diversity is a shared goal that cuts across the company. One way this can be done is by having leadership model the value of diversity through acknowledging (through awards or simple recognition) individuals who have engaged in company initiatives or developed new ways to foster interaction across lines of difference. It does not take long for employees to gravitate towards behavior that is being consistently rewarded.

If you are interested in examining company models, there a numerous options, but consider Kraft Foods or Aflac. They are clear about valuing diversity and making it something that is not only encouraged but rewarded from entry-level to upper management. Both companies also have employee councils, which provide support and develop initiatives geared towards various groups.

Still not convinced? More than 70% of Fortune 500 companies have diversity initiatives. It’s an important investment.

Got Diversity?

It’s worth pondering. How do you measure it? Some would quickly say it’s a numbers game. But is that the whole story? If we had the “ideal” mix of people, but those people simply coexisted in the same space, would that be diversity? OK, enough with the questions. I want to suggest that we consider multiple aspects of the term “diversity.” Social psychologist Patricia Gurin and colleagues have differentiated between structural, classroom, and interactional diversity. Structural diversity refers to the numerical representation of diversity and is necessary, but insufficient, in guaranteeing that people will have meaningful cross-racial interactions. Classroom diversity refers to knowledge of diverse people; whereas, informal interactional diversity involves the frequency and quality of intergroup interactions. Of these types of diversity, interactional seems to come closest to reaching the ideals espoused in vision statements. In part, these statements are put forth because diversity has become a sought after attribute of many institutions- colleges and universities in particular. They want to prepare students for a diverse and democratic society, and that cannot happen by osmosis. It takes more than diverse groups co-existing. It takes intergroup contact, relationships and engagement. Along the way, knowledge is gathered and perspective-taking skills increase. Even still, classroom diversity has its limits since book knowledge lacks the dynamics of real-life interaction.

Although this theory is rooting in the college setting, it also has implications for the wider population. As a society, we also need structural, informational (classroom), and interactional diversity. I believe the most transformative of these types is interactional, because a person who engages across lines of difference most likely also seeks knowledge about other groups and supports efforts of structural diversity. To answer my initial question, we need to examine our social circles, neighborhoods, workplaces and communities. It should not be expected that we can answer affirmatively for all of these domains given that our country remains quite segregated in various regards. However, it’s worth the reflection. We can look at the make-up of our social circle, neighborhood, schools, boards and city officials to examine structural diversity. Then, we can reflect personally and as a community about our knowledge of people who are different from us. Do we harbor misperceptions about our neighbors who have different traditions? Do we accurately portray various groups in the media? To examine interactional diversity, we can think about who we have invited to our home over the past year or which neighbors we actually associate with. These are all just suggestions to get you started on your own self-reflection.

You might ask, “Why?” Well, research has found that there are benefits to diversity. Basically, we all experience cognitive gains from enriched environments and encountering new stimuli. We know that a diverse educational environment has positive impacts on student learning, critical thinking, interpersonal competencies, self confidence and civic engagement. Although the research has not been replicated beyond college samples, it might not be too far of a leap to suggest that some of these benefits could also occur in a diverse community, workplace or social network. So, it seems a question worth asking- got diversity?