ARCHIVES
EDUCATION | COVID-19 | TECH | SOCIAL | WORK | ENVIRONMENT | POLITICS | CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Don’t forget to subscribe ›
Stop the diversity cash grab.
In the past year, many corporations responded to renewed attention to issues of racism and racial justice, some setting aside significant amounts of funding earmarked for distribution to groups working on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and promoting the economic inclusion of Black Americans. We might wonder why it took widely-publicized murders and a nation-wide uprising for what’s typically a “drought stricken funding landscape” for diversity initiatives to change. We should also consider who actually benefits in a time when it’s “raining diversity dollars, and everyone is outside with a bucket” (Lightship). Sometimes, so-called “diversity” is actually tokenization that falls short of actually fostering inclusion.
TAKE ACTION
Encourage companies or organizations you’re part of to take concrete, material steps towards active anti-racism, even when they come with a cost.
Push back against tokenism by insisting on impactful policies and increased inclusion and diversity at all levels.
Advocate for credible DEI training led by people of color.
GET EDUCATED
By Andrew Lee (he/him)
In the past year, many corporations responded to renewed attention to issues of racism and racial justice, some setting aside significant amounts of funding earmarked for distribution to groups working on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and promoting the economic inclusion of Black Americans. We might wonder why it took widely-publicized murders and a nation-wide uprising for what’s typically a “drought stricken funding landscape” for diversity initiatives to change. We should also consider who actually benefits in a time when it’s “raining diversity dollars, and everyone is outside with a bucket” (Lightship). Sometimes, so-called “diversity” is actually tokenization that falls short of actually fostering inclusion.
Tokenism or tokenization “results when institutions make performative efforts towards the inclusion of people from underrepresented groups to give the appearance of equity,” like appointing a few BIPOC or LGBTQ+ people to leadership positions in order to deflect critique. The only token members of a team have little power to actually effect change, and they’re moreover “often unfairly asked to speak on behalf of their entire community” (Wexner Foundation).
Token representation often doesn’t extend to the highest positions of power. Though companies supporting racial justice in the wake of the Black Lives Matter revolts “have been quick to adopt the movement’s hashtag, they don’t appear to show the same enthusiasm in their boardrooms: as of 2020, only four out of America's 500 biggest companies had a black chief executive (BBC). Despite press releases, advertisements, and internal diversity programming, the number of Black men on corporate boards of directors actually dropped in the last two years. Carey Oven of Deloitte’s Center for Board Effectiveness found that the lack of progress is due to a lack “of corporate will, rather than a lack of qualified minority candidates” (CNBC).
Many of the same successful companies that utterly failed to diversify management and board positions now contract with external DEI consultants in what is now an $8 billion industry (Forbes). Incredibly, this same tokenization happens in the diversity consulting industry, as well. White-led organizations are seeking federal and foundation grant money, jumping in line ahead of long-standing BIPOC-led groups. According to Lightship Capital, which exclusively supports companies founded by people from marginalized identities, they were approached by a white-led group to co-apply for a grant. The inquiring organization would keep 80% of the money for themselves, leaving only 20% for Lightship Capital “to do the actual, in the trenches work” (Lightship).
Instituting token representation is easy compared to actually creating the changes necessary for authentic inclusion. But actual inclusion is the only solution to systemic oppression and exclusion. There are organizations making honest attempts to change for the better, and there are DEI initiatives led by people of color with experience and skills. One, but by no means the only, is Anti-Racism Daily, which offers courses, workshops, and subscription packages for workplaces and teams (ARD).
North Coast Organics publicly posted their pay scales and demographic information for employees and management, making a commitment to equitable pay and hiring practices (Instagram). Fashion company Nisolo included a commitment to donate monthly to Black Lives Matter and Gideon’s Army of Nashville in their statement in support of Black lives (Nisolo). Sea to Sky Removal made a public commitment to “cut ties with customers, partners, and suppliers that do not share our commitment to battle racism in all its forms” (Sea to Sky).
Awaken offers diversity and inclusion workshops facilitated by a multi-racial team from a variety of professional backgrounds, from community organizers to communications specialists (Awaken). And Leesa Renée Hall has worked with thousands of people to interrupt unconscious bias with questions she first used to think through her own race, gender, religion and ancestry (Leesa Renée Hall).
What distinguishes sincere attempts to foster diversity from tokenism and cynical diversity cash grabs is that the former takes work but the latter takes the easy way out. Cutting ties with suppliers that aren’t actively anti-racist or taking the time to find a credible DEI consulting firm may cost time, energy, organizational resources, and money; promoting a single person from a marginalized group does not.
Key Takeaways
Tokenism is including one or two people from marginalized groups in order to deflect legitimate criticism.
Some organizations wish to capitalize on interest in and funding for racial justice initiatives by taking the easy way out and deploying tokenism in lieu of substantive change.
Real diversity, equity, and inclusion means changing policies and practices, even when it comes with a cost. Tokenism is easy but harmful.
Uproot workplace racism.
On Friday, NBC reported on a Glassdoor survey, which found the primary reason workers are excited to return to their workplaces is the opportunity to socialize with their coworkers (GlassDoor). But for employees of color, workplace socialization and communication are often taxing rather than restorative. Just 3% of Black remote workers want to return to the office, compared to 21% of their white peers.
TAKE ACTION
Recognize racist microaggressions and intervene when you witness them.
Subscribe to Anti-Racism at Work, our weekly email that offers tactical ways to transform the workplace.
Consider: How do I feel about my work environment? Could my coworkers with different identities feel differently? What kind of support do I and others need? How can I practice active solidarity with the people I work with?
GET EDUCATED
By Andrew Lee (he/him)
On Friday, NBC reported on a Glassdoor survey, which found the primary reason workers are excited to return to their workplaces is the opportunity to socialize with their coworkers (GlassDoor). But for employees of color, workplace socialization and communication are often taxing rather than restorative.
When one Black web developer learned of plans to work in-person again, she thought back to the “snide remarks, almost always about race” she endured before a year of remote work. “Some of it was intentional. Most of it was. A little of it was just sort of unconscious. All of it just wears on you. I was really upset.” Rather than return to her office to face more “jokes” about affirmative action and boats back to Africa, she decided to quit (NBC).
The microaggressions faced by employees of color include bigoted jokes, backhanded “compliments,” and offensive nicknames (BuzzFeed). See our previous piece on microaggressions. The psychic toll of such exchanges mean that workplaces can feel very different for white people and people of color. 21% of white workers wish to return to the office. In contrast, only 3% of Black workers want to do the same (Future Forum).
White workers are seven times more amenable to returning to office work than their Black colleagues because “they don’t have to deal with the microaggressions we do,” said marketing and public relations specialist Crystal Lowe. “Who wants to work in the office? I’d rather clean up dog poop” (NBC).
“Working from home has provided a sense of freedom from that,” explained Joseph B. Hill, managing partner of a diversity, equity, and inclusion firm. “But what this has highlighted is that some bold and courageous conversations have to take place inside these offices to make them welcoming for Black people” (NBC). Maybe your job is considering a return to in-person work. Perhaps your job falls within the half of American jobs that can't be performed remotely (Global Workplace Analytics). In any case, the wild disparities in attitudes towards returning to the office between Black and white workers demonstrates the urgency of starting such “bold and courageous conversations” in workplaces of any kind.
We should all feel compelled to intervene when we witness microaggressions on the job, especially those that don’t affect us directly. It can be tempting to avoid responsibility by second-guessing yourself about what you witnessed. You may wonder if you heard it correctly, if you have the authority to respond, or what the negative consequences might be for you should you decide to get involved (DiversityQ). But if a workplace is good for you only in equal measure to it being harmful to your coworkers from marginalized backgrounds, you’re already involved. In each instance, we all need to question, interrupt, and denounce discriminatory behavior while supporting those against whom it is directed. Rather than creating a culture of blame, responsible bystander intervention instead “creates a culture of accountability, and one that doesn’t tolerate harassment, microaggresions, or discrimination of any kind” (Idealist).
Ultimately, rooting out workplace racism requires structural change, as well. Workers of color also face longer commutes than white workers (Grist) because of economic inequalities, housing market racism, and gentrification (Teen Vogue), so returning to work in-person requires a greater sacrifice of unpaid commuting time each week for non-white workers. In the workplace, equity may require systemic changes like labor protections for marginalized workers (The Progressive, UCLA) and initiatives to create actively anti-racist workplaces at all levels (Times Up). We should demand that the places we work view anti-racism as integral to the work itself, and we should insist on racial, economic, and housing justice in the places we live. But while we should advocate for large-scale change, we don’t need to wait for it to take action ourselves. We can look the other way in the face of workplace microaggressions, or we can instead choose to advocate for ourselves and coworkers of marginalized backgrounds. We have a collective responsibility to uproot workplace racism.
Key Takeaways
Just 3% of Black remote workers want to return to the office, compared to 21% of their white peers.
Many workers of color face racial microaggressions at their jobs from co-workers and supervisors alike.
We need to take the initiative to disrupt racial microaggressions whenever we see them, including on the job.
Rethink the space race.
Earlier this week, Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, embarked on a ten-minute ride through space (CNN). I’m sure you already heard about it – it seems like everyone can’t stop talking about it (ourselves included, guilty)! One reporter noted that the time that the media spent covering Bezos’ space flight over the past few weeks is almost as much time as they spent covering the climate crisis throughout all of 2020 (Truthout).
TAKE ACTION
Learn more about the traumatic impact of colonization.
Support efforts of Amazon employees to unionize and advocate for fair waves and safe working conditions.
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
Earlier this week, Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, embarked on a ten-minute ride through space (CNN). I’m sure you already heard about it – it seems like everyone can’t stop talking about it (ourselves included, guilty)! One reporter noted that the time that the media spent covering Bezos’ space flight over the past few weeks is almost as much time as they spent covering the climate crisis throughout all of 2020 (Truthout). Read more on why the media has difficulty covering the climate crisis.
Naturally, this publicity stunt drew swift criticism, admonishing a billionaire for a frivolous ride through space while ignoring the threats we face on Earth. From the fast-spreading Delta variant to rising temperatures, rent increases and ending unemployment benefits, and fires on land and sea, it’s clear why some people are asking, at minimum, for billionaires to “read the room.” Here’s our take on TikTok >
The enthusiasm of conversations about the event has misconstrued some of the facts. Bezos has invested a significant amount into addressing issues today, including $10B to the environment and $100M to poverty (Quartz). Bezos also announced two $100 million grants to two individuals he believes are changing the world upon his return from the flight. However, this pales compared to the $10B invested into Blue Origin to date (Quartz). It also ignores the ongoing impact that a major corporation like Amazon has on our long-term wellbeing (Wired). And some of these contributions, particularly those announced upon his return from space, feel performative at best (CNN).
But if we reflect on our history, this isn’t the first time that wealthy white men have used their power to colonize new frontiers. And each time, there’s always someone that pays the cost. Throughout history, the colonization of “new” frontiers disregarded the safety and wellbeing of both those that inhabited it and those bearing the brunt of the labor. Remember that these lands were “new” to some and “Indigenous” to many others). Even the infrastructure it’s taken to colonize this nation, from the Transcontinental Railroad to modern-day highways, has only happened at the hands of low-wage and enslaved laboring working in unsafe conditions – and only after the displacement of Indigenous and lower-income communities. This is still happening today, and these same communities are still reeling from its generational impact. Read more about the generational trauma of colonization.
Ironically, Bezos was sure to “thank” Amazon employees for making it financially possible for him to travel to space and invest in Blue Origin (CNN). But many of these same employees – blue color workers that are often people of color – have waged a battle for fair wages, workplace safety, and the right to unionize (PBS). Their struggles mirror some of the same challenges that those impacted faced decades before. And their stories have received disproportionately less coverage than this space flight.
And what is this rush to space for? Bezos believes we should send all our pollution-generated industries into space to minimize its impact on Earth (Fast Company). But how does that address the environmental impact of our time here? How does that protect this planet from harm? And in its wake, what communities will be further disenfranchised as a result?
Nevertheless, some are excited about what privatized space travel means for us. This is partially because our society has had an overall positive view of space exploration. 72% of Americans consider it “essential” for the U.S. to continue to be a world leader in exploring space (Pew Research). Much of this was fostered by the space race after World War II, where the strength of our democracy was defined by its technological innovations against the communist Soviet Union (History). Also, in this time of heightened uncertainty, it might feel inspiring and escapist to watch someone leave it all behind, if only for a few minutes.
But this space race, led by private organizations, is different. This time around, it feels like a flex of individual wealth and privilege than a collective pursuit for greatness—more on this in The Conversation. The same study indicated that, in contrast, only 33% believe that “private companies will ensure that enough progress is made in space exploration, even without NASA’s involvement” (Pew Research). Historically, funding, research, and development from privatized corporations have contributed to the NASA program. However, the work of Bezos and Branson hasn’t made lasting contributions to their work – yet.
How can we as consumers respond? The answer isn’t straightforward (unless you, too, are planning to fire up your rocket engines in the weeks ahead. I advise against). We can first cultivate more awareness of who’s harmed when we push for technological innovation. We can align our purchasing habits with brands that foster what we envision for our collective futures. And we can continue to demand representation and equity for those most marginalized in our own communities. Some call space the final frontier. But if it’s the last space we have for our survival, we should be more critical of how we make this journey.
Key Takeaways
Earlier this week, Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, embarked on a ten-minute ride through space (CNN).
Throughout history, the colonization of “new” frontiers disregarded the safety and wellbeing of both those that inhabited it and those bearing the brunt of the labor.
As consumers, we can advocate and support the individuals and organizations that use their wealth for the future we envision.
Stop “wokewashing.”
The CIA and Nike ads are part of a wave of campaigns lining up behind social justice initiatives. We might look at this as evidence of success. If a multinational company speaks out in defense of Black people organizing, and the U.S. foreign intelligence agency promotes diversity in career advancement, maybe it’s a sign that social justice initiatives are winning — or have already won.
Happy Wednesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. Corporations pledged billions to racial equity initiatives, but most of that money hasn't been seen. But there are many other ways to feign solidarity for the sake of profit. Today's newsletter unpacks the concept of "wokewashing" and how marketing campaigns may cover more insidious actions.
This daily, free, independent newsletter is fully funded by contributions from our readers. Consider making a monthly or annual donation to join in, or give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza).
– Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Don’t accept progressive statements from powerful institutions at face value. Look at their present and historical practices within marginalized communities.
Ask yourself: is social justice language being used to help create the conditions for social justice? Or instead, is it being used as a substitute for real change?
Look beyond the rhetoric to support sweatshop workers and oppose American abuses abroad.
GET EDUCATED
By Andrew Lee (he/him)
This spring, one American employer posted a recruitment ad brimming with social justice sentiments narrated over swelling string music. A Latina mother talks of hee pride in having ascended the ranks of her organization. “I am a woman of color. I am a mom. I am a cisgender millennial woman who has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise,” she tells us. We watch her stride the halls of her workplace with a shirt reading “Mija, you are worth it” underneath a feminist icon with a raised fist.
“I am a proud first-generation Latina,” she says, “and an officer at CIA” (YouTube).
A different ad from last year opens with plain white text on a black background. “Don’t pretend there’s not a problem in America. Don’t turn your back on racism,” it reads. “Don’t accept innocent lives being taken from us.” Plaintive piano music plays.
“Don’t think you can’t be part of the change. Let’s all be part of the change.” The video, produced by Nike, ends with its iconic swoosh (YouTube).
The CIA and Nike ads are part of a wave of campaigns lining up behind social justice initiatives. We might look at this as evidence of success. If a multinational company speaks out in defense of Black people organizing, and the U.S. foreign intelligence agency promotes diversity in career advancement, maybe it’s a sign that social justice initiatives are winning — or have already won.
We should consider analyzing what’s going on beneath these inspiring words. As more and more institutions proffer social justice-inflected statements, many have been accused of “wokewashing,” or “cynically cashing in on people’s idealism and using progressive-orienting marketing campaigns to deflect questions about their own ethical records” (The Guardian). Read Nicole’s articles about the (mis)use of “woke” and pitfalls of corporate accountability statements.
We need to see if an institution’s actions match their rhetoric. Nike directs us to stand up for racial justice, even offering Colin Kaepernick a platform (Huff Post). But the company is infamous for subcontractors who pay poverty wages for work in horrifying conditions. Women making Nike sneakers in Vietnam regularly coughed up blood and fainted on the factory floor from heat and exhaustion (NY Times). An Indonesian union organizer was hospitalized after paid assailants attacked with machetes (Clean Clothes Campaign). Nike’s domestic support of racial justice is part of an effort to rehabilitate its image and increase its profits. According to one report, “the Nike brand is arguably stronger, thanks in no small part to the company being out in front in supporting Black Lives Matter” (Marketplace).
We should also doubt the CIA’s anti-oppression credentials. A decade after planning the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow the Cuban government (History), the CIA was involved with the horrific bombing of a Cuban civilian airplane that killed all 73 passengers on board (Daily Mail). They trained paramilitary death squads from Vietnam (Counterpunch) to Afghanistan (The Intercept), including one group that blew up dozens of civilians in a Lebanon car bombing (N.Y. Times). In the modern-day, the CIA runs documented torture programs out of secret prisons (N.Y. Times). As part of the ongoing “War on Terror,” CIA agents have sexually violated prisoners, threatened to rape and murder their family members, intimidated them with power drills, and dumped freezing water on them as they were shackled to walls naked (U.S. Senate). These aren’t the actions of an intersectional feminist organization. But by portraying itself as progressive, the CIA can both facilitate recruitment of new hires as well as defuse liberal outrage and opposition to their actions, some of which are truly appalling.
Groups like Nike and the CIA wouldn’t even bother manufacturing “progressive” ads had it not been for decades of struggle from the racial and immigrant justice, feminist, and labor movements. The fact that they make the effort to pander to justice-minded people shows that organizing and advocacy and struggle works. The fact that they continue perpetrating abuses proves that we need to grow these movements even more. Wokewashed hypocrisy isn’t a reason to rest on our laurels. It’s motivation to support people-powered efforts to actually create an equitable world, a world in which liberal ads can’t distract from American sweatshops, secret prisons, and torture chambers because such things no longer exist.
Key Takeaways
In the past year, institutions like Nike and the CIA have put out pro-racial justice ads.
We need to investigate the practices and policies behind lofty rhetoric.
Nike and the CIA both use racial justice language for their own benefit while committing incredible harm to communities of color around the world.
RELATED ISSUES
6/3/2021 | Stop rainbow-washing.
3/26/2021 | Learn the definition of "woke.”
3/3/2021 | Know the difference between canceled and accountability.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Unpack corporate political contributions.
Though the Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6th failed, they motivated plenty of Republicans to keep pushing unsubstantiated claims. That same day, 147 Republicans voted against certifying the election results, alleging fraud (NYTimes). After pushback from community groups, some corporations decided they would stop contributing to these candidates. However, businesses like AT&T, Intel, and Cigna have since betrayed those promises with quiet donations to Republican fundraising committees, ensuring their money will in part be distributed to those who voted in lockstep with an attempted coup.
Happy Wednesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! Lots of you readers asked how corporate commitments to racial equity compared to campaign contributions over the past four years. Today, we're highlighting an initiative that's tracking corporate funding to those that supported the insurrection earlier this year. Read more and take action.
Our free, daily newsletter is made possible by our passionate team of readers that give one time or monthly to help sustain the work. If you want to support, give monthly on Patreon. Or, you can give one-time on our website or PayPal. You can also support us by joining our curated digital community.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Tell corporations to stop funding insurrectionists in Congress using the resources on the Insurrection Incorporated website.
Educate yourself about corporate lobbying and reasons for corporate political donations.
Learn how campaigns have forced powerful corporations to change their behavior.
GET EDUCATED
By Andrew Lee (he/him)
Though the Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6th failed, they motivated plenty of Republicans to keep pushing unsubstantiated claims. That same day, 147 Republicans voted against certifying the election results, alleging fraud (NYTimes). After pushback from community groups, some corporations decided they would stop contributing to these candidates. However, businesses like AT&T, Intel, and Cigna have since betrayed those promises with quiet donations to Republican fundraising committees, ensuring their money will in part be distributed to those who voted in lockstep with an attempted coup.
Color of Change PAC’s Insurrection Incorporated is a campaign to pressure companies to permanently stop supporting those who voted against certifying last year’s election. Their website tracks companies who supported such politicians and notes whether any donations were given after January 6th. Readers can contact corporate leaders directly to demand such support stop (Insurrection Incorporated).
Several of those who voted against the election results had received contributions from computer firm Intel. Though Intel insisted such support would cease, on February 26th, the company gave $15,000 to the National Republican Campaign Committee (Insurrection Incorporated). Why would Intel want to overthrow American democracy?
The American political system has been exceptionally good to Intel Corporation, which earned $77.9 billion in revenue last year alone (Intel). Intel was founded in the United States and its headquarters are in California to this day. It’s hard to believe that anybody inside those buildings, from the cafeteria dishwashers to the CEO, thought that shredding the Constitution would help Intel make more money than it already does.
And when we’re thinking about corporate political donations, the bottom line is all that matters. Investors buy stocks in publicly-traded companies hoping to profit as the value of those companies, and their stocks, rises. Publicly-traded companies have a responsibility to become more valuable so that their investors are enriched as well, whether over the short term or long (Forbes). The point of any corporation is to make money for itself and for those who gamble on its success. The decisions taken by any rationally-managed company will be towards this one objective.
Last year, Intel gave over $500,000 to federal candidates. The majority were Republicans, but almost half were Democrats (Open Secrets). When you’re a multinational corporation whose profits can be influenced by innumerable governmental policies, it helps to have as many politicians on the payroll as you can. And even if you think one party might help more than the other, with that much cash, it can’t hurt to hedge your bets.
“Companies donate millions to political causes,” says Business Insider, “to have a say in government” (Business Insider). It’s not like Intel’s CEO decided to continue giving money to Republicans because he sincerely hoped Trump would be President-for-Life. But he knew that both Democrats and Republicans will continue voting on numerous issues that could affect Intel’s profit margin.
What’s true for political donations is true for other kinds of corporate giving as well. After the protests last summer, Target announced that it “stands with Black families, communities, and team members,” since improving its public image with the socially conscious might help it make more money. Target simultaneously donated over $3 million to the National Museum of Law Enforcement and continued to run a Minneapolis forensics lab to assist police officers, since these actions might help it make money as well (Business Insider). The issue isn’t that corporations are hypocritical or have divided loyalties. They only have loyalty to their bottom line, and every political contribution or public statement or charitable fund is a means to that end.
This means we have some leverage to change corporate behavior. If a company expects its donation to a right-wing politician will net it a certain amount of money, we only need to demonstrate that a negative public campaign will cost them an even greater amount of money should they follow through. This could take the shape of a direct action to hamper business operation, a boycott to reduce sales, or a public relations campaign that makes their products and brand less appealing. The objective of the Insurrection Incorporated campaign isn’t to make corporations grow a heart, but to convince them that supporting certain politicians can be extremely costly if enough people come together.
These actions can’t make companies moral or righteous or maybe even decent places to work. And they certainly can’t erase all the bad effects of a system where the most powerful actors are sprawling conglomerates maneuvering to enrich themselves at the expense of people and the planet. But even when our adversaries are powerful and wealthy beyond comprehension, and the action each of us takes might be very small, with enough of us we can make a real change.
We can take action once we really understand corporate donations.
Key Takeaways
Companies have continued to support Republican politicians even after the attempted coup.
Many of these companies also support Democrats, since corporate contributions are designed for profit maximization, not ideals.
This includes donations or statements in support of progressive causes, like Black Lives Matter.
We can stop bad corporate practices or contributions by making them more costly for companies than not.
RELATED ISSUES
3/29/2021 | Rally against voter suppression.
5/4/2021 | Fight anti-protest legislation.
9/27/2020 | Protect the polls.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Analyze corporate commitments to racial equity.
But race is a social construct, and social constructs have social histories. Our The first place generating criticism is in financial commitments. Companies in the U.S. pledged a collective $50 billion to various racial initiatives (Financial Times), an unprecedented response to social issues (Washington Post). But, research indicates that only $250 million has actually been spent or committed to a specific initiative (Financial Times). William Cunningham, the chief executive of Creative Investment Research, who published the study, notes that until those funds are actually spent, there’s no reason they couldn’t be retracted or allocated to another initiative. Another survey found that tech companies that made commitments have 20% fewer Black employees on average than those that didn’t (Bloomberg), adding more skepticism to some organizations’ intentions.
Happy Monday, and welcome back to the daily newsletter! Today is a quick check-in on how corporate accountability has progressed since pledges made last year. I see this as an opportunity to both recognize pitfalls and explore the possibilities of where we can grow from here.
Thank you to everyone that supports our independent publishing! If you can, consider giving $7/month on Patreon. Or you can give one-time on our website or PayPal. You can also support us by joining our curated digital community. I'm grateful for your support!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Explore how major corporations have committed to racial equity using this tracker by Just Capital.
Use these instant downloads provided by Diverse City, LLC to improve your ERG group, navigate difficult conversations or address trauma at your workplace.
If you work at an organization, check in to see how any potential pledges have been implemented since last year.
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
After the racial reckoning last summer, many companies quickly made broad public statements on how they can do better. But, one year later, research and testimony indicate that many haven’t lived up to their promises.
The first place generating criticism is in financial commitments. Companies in the U.S. pledged a collective $50 billion to various racial initiatives (Financial Times), an unprecedented response to social issues (Washington Post). But, research indicates that only $250 million has actually been spent or committed to a specific initiative (Financial Times). William Cunningham, the chief executive of Creative Investment Research, who published the study, notes that until those funds are actually spent, there’s no reason they couldn’t be retracted or allocated to another initiative. Another survey found that tech companies that made commitments have 20% fewer Black employees on average than those that didn’t (Bloomberg), adding more skepticism to some organizations’ intentions.
In addition, Jay Peters at The Verge adds context to the true amount of the commitments made by big tech companies. Although Apple’s commitment of $100 million, for example, sounds quite large, it’s relatively minuscule when considering that they made $6.3 million in profit every single hour last year (The Verge). This isn’t to discredit the clear impact that $100 million can make, but to emphasize how much more companies could do with lasting, consistent investment.
This graph, from the same The Verge article, adjusts corporate contributions to racial equity against the median U.S. salary of $63,179 to demonstrate how little, relatively, tech companies pledged.
Many also pledged to improve conditions internally by diversifying their talent pipeline, addressing barriers to employment eligibility, and increasing representation in the executive suite (Financial Times). But, a year later, many of those same large companies have yet to release their diversity metrics, making it challenging to quantify comprehensive change.
Ada*, a Black woman, watched this unfold at the financial services company she works for. The company publicly announced significant investments into companies owned by marginalized communities and plans to diversify its hiring practices. But the company has yet to share its metrics on hiring. “I’ve asked human resources for the data,” she explains, “but they say it’s tricky because they don’t have the accurate data. This makes no sense to me, considering they asked me my race/ethnicity on my job application.”
Khalia*, who worked in development at a national nonprofit organization, noted that her company made commitments to change internal culture last June. But, efforts that were implemented faded after a few months. “We had an ERG that met monthly to discuss areas where we could improve company culture. This space brought up a lot of things the executive leadership wasn’t aware of. But now, most of the people that initially joined don’t come to the meetings anymore, including those same leaders. It feels like an afterthought. And I don’t think we’ve actually changed anything for the better”. She ultimately left the organization because she desired a stronger commitment to the cause.
This scrutiny is compounded when considering how companies invested in equity initiatives before last summer. Because of COVID-19, jobs with titles like “chief diversity officer,” “diversity and inclusion recruiter,” or “D&I program manager” fell nearly 60 percent between early March and early June, according to the careers site Glassdoor (Washington Post). In comparison, jobs overall fell by 28%, and human resources roles fell by 49%, demonstrating that many companies felt like this was the best place to reduce costs. Since the murder of George Floyd and the subsequent protests, diversity job postings are surging. But filling the position isn’t enough; experts warn that these can be performative hires if leaders aren’t empowered and supported to guide corporate change (Axios).
Individuals, often employees of color, have taken on the task of carrying this work forward, regardless of their company’s investment. Ada has been intentional about incorporating initiatives to address systemic oppression and racism with her team, which she believes increases feelings of belonging and solidarity. “We have ongoing conversations, book clubs, watch movies, etc. My team has said that they look forward to it because they don’t have that outlet anywhere else.”
But individual employees aren’t the only ones taking note. Shareholders at major companies are pressuring executive leadership to perform racial audits for transparency and accountability (Forbes). Of seven big Wall Street banks, six urged shareholders to reject the proposals, despite the deep history of racial inequity in the financial sector (Inequality). Shareholders at Amazon, which is facing a slew of new allegations of racism and discrimination through its product offering and working conditions, are expected to vote on a racial audit on May 26 (Forbes).
Nevertheless, it’s important to recognize that all progress made so far – and how far we have to go has happened because each of us raise our voices and rally for change. “The only reason companies cared is because their employees did,” said Ada. “If people continue the momentum, there will be more accountability.” As the summer unfolds, continue to hold the organization you may work for, buy from, and engage with accountable to shift culture, both for employees and broader society.
We’d love to hear from our Black, Indigenous, and other readers of color: how has the company you work for respond to the events last year? How has it changed your experience working at your company? Reply to this email with your thoughts.
*Names have been changed.
Key Takeaways
As we approach one year since the racial reckoning of last summer, individuals and shareholders are scrutinizing the pledges made by major corporations to addressing racial equity
Over $50B was pledged by major corporations to racial equity initiatives, but so far, an estimated $250M has been committed
A growing number of shareholders are voting for their corporations to perform racial audits for accountability
RELATED ISSUES
3/16/2021 | Diversify executive leadership.
10/4/2020 | Don't blame the pipeline.
2/1/2021 | Honor Black History Month with action.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Go beyond allyship.
The uprisings of last summer against police murder and anti-Blackness led to quite a few folks loudly proclaiming themselves allies. You can buy a digital print-at-home poster declaring “I am an ally” over a clenched Black fist (Etsy) or a shirt with a similar fist and the word “ally” in capital letters underneath (Etsy). You can write an article expounding on all of your social positionalities and personal privileges, announce that you take yourself seriously as an ally, and close the piece with the sentence “let’s promise to listen” (HuffPost).
Happy Tuesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. Many people feel spurred into action because of the series of violent events from the past two weeks. Today, Andrew shares more about the importance of solidarity, not allyship, as we collectively commit to reimagine the world we live in.
Our Earth Week series, "This is our home," starts Thursday, April 22. Subscribe to learn from youth environmental justice leaders addressing the biggest climate threats of our time. thisisourho.me.
This newsletter is a free resource and that's made possible by our paying subscribers. Consider giving $7/month on our website or Patreon. Or you can give one-time on our website or PayPal. You can also support us by joining our curated digital community. Thank you to all those that support!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Read “Accomplices Not Allies: Abolishing the Ally Industrial Complex.”
Educate yourself about how the category of whiteness was through the practice of colonialism and slavery.
Learn about the limits of allyship in fighting racism and settler-colonialism.
Support Black-led groups organizing for Black liberation.
Deepen your commitment to learn about and contribute to struggles for liberation.
GET EDUCATED
By Andrew Lee (he/him)
The uprisings of last summer against police murder and anti-Blackness led to quite a few folks loudly proclaiming themselves allies. You can buy a digital print-at-home poster declaring “I am an ally” over a clenched Black fist (Etsy) or a shirt with a similar fist and the word “ally” in capital letters underneath (Etsy). You can write an article expounding on all of your social positionalities and personal privileges, announce that you take yourself seriously as an ally, and close the piece with the sentence “let’s promise to listen” (HuffPost).
In her piece on white feminism, Nicole wrote of the need for “white women [to] decenter their own narrative and elevate others instead” (Anti-Racism Daily). Some of the language around allyship does the opposite: instead of highlighting the voices and needs of those most impacted by racism, sexism, or queerphobia, it singles out white, male, or straight and cis allies for praise and adulation. Self-centered allyship in the struggle for racial justice can veer dangerously close to white saviorism (MSN). They can divert radical movements into “a self-help book for white people” as more attention is paid to processing white guilt than stopping Black death (Wear Your Voice).
Another problem with centering allyship is that self-declared allies get to decide what allyship entails and whether to engage in it. Support for Black Lives Matter crested before the shooting of Jacob Blake last August as people and brands rushed to announce their status as allies publicly. After that, white support for the movement “grew soft, like a rotting spot on a piece of fruit” (New York Times). For a moment, allyship was in fashion. When the moment passed, many of those allies slunk back to the sidelines.
To center and celebrate allies as exceptionally interesting and virtuous often goes hand-in-hand with the belief that the alternative to allyship is neutrality. We might think that white supporters of Black Lives Matter are especially noble because their other white peers are instead neutral bystanders.
Indigenous Action forcefully critiqued this understanding in their influential zine “Accomplices Not Allies: Abolishing the Ally Industrial Complex” (Indigenous Action). Being an ally to indigenous people, they wrote, has become “currency,” “an identity, disembodied from any real mutual understanding of support,” a term “rendered ineffective and meaningless.”
To move beyond allyship means recognizing that the starting point isn’t neutrality. Citizens actively, materially benefit from anti-immigrant policies. Non-Black people benefit from anti-Blackness. The starting point for settlers is benefitting from settler-colonialism. As the zine puts it, non-indigenous people need to begin “to articulate your relationship to Indigenous Peoples whose lands you are occupying.”
If the starting position is not neutrality but complicity, we’re called to do more than declare ourselves allies, change our Twitter bios, or buy social justice ally wall art. Whereas allies center themselves, “accomplices are realized through mutual consent and build trust. They don’t just have our backs; they are at our side, or in their own spaces confronting and unsettling colonialism.” This isn’t just a semantic difference. It’s a different way to think about and practice solidarity: through centering those most directly affected and joining in the struggle, through direct action and confrontation, to dismantle systems that oppress them even as they benefit us.
An accomplice is, of course, someone who aids another in committing a crime as defined by the criminal justice system. As Code Pink puts it, “liberation requires being accomplices in resisting the legitimized forces of social control” (Code Pink). There are many roles that people can take to support social movements, from being at the front lines in the street to doing jail support or media work or a thousand other things. But self-identified allies should remember that dozens of people have already been arrested in Minneapolis following the police murder of Daunte Wright (ABC). Those people, many of them people of color, put their bodies, their freedom, and their lives on the line. Some may face legal repercussions for years to come because of these arrests. The way to honor that struggle isn’t by taking the easy way but deepening our commitments to listen, o learn, and to fight to uproot a system that kills and oppresses some while enriching and protecting others. In the words of Angela Davis, “When one commits oneself to the struggle, it must be for a lifetime” (American Public Media).
It’s time to go beyond allyship.
Key Takeaways
We should shift attention from the struggle against oppression to the virtues or guilt of allies.
Those who choose not to be allies aren’t neutral bystanders but rather beneficiaries of systems of oppression.
Benefitting from oppression calls us to engage deeply with communities in struggle and realize that we are personally implicated in the destruction of unjust systems.
To be an accomplice is to listen, learn, and take personal risks in the fight to dismantle systems of social control and racial injustice.
RELATED ISSUES
2/1/2021 | Honor Black History Month with action.
10/4/2020 | Don't blame the pipeline.
7/9/2020 | Acknowledge the harm of microaggressions.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Diversify executive leadership.
Fashion exists in a vortex of trends. Certain colors make their way into vogue as quickly as they make their way out. What’s considered chic can easily turn in a faux pas in a matter of a few months. And while fashion continues to work on a more sustainable system to combat waste, there’s one topic currently in vogue that must not be seen as a trend: diversity in fashion’s workplaces.
Happy Tuesday and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily! I've really been enjoying Isiah's critical analysis of the fashion industry, especially as fashion shows and award shows take over my social media feeds. But today's article resonates with me because the issues outlined here are reflected in many other industries. As you read, consider: how can you carry the same energy into the industry you work in, or are passionate about?
This newsletter is a free resource made possible by our paying subscribers. Consider giving $7/month on Patreon. Or you can give one-time on our website, PayPal, or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). You can also support us by joining our curated digital community. Thank you to all those that have contributed!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Do more than hire Black and Brown Talent. Promote and hire Black and Brown talent for executive positions, also.
For predominantly white workplaces: instead of relying on friends for the unpaid labor of informing you about the importance of a diverse workplace, hire professional diversity consultants like 2BG Consulting.
Don’t just work on diversifying workplaces, but ensure that workplaces cultivate an environment where Black and Brown employees feel safe and thrive.
Encourage your favorite brands and retailers to join the 15 Percent Pledge – an initiative that asks retailers to reserve 15 percent of their shelving space for Black-owned businesses.
GET EDUCATED
By Isiah Magsino (he/him)
Fashion exists in a vortex of trends. Certain colors make their way into vogue as quickly as they make their way out. What’s considered chic can easily turn in a faux pas in a matter of a few months. And while fashion continues to work on a more sustainable system to combat waste, there’s one topic currently in vogue that must not be seen as a trend: diversity in fashion’s workplaces.
In the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests in the response to George Floyd’s murder, fashion brands all over the world suddenly felt the need to address racism in the fashion industry (Dazed). From futile black squares captioned “I understand, that I’ll never understand” to posting pictures of Black and Brown models on their social media pages that were undiscovered until this time, brands were desperate to save themselves by coming off as an advocate for racial equality.
But, unlike in the past, employees from the institutions called out the reality of the systemic racism, microaggressions, and lack of diversity in their own offices (Vogue Business). High-fashion Australian brand, Zimmerman, was one of the brands called out after their internal grooming regulations were brought to the limelight. These regulations specifically targeted Black and Brown natural hairstyles and prohibited high buns, top knot, plaits, and braids (Vogue Business). And the high-fashion market isn’t the only place where public messages didn’t match with internal practices. The sustainable, millennial-focused brand, Everlane, was called out by former employees for their “anti-Black” behavior. The accusations include the large pay gap between queer women of color and white men and refusing to use Black models in their campaigns because they were “too edgy” according to the executives (Fashionista).
And explicitly toxic workplaces aren’t exempt from this diversity malpractice, either. In 2018, fashion’s runways were becoming more diverse than ever with almost 50 percent of Black and Brown models in New York and 36-percent through all fashion locations (New York, London, Milan, Paris). And while this was an improvement from the reported 30-percent in 2017, the Black and Brown editors, buyers, and other decision-makers were scarce (New York Times). Just recently, the New York Times came out with a follow-up report as many brands publicly promised to improve diversity within the workplace in 2020. The article cites that, in 2021, there is only one Black chief executive officer out of the 64 brands they contacted for the new survey (New York Times). There are also only four Black creative directors and designers out of 69 from the same batch of surveyed brands. For fashion magazines, only two of the nine domestic and international editions of Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, and Elle were led by Black editors.
An industry where nepotism and classism are rampant is also an incubator for systemic racism. Without familial ties or financial support, launching a company is especially difficult for Black and Brown designers (Fast). In 2019, the predominantly white Council of Fashion Designers crowned Mary Kate and Ashley as the winner for the Accessories Designer of the year and a hefty $400,000 USD grand prize. This would be their second year in a row. The other four nominees for the category were all Black designers-- Virgil Abloh for Louis Vuitton, Kerby Jean-Raymond of Pyer Moss, Telfar Clemens of Telfar, and Heron Preston (Nylon). The unpaid internship, a common practice in the industry, only offers the opportunity to those with financial support oftentimes limiting Black and Brown talent (Fashionista).
How can an industry parade its interest in diversity, while still prohibiting Black and Brown talent from the decision-making process? If morals and ethics aren’t enough for brands to create workplace environments where Black and Brown’s talent is heard and nurtured, they must consider the power of social media. Without Black and Brown leadership, brands have the potential to come across major backlash as seen when H&M sold a “Coolest Monkey in the Jungle” sweatshirt (Washington Post.) Consumers are hyper-aware of these malpractices and have more than enough resources to support brands that are more than willing to cultivate diverse talent. Ultimately, it’s said that fashion has always been reflective of the times. Now, the times are looking both on the inside and the out.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Many fashion brands are quick to publicly denounce racism, but will still participate in systemic racism within their own offices whether that be through microaggressions or pay gaps.
The New York Times recently reported that in 2021, there is only one Black chief executive officer out of the 64 brands that were contacted and only four Black creative directors out of 69 designers from the same survey group.
Unpaid internships in the fashion industry prohibit Black and Brown talent from entering.
Without diversity in decision-making processes, brands run the risk of future backlash with socially-aware consumers who are quick to respond on social media.
RELATED ISSUES
3/4/2021 | Reject appropriation in fashion.
2/9/2021 | Decolonize sustainable + ethical fashion.
12/17/2020 | Respect Hawaii’s sacred land.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Honor Black History Month with action.
Today marks the beginning of Black History Month in the U.S. Created as Negro History Week in February 1926 by Carter G. Woodson at his organization, the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, this time was designed to encourage “people of all ethnic and social backgrounds discuss the black experience” (ASALH). Congress passed “National Black History Month” into law in 1986, proclaiming that “the foremost purpose of Black History Month is to make all Americans aware of this struggle for freedom and equal opportunity” (Library of Congress).
It's Monday, it's finally February, and we're back with the Anti-Racism Daily. It's also the first day of Black History Month. I touched on this topic in a Study Hall email two Saturdays ago, which I saw people sharing with their community. I figured today was a good day to expand on that, and offer more ways to honor this month beyond education.
If you're looking for more accountability on education, though, I highly recommend 28 Days of Black History, our daily curated guide of works that exemplify the Black legacy. The first work goes out tonight. Sign up here: 28daysofblackhistory.com.
Thank you all for your support. This newsletter is made possible by our subscribers. Consider subscribing for $7/month on Patreon. Or you can give one-time on our website or PayPal. You can also support us by joining our curated digital community.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Add one of the action items below to your plan this month. Commit to executing on it weekly (if relevant).
Consider: How can my community/classroom/organization make a more meaningful impact this Black History Month?
As you learn over the next month, share and discuss with your friends and community.
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
Today marks the beginning of Black History Month in the U.S. Created as Negro History Week in February 1926 by Carter G. Woodson at his organization, the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, this time was designed to encourage “people of all ethnic and social backgrounds discuss the black experience” (ASALH). Congress passed “National Black History Month” into law in 1986, proclaiming that “the foremost purpose of Black History Month is to make all Americans aware of this struggle for freedom and equal opportunity” (Library of Congress).
However, moving through Black History Month 2021 like it’s merely a learning opportunity misses the mark. This is a year for making the history books, not only for re-reading them. Education is essential, but we have to also take targeted actions to change the course of history. Here are some suggestions.
Address pay inequity.
Racial pay inequity is still an issue across the country. Reports from early 2020 found that the Black-white wealth gap widened in the 2000s (NWLC) and worsening during the pandemic (UC Berkeley). Use this month to solve the pay inequity at your organization. If you’re not in a leadership position to do this, perhaps start by inquiring: what were the findings of the latest pay audit performed by your company? What initiatives were put in place to solve them?
Review your DEI initiatives.
Ensure your DEI initiatives are actually inclusive. And this goes beyond racial equity. Organizations that strive for racial equity, but don’t prioritize disability equity or LGBTQ rights, for example, aren’t inclusive. This is one of many reasons that DEI can fail to fix corporate culture (Catapult).
Give.
Donate monthly to organizations that center Black wellbeing. Prioritize organizations that have Black executive leaders and Black board members (Non-Profit Quarterly). Think beyond traditional 501c3 to local, grassroots initiatives – including mutual aid networks. You can also donate physical goods (like food or clothing) or your time (skills-based volunteering, transportation, etc.).
Mentor.
Invest in the next generation of leaders in your field through a fellowship or mentorship program. You can do this individually or create/enhance a program at your office. Remember that mentorships are a two-way relationship. You likely have as much, or more, to learn from your mentees or fellows than you may think. Note: mentorships and fellowships should only be implemented in addition to other employment equity initiatives, like achieving pay equity or increasing the number of Black senior executives, not in place of them. Alone, it can cause more harm than good.
Rally.
Change isn’t created in silence. Continue showing up at protests and other demonstrations as best as you can. This includes protesting physically in the streets and/or providing essential services to protestors on the ground. This can also include consistently sharing action items on social media and defending protestors through advocating for legislation and donating to bail funds and other emerging needs. More resources for supporting protests can be found here.
Pay reparations.
Reparations are necessary for achieving racial equity (Brookings). On an individual level, pay it forward to creators you learn from on social media or organizers in your community. On a local level, find the local or state initiative advocating for reparations and support for their work. In addition, I recommend completing the Reparations Now Tool Kit created by the Movement for Black Lives to create a comprehensive plan.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Black History Month was started by Carter G. Woodson as Negro History Week in February 1926.
The disproportionate impact of the pandemic on the Black community only widens the racial disparities evident in the U.S.
Use this month not just to educate, but do your part to accelerate racial equity in the U.S.
RELATED ISSUES
11/27/2020 | Support Black-owned businesses.
1/26/2021 | Support Black poetry.
1/8/2021 | Pay Black women.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Don't blame the pipeline.
Happy Sunday,
Many companies pledged to diversify their teams this past June, and as we enter Q4 of the fiscal year, it will be interesting to see how those promises generate tangible outcomes. A recent statement by the CEO of Wells Fargo reminds us of how much work we have to do to ensure that diverse, talented candidates are acknowledged – let alone given the opportunities they deserve. Consider how controversy like this may be reflected in the companies you work for now, or have worked with in the past.
Furthermore, consider the intent vs. impact in the language the CEO used. How can we make the same mistakes when we aim to rectify the lack of diversity in the spaces we occupy?
As always, you can support the newsletter by giving one-time on PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe monthly on Patreon. Thank you for your support.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
If you are employed, take time this week to review your company’s hiring practices. Identify how they center hiring and retaining diverse talent.
Cancel your accounts with Wells Fargo (which has a history of racist actions).
Reflect: How may my unconscious bias impact who I hire/do business with? Who do I perceive as "smart," "talented," "genius," in my industry? Why?
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
Like many companies, this past June, Wells Fargo made a commitment to diversity initiatives after the outrage of the death of George Floyd. But in that company-wide memo, the CEO, Charlie Scharf, said that the company was not meeting its diversity goals because there was not enough qualified minority talent. “While it might sound like an excuse, the unfortunate reality is that there is a very limited pool of Black talent to recruit from,” the statement read (Reuters). The comment prompted criticism internally in the company and externally when Reuters broke the story in late September.
2020 hasn’t been the best year for Wells Fargo (has it been a good year for anyone?). Earlier this year, the company was forced to pay $3B in penalties after collecting millions of dollars in fees for bank accounts, debit cards and other products that customers – mainly customers of color – neither asked for nor needed (NPR). This is after they paid $2B in penalties in 2018 for misstating income information to sell risky mortgages to consumers (NPR). And just this week, the company has come under fire for placing at least 1,600 consumer mortgage accounts into forbearance – without the consent of its consumers (American Banker).
This also isn’t the first time the company has been criticized for its relationship to a pipeline, either, albeit a very different one. Wells Fargo was one of 17 banks to invest in the Dakota Access Pipeline, a 1,172mi underground oil pipeline hotly contested by Indigenous populations for how it disrupted sacred land, valuable natural resources, and caused harm to the communities it crossed (Time).
But let’s unpack the issue at hand. The "pipeline problem" is the theory that there “simply aren't enough properly skilled members of underrepresented groups for hire” – including women, people of color, veterans, members of the LGBTQ community, etc. (Entrepreneur). Major companies like Facebook and Google have cited this “problem” for their lack of diversity. This problem is most glaring in traditionally male-dominated and white-dominated fields, like science, technology, engineering, and banking.
And the "pipeline problem" is a myth. A series of reports prove that there are plenty of qualified, diverse candidates for companies to choose from. A Kauffman Fellow report from earlier this year notes that the number of Black professionals that hold master’s degrees has increased 133% from 1980 – 2016. The number of Latinx professions with master’s degrees has increased by 400%. But in contrast, the number of Black and Latinx talent in the industry has remained stagnant (AfroTech).
The problem is more centered in how these companies hire and promote diverse talent. According to a study from Payscale, 80 to 85% of jobs are filled through networking. This type of hiring makes it easier for recruiters to find qualified candidates without doing the legwork. Still, it also means that employees tend to be more homogenous, and with a limited existing pool of diverse staff, it’s likely that few referrals will be diverse, too (Forbes). Unconscious bias in hiring and recruiting also plays a part. Another study from 2015 found that candidates are 50% less likely to get a callback for a potential job opportunity if they had a “stereotypically African-American-sounding name” like Jamal, versus a “stereotypically white name” like Brendan (NYTimes). These issues imply that there’s more work companies need to do internally before shifting blame externally.
But Scharf’s words took the offensive. By expressing that there was a pipeline issue, Scharf places the burden on Black people, as if it is their fault that they’re not fully represented. If you were a Black person who was recently denied a job there, how would you feel? And what type of message does that send to other executives that may also be considering more diverse hiring practices at their organizations? Would they, like Scharf, decide that it’s not worth investing time and energy into? And how does this message add to the rhetoric we’ve been hearing about Black people from other influential leaders in our society?
And how does the company itself retain the diverse staff it already has? A story from the Charlotte Observer this week notes that, over the past year, seven Black female senior executives have left Wells Fargo (Charlotte Observer). Unnamed sources say that “the bank’s culture around race and gender” influenced why some of the women left, and the timing indicates that some left after the CEO’s comments in June. It adds another layer to the conversation – how is Wells Fargo actively working to retain diverse employees after they’ve hired them?
In a statement from the company after the news broke, Scharf apologized for his “insensitive comment reflecting my own unconscious bias.” Wells Fargo also committed to reaching out to diverse talent and creating an anti-racism training course to invigorate its diversity efforts (Wells Fargo website). But the damage of those words is done. Not only are they highly insensitive for these times, but they also do little to increase the favorability of a brand that’s consistently caused harm against communities of color. Statements like these also dissuade individuals from taking on positions at companies that don’t reflect their safety or needs, which exacerbates the representation issue. Hopefully, more executive leaders learn from this mistake and choose instead to lead with equity and understanding.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
This past June, the Wells Fargo CEO blamed the "pipeline problem" for the lack of diverse representation in staff
The "pipeline problem" is a myth, and places blame on the workforce instead of holding internal hiring practices accountable
There's a growing population of qualified diverse candidates in white-dominated and male-dominated fields that aren't being hired
RELATED ISSUES
8/9/2020 | Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19
9/10/2020 | Fight for fair labor.
9/16/2020 | Fight for paid sick leave.
8/28/2020 | Start seeing color.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Think before eating out.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
I was once a bartender and line cook, and currently travel the world as a nomad. Between the two, I've always considered restaurants a second home, and find solace whenever I cozy up at the bar for a dinner for one. Today, as part of our ongoing series on the racial disparities exposed by COVID-19, I researched how new trends of dining in at restaurants are increasing the likelihood of contracting the virus.
Do you currently work in the restaurant industry? I'd love to hear from you. Reply to this email or send us a note on our submissions page.
As always, consider making a contribution to help this work grow. You can give on our website, Paypal, Venmo (@nicoleacardoza) or subscribe $5/mo on Patreon. A huge thank you for those that have already supported!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Tell Congress to pass the RESTAURANTS Act, which prioritizes funding and support for independent restaurants to weather COVID-19. Read an overview of the bill here.
Protect farmworkers in your state/region. There are different calls to action for various states, including New York, southern California, and Florida.
Consider how your efforts to support local businesses can also center the needs of those most vulnerable in the restaurant industry.
GET EDUCATED
Many states have started to re-open businesses, encouraging communities to head to their favorite bars and restaurants. But data indicates this trend has unfavorable results. About 25% of new cases in Louisiana stemmed from bars and restaurants, and so did 9% of outbreaks in Colorado. 12% of new Maryland cases started in bars and restaurants last month, and 15 of the 39 new cases in San Diego stemmed from restaurants in only one week (NYTimes).
This doesn’t just threaten the safety of guests. Workers, often forced to return to their jobs, carry the brunt of this impact. And these workers are disproportionately from the Latino community, who are already disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. The Hispanic and Latino population represent 17% of the total U.S. workforce, but over 27% of restaurant and food service workers (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics).
And this goes beyond the restaurant where you may be dining. Consider how eating out affects the supply chain that fuels the restaurant industry. According to a PBS report, farmworkers are three times more likely to contract COVID-19 than workers in other industries, where lack of affordable housing and personal transportation forces workers to live in closed proximity in shared homes and cars (PBS). Although the federal Occupational Safety and Hazard Administration (OSHA) has issued workplace guidance to protect employees, none of them are mandatory, and many employers aren’t providing the necessary PPE to support practicing these policies (PBS).
And a significant percentage of workers across the restaurant industry are also undocumented, which exacerbates the stress of the persistent lack of employment. Most workers pay taxes in this income, but they aren’t eligible for government aid, nor are they protected by the eviction moratorium. Many face a difficult decision: stay at the open and available jobs and expose themselves to risk, or go without pay indefinitely (Eater).
Undocumented or not, there are millions of workers in the restaurant industry who were already paid too little to be eligible for unemployment (Time), a critical part of the unemployment gap we referenced in last week’s newsletter. This is because many restaurants operate off of the subminimum tipped wage policy, where workers get paid less than minimum wage in addition to tips provided by customers. But this practice stems from our legacy of slavery. After slavery was abolished, restaurant owners weren’t keen on paying their newly freed Black workers. Instead, they created policies that customers would pay employees on their behalf, based on the service they provided. This makes front-of-house workers’ pay subject to discrimination of guests, making “customer prejudice into public policy” (Time). It’s no surprise why front-of-house workers are predominantly white, while 70% of tip-ineligible cooks and dishwashers are people of color (Time). Furthermore, many restaurants don’t share tips between front-of-house staff and back-of-house employees, fueling pay disparities within the restaurant itself.
In some ways, you can argue that it’s better that these restaurants can open at all. Many restaurants have been forced to shutter, even if they did receive some time of business relief grants. Nationwide, about 25% of those unemployed in the U.S. because of the pandemic are food and beverage workers (Washington Post). In NYC, a culinary epicenter, 80% of restaurants could not pay their full rent (Eater). Although many restaurants and local organizations started GoFundMe initiatives to support staff earlier this spring, many of those funds have long been disbursed. And as of now, there’s no plan for future relief funding for small businesses. Many restaurants are tasked with choosing whether to close or expose staff and guests to risk to recoup costs.
And many of the guidelines open restaurants are encouraged to follow center the safety of the guests, not the staff. For example, tables might be placed further away from one another, but wait staff still have to serve guests nearby. Back-of-house staff still have to cook and clean in smaller conditions, and decreasing staff support places more stress and burden on those remaining. In New York and other major cities, temperature checks and contact tracing is encouraged for guests, but not required, so diners can come and go as they please. In a way, it doesn’t matter if restaurants make these precautions required for their staff; there’s such high traffic of other people not committing to the same rules. And if a diner finds out they’ve contracted COVID-19 and want to hold a restaurant accountable, they could sue. Read more of the double standards in Eater.
And there’s no reprieve from the virus on the horizon, but we’re transitioning from summer to fall and winter. With temperatures dropping, many of us may be more tempted to escape our homes for the atmosphere of a restaurant and sit indoors. With windows closed to contain the heat, the likelihood of contracting the virus may increase. And this will be paired with an upcoming flu season that, at minimum, will conflate how we respond to the virus (Science Magazine).
So when supporting your local businesses and boosting your local economy, take extra care. Take-out may be a safer alternative – or, consider buying gift cards to enjoy the food and drink later. But as you do, remember that this is less of an individual failing than a political one. The safest option, for many industries, is to close businesses and pay people adequately to stay at home – it’s just not an option our government is considering. Another effective way to support your local restaurant is by exercising your civic duty and advocating for the needs of local businesses and vulnerable workers.
Do you currently work in the restaurant industry? We'd love to hear from you. Reply to this email or send us a note on our submissions page.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Restaurants are faced with difficult decisions between shuttering businesses and operating during a global pandemic
A rise of cases in many states have been linked to the return of dining-in establishments, like restaurants and bars
The likelihood of contracting the virus at bars and restaurants disproportionately affects the staff, who are more likely to be communities of color and undocumented
The impact of eating out impacts marginalized workers across the supply chain
RELATED ISSUES
8/9/2020 | Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19
8/2/2020 | Protect those vulnerable to extreme heat during COVID-19.
7/27/2020 | Support Asian Americans through COVID-19.
7/19/2020 | Rally for representation in science and research: COVID-19 and CDC.
6/28/2020 | Understand disparities in healthcare treatment.
6/21/2020 | Protect essential workers: Racial Disparities of COVID-19
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Understand the unemployment gap | COVID-19
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Sunday,
Today we continue our weekly reporting on the impact of COVID-19 on communities of color. The unemployment gap is a critical economic indicator of the growing disparities between each group, and important for us to watch as we struggle to recover from this global pandemic.
Your financial contributions are greatly appreciated. These contributions are our only source of funding and make this work sustainable. Consider giving one-time on our website or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Check-in with your neighbors to see if you can support with childcare, assisting with groceries, or running errands.
Make a donation to your local food bank or other community center offering services to meet the basic needs of those in need.
GET EDUCATED
On Saturday, Trump signed four executive orders to provide economic relief as COVID-19 persists across the nation. One of which authorizes the federal government to pay an additional $300 a week for unemployment, calling states to add $100 and ensure a $400/week extension (NPR). The $600/weekly unemployment benefits implemented in an earlier relief package expired in July.
Considering the gross disparities in the impact of COVID-19 on communities of color across the board, this may come as no surprise. But as of July 2020, the gap in U.S. Black and white unemployment rates is the widest it has been for the past five years (Reuters). The white unemployment rate is roughly at 10.1%. In contrast, the Black unemployment rate is 15.4% (Reuters). This five percentage point does include a slight rebound of employment since COVID-19 hit across both groups. Still, the rebound rate is significantly slower, indicating that Black people will be disproportionately delayed in finding roles as the economy recovers. These trends persist across other racial/ethnic groups; The unemployment rate for Hispanic workers is at 14.5%, closely tailing the unemployment rate for Black people. The unemployment rate for Asian workers hovers at 13.8% (Reuters).
The global pandemic didn’t create this disparity. Although the national unemployment rate was at a 50-year low before COVID-19 (Quartz), Black people were still twice as likely to be unemployed than their white counterparts (ProPublica). Since the Great Recession of 2010, we’ve watched the unemployment rate of Black communities recover more slowly than the unemployment rate for white workers. This lag in delivery, compounding with a more profound disparity in employment opportunities for communities of color, created the unequal foundation for the COVID-19 impact to exacerbate (ProPublica).
“The Black unemployment rate is always ridiculously high, but we don’t treat it like a crisis.”
Jessica Fulton, vice president of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, for ProPublica
Initially, reports indicated that differences in education contributed to the disparities; new data shows that can’t be the only factor. Institutionalized racial discrimination, found in anything from how resumes are screened and interviews are conducted to mentorship, job training, and promotions opportunities, is a significant contributor (Quartz).
These trends are more evident when cross-analyzed with other data. Unemployment rates in some cities, for example, are disproportionately larger between white and Black populations than others, according to data compilated by Quartz. In Minneapolis, the center of the national protests back in May, the unemployment rate for Black people is nearly 4x the unemployment rate for white people (Quartz). The city recently declared racism as a public health emergency to allocate resources and capacity for addressing the systemic inequities pervasive through the city (CBS News).
The trends persist even in wealthier households. Although unemployment rates are lower for roles usually reserved for those with college degrees, data indicates that Black people are still more likely to be unemployed (ProPublica). Explore more data in this comprehensive visualization by ProPublica.
It’s also important to note that the unemployment rate is disproportionately affecting women. The unemployment rate for women at 10.5% is larger than the 9.4% of men (Forbes). For communities of color, this is especially damaging, considering women of color face with mounting issues like lower salaries, increased harassment and bullying, and harsher evaluations (Business Insider). Disruption to employment may make it more difficult for these women to secure these roles again or re-establish boundaries to keep themselves safer. Also, many women of color are the financial mainstays for their families. 67.5% of Black mothers and 41.4% of Latina mothers were the primary or sole breadwinners for their families, compared with 37% of white mothers (American Progress). These financial disruptions can create immediate hardship and create economic issues that can last generations.
As businesses begin to deteriorate because of this virus and more people lose their jobs, it may be wise for our government to consider an unemployment strategy that centers those most impacted to help assist the disproportionate impact of this virus on so many communities of color.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
The unemployment gap between Black and white workers is the highest it's been in the past five years
COVID-19 has exacerbated persistent trends in unemployment for communities of color
Racial discrimination, along with education and mass incarceration, are major factors in the unemployment rate
Women of color are disproportionately impacted
RELATED ISSUES
7/27/2020 | Support Asian Americans through COVID-19.
7/19/2020 | Rally for representation in science and research: COVID-19 and CDC.
7/12/2020 | Learn how air pollution exacerbates COVID-19.
7/5/2020 | Support the Navajo Nation through COVID-19.
6/21/2020 | Protect essential workers: Racial Disparities of COVID-19
6/14/2020 | Learn how racism is a public health crisis.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Acknowledge the harm of microaggressions.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Hi,
We're close to the end of another week! Reminder that each Saturday I share reflections and questions from the community – reply to this email with yours. I appreciate all the thoughtful responses from our topics this week.
Many people have asked about microaggressions, so today's newsletter dives in. We've been focusing much of our newsletter on the systemic forms of racism, so this is a good reminder of how much our individual actions help to reinforce inequitable systems by perpetuating false stereotypes.
As always, you can invest one-time on Paypal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza) or monthly on Patreon to keep this community growing. We have new tools and resources coming your way, and your support is so appreciated!
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
For those that identify as white:
1. Reflect on the last time you saw a racial microaggression happen. Have a conversation with that individual using the resources below.
Everyone:
2. Consider – what microaggressions have you experienced related to your identity? How did they feel? How do you wish to be perceived instead?
GET EDUCATED
Stories of microaggressions have been making the news as brave non-white people share their harmful experiences with others, oftentimes in work settings. But they're easy to overlook as more overt forms of racism dominate the news cycle. Today we're analyzing how microaggressions play a major role in interpersonal and systemic racism.
Microaggressions are defined as "the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership" (Blavity). Microaggressions can be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, and any combination of these, too (remember our conversation on intersectionality), but we're centering this conversation on racial microaggressions.
For the sake of our non-white readers, I won't be listing any examples in this article, but you can read lists of examples on Vox, NYTimes, Psychology Today, Fortune, Teen Vogue, Buzzfeed, Instagram, and CNN. Read these and Google "examples of racial microaggressions" so you can see more. Do not reach out to a non-white person to give you examples of microaggressions.
Because of the word "micro," many people (read: non-white people) consider instances of microaggressions to be brief and relatively harmless. But there is nothing micro about microaggressions. Many psychologists refer to the impact of microaggressions as "death by a thousand papercuts" for those that experience them on a regular basis (NYTimes). If macroaggressions define more overt forms of racism (JSTOR), microaggressions are more accurately subvert acts, a way to undermine or corrupt someone, which makes them all the more sinister, especially when people use them intentionally to get away with racism in public settings.
The impact of microaggressions
But the impact of microaggressions is anything but small. In fact, studies have proved that the impact of microaggressions is almost as mentally and emotionally damaging as macroaggressions (full study here). Another study found that Black teenagers in the United States face microaggressions multiple times a day, most frequently online, which often leads to depression (Blavity).
It's difficult to isolate the impact of microaggressions alone on broader health outcomes. But in this fascinating article from NPR, psychologists look at correlations of various health indicators after more overt forms of racism on different populations throughout the world and find consistent data that indicates how damaging stressful, traumatic experiences can be (NPR). The aggregated impact of racism, from the systemic to interpersonal, is being referred to as a term called weathering, which refers to the way the constant stress of racism can lead to premature biological aging and worse health outcomes for Black people (SELF Magazine). Although microaggressions certainly play a part in weathering, we'll discuss weathering in full at a later date.
But remember, we don't need statistics to validate harm. Kevin Nadal, a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, puts it simply: "At the end of the day if somebody says something racist to you, it's racist. And if it hurt your feelings, it hurt your feelings, so it doesn't really matter what we define it as" (NPR).
“[Microaggressions] really chip away at your self worth, and it’s harder because the instances seem so small.”
Avery Francis, HR Expert for the Independent
Addressing racial microaggressions
As conversations around race grow in offices and around dinner tables, microaggressions have more of a chance to come out of the shadows. But it puts non-white people in a difficult position. Not only do we have to reckon with the emotional impact of the microaggression itself, we have to choose how to respond– knowing our disadvantaged position in these scenarios. We have to consider how responding could further enforce false stereotypes about our race. We have to gauge whether we could be provoking more racial aggressions, even bodily harm. We also have to consider how staying silent will enforce this behavior in the future, and cause further suffering.
Resources for responding to racial microaggressions as a non-white person that highlight these considerations are available in the Harvard Business Review and Advancing Justice website.
With privilege comes the responsibility to intervene on behalf of someone harmed and address racist interactions directly. Derald Wing Sue, a psychology and education professor at Columbia University in New York City, offers a way for anti-racist allies to intervene during a microaggression in an interview with CNN.
Make the invisible, visible.
According to Sue, the perpetrator is often unaware of their actions. As an anti-racist ally, you must, at minimum, make sure they are aware of the harm they caused (CNN). Diane Goodman, a social justice and diversity consultant, offers this format in the NYTimes:
“I know you didn’t realize this, but when you __________ (comment/behavior), it was hurtful/offensive because___________. Instead you could___________ (different language or behavior.)”
Educate the perpetrator.
Ensure they understand that regardless of the intent of what they said, it's the impact of their words that matter (CNN).
Disarm the microaggression.
Move the conversation past a problematic to communicate that it's offensive. According to Sue, you'll be "modeling good behavior to other people present, and you can have a later conversation with the person about why his joke was inappropriate" (CNN).
"…if you're a person with privileged identities and you want to be a true ally, maybe you do have to do that homework. Maybe you do have to engage in those uncomfortable emotions because you know that it's your job and responsibility to have those conversations so that other people of color or women or LGBTQ folks won't have to have those conversations for you.'“
Kevin Nadal, a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice for NPR
It's important as we do this work that we don't focus only on the blatant forms of racism. So much of macro systemic racism is reinforced by micro-actions, and racial microaggressions play a major part. As we do this work we must take accountability for microaggressions, and use our privilege to call them out however we can.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Racial microaggressions are common and brief and subvert forms of racism
The impact of racial microaggressions is as damaging as macroaggressions
Microaggressions contribute to the cumulative stress that non-white people experience as part of living with racism
It's important that we leverage our privilege to dismantle microaggressions in our workplaces and other social spaces
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Weekly Reflection: White terrorists, Black spaces, and deleting Facebook.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Hi everyone,
Each Saturday I go through the questions and reflections from the community in response to the actions we've been taking everyday. It's a good way to reflect further on the key themes – and catch up on any actions you missed this week. This weekly series needs a better title...
Many of the questions this week are too broad for a simple one-paragraph response, and are added to the list for future newsletters! And kind reminder that these daily newsletters should be part – but not all – of your anti-racism education and actions. There is no such thing as "enough" until we are all free! They're designed to introduce you to issues, but certainly can't paint the whole picture in 800-1000 words. Keep learning and listening.
As always, you can invest one-time on Paypal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza) or monthly on Patreon to keep these conversations growing. I'm so grateful to be learning and unlearning with each of you.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Choose one newsletter from this week. Share with a friend to read, and discuss afterwards. Commit together to diving deeper, answering your questions, and learning more.
WEEKLY REFLECTION
Why is it that white men, whether at schools or otherwise, are very rarely reported and / or labeled as terrorists?
In response to Don't Vote for Trump, which analyzes the white supremacy movement in America
Racism, put simply. Ibram X. Kendi puts it simply – terror in America (and in many parts of the world) has been branded as something delivered by Black and Brown communities (The Atlantic). White men that commit acts of terror are usually referred to a "troubled individual" "acting alone," but in reality (like in the examples from our newsletter on Confederate symbols) they are nearly always perpetuating a violent and racist ideology – one that's embedded in the fabric of our society.
Teen Vogue has done some powerful reporting on this, analyzing both the response to the Parkland school shooting (Teen Vogue) and criticizing how certain people get named terrorists (Teen Vogue). And the NYTimes analyzes how the white supremacy ideology thrives online and in the Trump administration (NYTimes).
Thank you to person that submitted this question WITH the research they've done so far!
"
In the American imagination, danger comes mainly in black or brown, to the point that people miss the threat emanating from individuals who happen to be white. In recent years, white terrorists motivated by all sorts of bigotry have shot up white churches and synagogues and concerts and schools and bars and yoga studios. White people, not to mention the rest of us, are being terrorized—primarily by other white people. Any day can be the day they meet the final face of white terror, too.
The fundamental question of our time is whether we have enough respect for humanity to protect against white terror. Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve and extend pockets of equality, liberty, and democracy in the face of those who would subvert and destroy them?
– Ibram X. Kendi in The Atlantic
Do we all leave Facebook so we're not complicit?
In response to 6.30 newsletter Boycott as a form of protest, which reviewed the power of boycotts in the anti-racism movement.
Facebook is a powerful tool for staying connected with friends and running businesses. It might do you more good to stay informed and active online than going dark altogether. But that choice is up to you. It's highly unlikely enough people will boycott the service to cause Facebook to change, but it is likely that brands pulling millions of advertising money will. My opinion? I'd focus on getting the large company you may work for to pull ad revenue (if they use FB) than deactivate your own account.
But I get a lot of questions like these that feel less tactical, more moral (although this particular reader sounded very tactical, so just using this as an example). For moral questions, I leave that decision up to you. Ask yourself the questions and decide: what are you willing to sacrifice? What is being called for in this moment? Are you taking action for yourself or the greater good? Will this action be your only action? Is this action the most comfortable one?
How do I find black-owned businesses?
Google!
I’m a white woman and want to support Black businesses. I also want to be cognizant of Black spaces and not infiltrating them with our whiteness. Can you touch on this?
Supporting Black-owned businesses with your dollars is always a good thing (and please remember to make it sustainable, not just a one-time thing, because Black-owned businesses have operationalized to manage demand that might disappear once the protests fade). But you bring up an interesting intersection of supporting these businesses and gentrifying them with your presence.
I'll spend time on gentrification more broadly later on. But I think there needs to be a distinction between Black-owned businesses and Black spaces. Black people – and other people of color – deserve their own space to connect and heal (great article on this by The Arrow) but that might not be a Black-owned business, which may be designed to cater to any population. And start asking yourself questions about whether you belong in that space, how people will feel with your presence, and how you would be actively contributing. It takes a level of awareness about how to navigate spaces – an awareness that Black people, and other people of color, have had to practice their entire lives.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @ nicoleacardoza
Reflect before apologizing to your Black friends.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
It's Wednesday!
Our emails for the past week or so have been focused on structural racism: how public policies and institutional racism perpetuate racism in our society. But as we dive into those topics (and there are SO many more) it's also important to remember that racism exists on an interpersonal level, too, and upheld and perpetuated by how we treat one another.
As this lovely community has grown, a frequently asked question is how to have conversations around current events, or apologize for past harm, with friends who identify as Black. Although I can't speak for all Black people or the specific circumstances of your relationship, I can offer resources to contextualize how you approach this conversation. This is an updated version of an earlier newsletter from 6.8, which analyzed it only from a work lens.
Thank you to everyone that's financially contributing to make this possible – and ensuring this can always be free for those that aren't able. Consider investing one-time on Paypal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza) or monthly for this community to grow.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
If you identify as non-Black:
Reflect and respond to these questions below before you reach out to a Black friend / colleague:
What prompted me to reach out to this person?
What do I know about this person's emotional state right now?
What assumptions am I making?*
What burden am I putting on this friend I care about?*
Would I normally ask this question?*
Did I, say, wish this person a happy birthday?*
What would I do if they really aren’t okay?*
*These prompts are from Priska Neely's article Please Stop ‘Checking In to See If I’m Okay in The Cut.
If you identify as Black:
A kind reminder that you have no obligation to respond or engage with any harmful messages in your inbox right now.
GET EDUCATED
Over the past month, Black people have been bombarded with texts, calls, IG messages, emails, Slack messages, etc with apologies from white people (and other non-white POC) – apologies for the police brutality, for the collective awakening in society, and for past microaggressions or more overt forms of racism.
Part of this is sparked by the apology train unfolding in our news. We've watched celebrities apologize for insensitive content in the past, like Jimmy Fallon (NYTimes) and Youtube personality Jenna Marbles (Forbes). White actors are stepping down from voicing Black characters on animated series (Glamour). It feels like every day there is a new, public, grand apology posted on Instagram or in a series of tweets coming across my newsfeed.
These public apologies make sense for celebrities with influence. They shine a public light on public examples of past harm. But when we look at apologizing or reaching out on an interpersonal level, I'm not sure the same rules apply. Acknowledging pain or harm in an interpersonal relationship is much more nuanced. And to fully understand it, we need to understand intent vs. impact, a concept critical to social justice work.
Unpacking intent vs. impact is a practice of decoupling our words and actions from how they impact other people. Oftentimes when addressing race, our words and actions don't land the way we intend, especially in times of deep emotional pain and trauma. And regardless of what we think we're doing, there's still harm in what we do. Or, as Rebekah aptly said in a blog post from January 2018, "if I punch you in the face on accident—you still got punched in the face". Although we can never be fully responsible for how someone responds, we need to get critical on how our impact can cause harm to people – especially when they are already in pain, and our intention is to acknowledge that pain without causing more. Watch this 2:30m video by Diverse City by Dr. Cheryl Ingram on the importance of intent vs. impact in diversity, equity and inclusion (Youtube).
Many people when causing harm tend to attach themselves to the intent side of the narrative. "I didn't mean to" is a common refrain. But that doesn't get us anywhere; acknowledging the impact is far more important. Let's circle back to our celebrity apologies, many acknowledge this in their own posts. Many use language like "although I didn't mean to, I realize now that my actions were harmful". It's as if, even in the apology itself, there has to be some semblance of innocence. And that can often get in the way of accountability. Stop holding onto your innocence so you can carry your culpability – otherwise, you're forcing a Black person to do it for you.
Today's action should help you do move from intention to impact, first by getting clear on what your actual intention is for reaching out. Are you actively willing and able to support your Black colleagues? Or, are you instead looking alleviate some guilt that you're feeling with the weight of this moment? Remember that it's not fair to alleviate your own guilt about current events and your own relationship with this work by reaching out to a Black person. If that's your intention, you might want to consider how to take care of that outside your relationship.
The second is to understand what the impact of your outreach will be. Does your outreach add burden, or feel disingenuous? Does it directly benefit the Black person you're reaching out to? If you're checking in to see if someone is okay, are you in a position to actually support this person with their feelings? And if you're apologizing for past transgressions, how committed are you to continuing to learn and unlearn what brought that harm to begin with? I have a feeling you're committed if you're reading this newsletter! But important to note nonetheless.
And consider how your privilege may muddle the impact of your intent. When prompting a conversation with colleagues at work, note: are you their direct report, or in a higher role than them? Consequently, are you placing them in a space where they may feel forced to respond? Perhaps you can focus your intention instead on creating a safer work environment for your Black colleagues (inspiration via CNBC). Even more simply, are you reaching out during a time where you feel rested and healed, without acknowledging whether the other person in the conversation has had the same opportunity? Remember that your apology is likely to land in your friend's inbox on top of three more – does that change how you'd like to approach the conversation?
“Apologizing is the dual act of recognizing another’s humanity as sacred while also working to dismantle the internalized-ideologies that led you to dehumanize someone in the first place.”
Ciarra Jones in "The Violence of white (and non-Black PoC) Apologies" on Medium
As a Black woman writing this, I can't speak for all Black people. You can read through these reflections of the apologies and check-ins that many have experienced, and how they feel about them.
"So please, stop sending #love. Stop sending positive vibes. Stop sending your thoughts. Here are three suggestions on more immediately impactful things to offer instead."
Chad Sanders, I Don’t Need ‘Love’ Texts From My White Friends in the NYTimes
"So if this is the first time you’re asking me how I am, if this is the first time we’ve talked about my existence as a black person in America, you are definitely not the person I’m going to call if I’m not okay. And that is okay! It’s also the reason I don’t need you to check on me now."
Priska Neely, Please Stop ‘Checking In to See If I’m Okay in The Cut.
"If you're a white person, you want to try to understand how you might be feeling if you were in the kind of crisis that your black colleague or friend is in right now," she explains. "What would I want to hear?" Dr. Breland-Noble also points out that if they were really our friends — if they were really coworkers that we valued — we would always be coming from a space of trying to understand, whether in a crisis or not."
Elizabeth Gulio, Before You Check In On Your Black Friend, in Refinery29
"She wanted to make sure she was not creating an emotional burden for her friends, she said, but also that she was not missing an important moment to help if they needed anything. She settled on a simple rule: She would only check in with people of color she already interacted with on a daily basis before the protests, those who she felt would receive her message with a sense of relief and not as an additional burden."
Jose A. Del Real, White people are pouring out their hearts - and sending money - to their black friends in the Washington Post
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Although we can never be fully responsible for how someone responds, we need to get critical on our impact can cause harm to people, especially when they are already in pain
Read perspectives from Black people and others in different relationships when understanding intent v. impact in these conversation
Move into apologies with a full commitment to do the work to dismantle the preconceptions that got you here
Acknowledge how white guilt can often play a role in misconstruing intent, and causing negative impact
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @ nicoleacardoza
Protect essential workers: Racial Disparities of COVID-19
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Sunday!
As part of our weekly series on COVID-19, today we're analyzing the relationship between academic opportunities, essential workers and contracting the pandemic.
I'm also adding a FAQ at the bottom of this email with responses to some questions (accusations is more fitting) I've gotten from some emails this week. The email on reparations and the email on Confederate symbols got some people riled. And although I'm not interested in arguing on points, I think it's important to call attention to how our biases influence how we process information. I'll make this a weekly series where I'll answer questions – send some honest inquiries my way by replying to this email.
Also, a few of you have let me know the archives are appearing as blank pages on mobile web. I'm not sure why, so over the next week I'll move each archive off of Mailchimp to our website. Thanks for your patience.
If these newsletters have helped your understanding of racism and how to dismantle it, consider donating one-time on Paypal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or giving $5 each month on Patreon.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Research to see if your city council has put any actions in place to protect essential workers, like these from Philadelphia or Seattle.
Support the Essential Workers Bill of Rights.
GET EDUCATED
The impact of COVID-19 on essential workers.
As we discussed in yesterday's newsletter – which was somehow the most controversial newsletter I've published to date – there's a significant wealth gap between white Americans and Black Americans. There's also a similar wealth gap between white Americans and other non-white populations. And when analyzing the impact of COVID-19 on Black and brown populations, economics plays a huge part of who's likely to be contracting the disease.
Let's first review the role of essential workers; the few roles left standing after jobs shutter in the face of COVID-19. People of color make up nearly half the total population of essential workers overall, and make up the majority of essential workers in food and agriculture (50%) and in industrial, commercial, residential facilities and services (53%).
These essential roles tend to attract people who have been systemically disadvantaged from an academic perspective – those that haven't had the opportunity or privilege to attend a higher institution, or who immigrated here to America. According to the Economic Policy Institute, nearly 70% of essential workers do not have a college degree. 30% essential workers have some college or a high school diploma. One in 10 have less than a high school diploma.
To understand how many people find themselves in these types of roles, we have to look at the challenges that prevent people from excelling academically, particularly people of color. Not only do we know the significant barriers that prevent people of color from going to, and graduating from college, we also know that there are disproportionate challenges for students of color to stay in school, even as early as elementary school.
Compounding this issue are the trends on employment: African Americans have a higher unemployment rate compared to the overall population right now, making it more difficult to justify leaving a job, even if it's causing an increased likelihood of exposure. And remember that most people in essential jobs don't have the financial capacity to take off time if they wanted to.
So these individuals are significantly more likely to contract the disease, but they're also struggling to obtain the necessary support to protect themselves. For example, front-line health care workers were are 12x more likely to test positive for COVID-19 compared with members of the public, but hospitals are still struggling to meet the basic needs for PPE while cases surge. Since many gig workers – who are also deemed essential – are contractors, not employees of companies like Uber and DoorDash, they don't have employee protections that give them job security, healthcare or even PPE. Black people are twice as likely to lack health insurance compared with their white counterparts.
These challenges affect every essential worker from every ethnic background, regardless of race. But considering the racial makeup of the population, these challenges also contribute to the larger racial disparties of the impact of COVID-19.
Next week we'll analyze how undocumented immigrants have moved from "illegal" to "essential" during COVID-19, and the importance of protecting their health and safety.
“We’re not essential, we’re expendable.”
Denita Jones, a Dallas-area call center worker in this article for The Guardian
WEEKLY Q&A
Each Sunday I'll try to answer questions that come in from pieces throughout the week. You can submit a question by replying to this email. I can't get to everyone's questions and I'm automatically deleting any racist insults that come into my inbox, but I'm looking forward to hearing your inquiries! This week I'm addressing less questions, more accusations, that have come in.
”My white ancestors had a lot of hardships when they came to America, too! Why don't they get reparations?”
For starters, my email advocating for reparations for Black people does not say anywhere that other people from other racial backgrounds are ineligible for reparations. In fact, we can only hope that a movement towards reparations would encourage reparations for other people that have been harmed.
This line of argument is a common way people invalidate the experiences of marginalized people, and through this logic, inadvertently uphold systems of oppression. Remember that acknowledging harm against one person doesn't invalidate the harm against another.
Instead, I wish people with these arguments could empathize, and, with this deep and direct understanding of similar pain and trauma, feel more connected with the pain of others and join in solidarity.
Also, this person in particular was referring to the Irish slaves myth, which is factually inaccurate and is a popular argument used by white nationalists.
”I never owned a slave. My tax-paying dollars should not have to support a Black person.”
First off, from my understanding there is no formal proposal for an economic model for reparations. That would be, in part, what a task force for Congress would work on with the passing of H.R. 40. Yesterday's call-to-action was to encourage the task force to be created, not to empty anyone's pocketbooks.
But also remember that today, right now, your tax paying dollars are actively supporting police brutality, unfair criminal justice practices, and discriminatory housing and hiring practices. You may not have personally owned a slave, or even your family, but if we are all paying taxes, we are all complicit in this system right now.
This is a form of othering – distancing oneself from the harm that has happened to eschew accountability. Even if we are not directly responsible for something that's happened in our society, we must hold ourselves accountable. It's akin to people that see a car crash on the highway in front of them, and keep driving instead of stopping to see if the victims need help.
”Black people won't know what to do with the money. They'll spend it on drugs and alcohol.”
I'm not even going to argue against this racist stereotype because I don't have the patience. But let's just unpack that you, lovely reader, believe that a nationwide initiative for reparations shouldn't happen because of the potential of people spending it against your wishes. You believe that you know what is best for an entire population based on your perception of their relationship with money. You would rather that a significant act to reduce racial inequities does not happen than for funds to be potentially spent unwisely.
There's also another harmful practice where the actions of a Black person somehow are indicative of Black people as a whole. One financially irresponsible Black person doesn't mean all Black people are, in the same way that just because Barack Obama became president doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist.
That money won't even solve racism in America, or pay for all that pain.
Yep, this is true. We can't solve racism in America with a paycheck. Reparations isn't to solve racism, it's to reduce the economic impact of it. Germany wasn't hoping that money would make the impact of the Holocaust disappear, and we still mourn its devastating impact in today's time. But again, does that mean it shouldn't happen at all? Consider why you feel that blocking reparations helps move the movement forward.
Something else to consider – reparations could be used to invest in improving the systems that perpetuate racism, like creating more equitable housing and healthcare systems or improving education.
A lot of good men died for the Confederacy.
There's been good men (and women) that have lived and fought and died on both sides of conflict throughout time. Removing Confederate symbols and statues are not to diminish their individual names, but reduce the prominence of the harm their work represents. Robert E. Lee, the most prominent symbol of the Confederacy, was most likely a great father and husband.
This is a form of deflection. It creates an argument that's counter-productive to the conversation (where did I say in my newsletter that everyone that died for the Confederacy were bad men?) And it doesn't even address the key point – that Confederate symbols were often erected as white supremacy symbols after the war ended, and are still used to incite racial violence to this day.
On the flipside, many of you noted that we also should be tearing down statues of Christopher Columbus, too, which is absolutely valid. I should have mentioned him (and conversations on George Washington, the harmful depictions of Native Americans, and much more) though I plan to unpack all of this in future newsletters. Luckily, dozens of other harmful statues are being torn down right now, not just those associated with the Confederacy.
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Support black-owned businesses.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Thursday!
Today is our first conversation that looks at the economics of racism – and how black businesses have been disproportionately impacted by systemic oppression. Today we'll review a little about the history and significance of Tulsa and how you can support black businesses as part of your practice.
I'll be testing our texts today, so if you want alerts, text ARD to my cell: 718-715-4359. And as always, contributions are greatly appreciated! You can give one-time on PayPal, start a subscription on Patreon, or send Venmo to @nicoleacardoza.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
1. Sign the 15% Percent Pledge Petition to encourage major companies to pledge 15% of their shelf space to Black-owned businesses.
2. Choose something you've bought in the past week. Find a black-owned business that offers a similar product / service. Plan to buy that product again (or something else) from this retailer.
GET EDUCATED
Why is it critical to support black-owned businesses right now?
It's not easy being a Black business owner in the U.S. With limited access to capital and connections for their work to be seen and celebrated, Black businesses are just as impacted by racism as black people, making it difficult for their products / services, employees and communities to thrive.
And because of COVID-19, black-owned businesses have been particularly struggling this year. A recent report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that “the number of African-American business owners plummeted from 1.1 million in February 2020 to 640,000 in April," a 41% decrease. Overall, the United States lost only 22% of total business owners over the same period, showing a disproportionate impact on African-American individuals. Center for Responsible Lending Study
Part of this was fueled by the inequitable Payroll Protection Program, which aimed to support small-business owners through the pandemic. However, its structure illuminated some of the larger systemic disadvantages people of color, especially Black people, face in business. It initially prioritized people with existing relationships to commercial lenders, but Black people are twice as likely to be turned down for business loans than their White counterparts. It also prioritized those with employees, but "businesses headed by people of color are less likely to have employees, have fewer employees when they do, have less revenue, and have a smaller share of revenue compared to white-owned businesses". Center for Responsible Lending Study
Although Black people account for 15% of the population, there are few Black-owned brands carried by major retailers. Today's call-to-action is a small practice to counteract generations of harm against Black business owners through individual action and calling for collective change.
To fully understand the impact of systemic oppression on Black owned businesses, we have to talk about Tulsa.
“It’s so important to support black-owned businesses right now, because we are doing the work. It’s supporting the actual communities where injustice occurs.”
― Danielle Mullen, owner of Semicolon Bookstore & Gallery in CNBC
The Tulsa Race Massacre
Trump recently announced that he is hosting his first presidential rally post-COVID-19 in Tulsa, OK. He's also hosting it on Juneteenth, which we'll be discussing in full next week, but you can read about its significance here. And people (including myself) are not happy.
Tulsa, OK has deep cultural significance to the civil rights movement. In 1921, Tulsa, Oklahoma’s Greenwood District, known as Black Wall Street, was "one of the most prosperous African-American communities in the United States". O.W. Gurley, a wealthy African-American from Arkansas, moved to Tulsa and purchased land that he only gave to other African-Americans, leveling the playing field in a deeply segregated community for his community to thrive. Black businesses were thriving, a sustainable community that did not need dominant culture.
According to this article in JSTOR, "the average income of black families in the area exceeded 'what minimum wage is today.' As a result of segregation, a 'dollar circulated 36 to 100 times' and remained in Greenwood 'almost a year before leaving.'"
But this all changed when a black man was accused of assaulting a white woman in a neighboring town. The white community nearby attacked the community – on foot and by plane. Over two days, thirty-five city blocks went up in flames, 300 people died, and 800 were injured. Reports showed that local police actively participated in the rioting. The entire event was omitted from history records for decades, and will be included in Oklahoma state school curriculum for the first time this fall. Reported property damages estimate the total destruction at $1.8 million in 1921, a $25 million loss for the community in today's dollars.
With this type of outrage on the growth and development of Black wealth in our history, paired with consistently named barriers for our community to access funding and opportunities as businesspeople, it's critical we all do our part to support Black-owned businesses however we can.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza
Reflect before reaching out to your Black colleagues.
Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›
Happy Monday,
As social distancing restrictions ease across the U.S. more people are going back to work today than weeks prior. Many subscribers have asked how they can support Black colleagues and friends through this, so here's a collection of resources.
For some subscribers, there was an incorrect link in yesterday's email. The comprehensive list of resources to continue your anti-racism learning created by Tasha K can be found here.
If you haven't already, consider investing one-time or monthly for this community to grow. Please note that I'm not responding to emails asking for individual support or guidance at this time.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Reflect and respond to these questions below before you reach out to a Black friend / colleague:
What prompted me to reach out to this person?
What do I know about this person's emotional state right now?
What assumptions am I making?*
What burden am I putting on this friend I care about?*
Would I normally ask this question?*
Did I, say, wish this person a happy birthday?*
What would I do if they really aren’t okay?*
*These prompts are from Priska Neely's article Please Stop ‘Checking In to See If I’m Okay in The Cut.
GET EDUCATED
To understand a bit more about how thoughtful, empathetic check-ins (or none at all) are important right now, we're going to learn a bit about intent vs. impact, a concept critical to social justice work.
Intent vs. impact is a practice of decoupling our words and actions from how they impact other people. Oftentimes when addressing race, our words and actions don't land the way we intend, especially in times of deep emotional pain and trauma. And regardless of what we think we're doing, there's still harm in what we do. Or, as Rebekah aptly said in a blog post from January 2018, "if I punch you in the face on accident—you still got punched in the face".
Watch this 2:30m video by Diverse City by Dr. Cheryl Ingram on the importance of intent vs. impact in diversity, equity and inclusion.
Although we can never be fully responsible for how someone responds, we need to get critical on our impact can cause harm to people, especially when they are already in pain, and our intention is to acknowledge that pain without causing more.
The questions in today's action should help you do two things. The first is to get clear on what your actual intention is for reaching out. Are you actively willing and able to support your Black colleagues? Or are you instead looking alleviate some guilt that you're feeling with the weight of this moment.
The second is to understand what the impact of your outreach will be. Does your outreach add burden, or feel disingenuous? Are you in a position to actually support this person?
As long as we continue to engage with societal issues in which there is an agent with intentions and a patient receiving the consequences of those actions, we must all struggle to tease apart these issues of intent and impact. We must all focus on how actions that harm others -- regardless of intent -- need to be addressed, not pushed under the rug because the agent "didn't mean" to do anything wrong.
― Melanie Tannenbaum, “But I didn’t mean it!” Why it’s so hard to prioritize impacts over intents in Scientific America
Read these perspectives on how or if to reach out.
"So please, stop sending #love. Stop sending positive vibes. Stop sending your thoughts. Here are three suggestions on more immediately impactful things to offer instead."
Chad Sanders, I Don’t Need ‘Love’ Texts From My White Friends in the NYTimes
"So if this is the first time you’re asking me how I am, if this is the first time we’ve talked about my existence as a black person in America, you are definitely not the person I’m going to call if I’m not okay. And that is okay! It’s also the reason I don’t need you to check on me now."
Priska Neely, Please Stop ‘Checking In to See If I’m Okay in The Cut.
"If you're a white person, you want to try to understand how you might be feeling if you were in the kind of crisis that your black colleague or friend is in right now," she explains. "What would I want to hear?" Dr. Breland-Noble also points out that if they were really our friends — if they were really coworkers that we valued — we would always be coming from a space of trying to understand, whether in a crisis or not."
Elizabeth Gulio, Before You Check In On Your Black Friend, in Refinery29
"She wanted to make sure she was not creating an emotional burden for her friends, she said, but also that she was not missing an important moment to help if they needed anything. She settled on a simple rule: She would only check in with people of color she already interacted with on a daily basis before the protests, those who she felt would receive her message with a sense of relief and not as an additional burden."
Jose A. Del Real, White people are pouring out their hearts - and sending money - to their black friends in the Washington Post
"So what should I do?! Reach out or not?!"
You may start to notice through these emails that there's no easy answer. And that's because this work isn't easy. Reflect on a traumatic experience on your life and consider: how would you want your friends to help you? How about your coworker? A person you haven't talked to in four years? How would that change if you happen to be on holiday? If they reached out a day after it just happened? Or ten years, because something popped up in the news? What if your trauma didn't happen in a moment, but through a lifetime of consistent negative experiences?
Is there a simple response that fits all the nuances above?
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Although we can never be fully responsible for how someone responds, we need to get critical on our impact can cause harm to people, especially when they are already in pain, and our intention is to acknowledge that pain without causing more.
Read perspectives from black people and others in different relationships
Don't look for one best way to answer this, because it doesn't exist
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza