Diversity Training: In Search of Anti-Racism by Patti DeRosa The word "diversity" seems to be everywhere these days -- in workplaces, in the media, in education. But a striking feature of the diversity avalanche is how rarely words like "racism" and "oppression" are used. Such glaring omissions have led me to reflect on the state of anti-racism education as a philosophy and as a practice.In my 15 years as an anti-racism educator and activist, I have identified six different training models that fit under the broad umbrella of "diversity training." I have serious concerns about the current trend toward the professionalization and commercialization of the "diversity industry" and often struggle with the contradictions implicit in doing this kind of work "for a living" and my own complicity in the very practices and assumptions I raise for examination. I offer these observations in a spirit of critical discourse that challenges all of us engaged in these efforts to examine the profound implications of the work we do.
While the six approaches borrow extensively from each other, especially in techniques and methods, most practitioners lean towards one approach, reflecting different core philosophies about the issues. Each approach has some strengths and limitations. I have arranged them alphabetically, except for anti-racism education, which comes at the end.
The Intercultural Approach (IC)The primary focus of IC is the development of cross-cultural understanding and communication between people and nations. It examines how humans speak, reason, gesture, think, act, and believe. It tries to develop sensitivity to the cultural roots of one's own behavior, as well as an awareness to the richness and variety of values and assumptions of other people's cultures. When you hear terms like "worldviews," "cultural relativism," "mores," "value orientation," verbal/nonverbal communication," and "foreign," you are likely to be dealing with the IC approach.In IC, ignorance, cultural misunderstanding, and value clashes are seen as the problem, and increased cultural awareness, knowledge, and tolerance as the solution. Cultural identity and ethnicity are the focus, while racial identity is not often examined. Gender is explored within the context of culture and tradition, but not within the framework of power and oppression.Unlike some other approaches, IC has a well developed body of literature and professional organizations. A great deal of IC work takes place in the fields of international business, foreign student exchanges, and places where people of different nationalities come together.
The Legal Compliance Approach (LC)The classic legal-compliance training approach is easily recognized by the use of words like "law," "Affirmative Action," "equal opportunity," and "qualified minorities." Philosophically, it is based in legal theory, civil rights law, and human resource development strategies. The primary focus of the LC approach is monitoring the recruitment, hiring, and promotional procedures affecting women and people of color so as to promote increased representation in the organization and assure compliance with anti-discrimination laws.A basic assumption of LC is that the optimal state of race relations is "color-blindness," where "people are just people" and differences are not taken into account. In fact, even to acknowledge obvious differences may be interpreted as evidence of prejudice. (This, however, presents a serious contradiction, since Affirmative Action policies must be explicitly race- and gender-conscious.) Assimilation to the dominant culture is seen as the appropriate process for inclusion, a perspective that reinforces the dominant group's worldviews, with the standard of whiteness and maleness remaining intact. The problem is defined primarily as individual biases, lack of compliance with civil rights regulations, and exclusionary procedures within an organization.
The Managing Diversity Approach (MD)Managing Diversity has a strong presence nationally, particularly in corporations, and receives the most attention in the mainstream media. The driving force in MD is that the demographics of the US are rapidly changing and that in order to survive and thrive in the 21st century, businesses must tap into the diverse labor pool and customer base. One hears phrases like "competitive edge," "diversity is a business issue," "Workforce 2000," and "changing demographics." The term "managing diversity" itself seems to imply that if diversity isn't "managed," it will somehow get out of control, begging the question of just who is supposed to be managing whom, and why!Like the LC approach, MD training usually targets the managerial levels of an organization. While some experimental activities may be included, examination of personal attitudes and behavior is likely to be limited to the business context. Workshops often focus on how stereotypes and prejudice affect hiring and promotional decisions and undermine team effectiveness, productivity, and, ultimately, profitability. In other words, racism and sexism (although those terms are distinctly avoided in the MD approach) are problems inasmuch as they affect the bottom line.Top of Page
The Prejudice Reduction Approach (PR)The Prejudice Reduction model has its roots in the Re-evaluation Counseling (RC) movement. RC theory assumes that all human beings are born with tremendous intellectual and emotional potential but that these qualities become blocked and obscured as we grow older from "distress experiences"--fear, loss, pain, anger, etc. The RC approach teaches people to help free one another from the effects of these past hurts. As a diversity training model, PR applies the RC framework of exploring and healing past hurts, focusing on the hurts of being a target of or a colluder with prejudice and bigotry. PR phrases include: "guilt is the glue that holds prejudice together," "healing past hurts," and "emotional healing."PR trainings rely heavily on activities that promote emotional release. Sharing personal stories about how you were hurt by prejudice, exchanging painful lessons about stereotyping, hand-holding, and crying are likely to be part of a PR workshop. At its most positive, PR can help get at the emotional core of prejudice, setting the stage for increased change and activism. Some, however, may be frustrated with the emphasis on the personal, emotional level. As I heard one participant say, "We Need to stop holding hands and start putting our hands to work!"PR's name is revealing. Do we want just to "reduce" prejudice but not eliminate it? And if reduction is the goal, then what is an acceptable level to reduce it to? The emphasis is on prejudice, not necessarily institutional oppression. By focusing on personal hurt, it may obscure the very real differences in power and experiences of dominant group members and oppressed people.
The Valuing Differences Approach (VDF)The term "Valuing Difference" is sometimes used interchangeably with "Managing Diversity," but they are not the same. Cultural pluralism and the salad bowl" vision (rather than the "melting pot") are core beliefs of the VDF approach. Rather than ignoring human differences, VDF recognizes and celebrates them as the fuel of creativity and innovation. VDF sees conflict as the result of an inability to recognize and value human differences. This implies that the solution lies in learning about ourselves and one another, sharing similarities and respecting difference. It is similar to MD in that it talks about capitalizing on our differences tohelp organizations reach their fullest potential. The core task of VDF is the recognition of individual uniqueness with simultaneous acknowledgement of difference based in group identities.VDF is similar to PR in its emphasis on building relationships across lines of difference, and, like MD, it recognizes the importance of this in a diverse work team. VDF also shares some qualities with IC in that it provides activities to explore stereotypes and cultural differences, but it goes beyond ethnicity in its scope. All kinds of human differences may be included. Race and gender are often used as the core examples, but sexual orientation, language, physical abilities, age, and other personal differences are included. This can help create a space for diversity issues to be explored, and can set the stage for deeper re-evaluation and learning. Everyone can find themselves somewhere in a VDF program, and that connection is often the hook that leads people to consider the experiences of others.The VDF approach also has limitations. VDF training tends to be apolitical. Since all human differences are up for discussion, the unique histories and experiences of specific groups may be obscured or diluted. Issues of the privilege and entitlement of dominant group members may not be critically examined. In its effort to be all-inclusive. It can reduce oppression to what I call the "50/50 analysis" making the false assumption that all groups have equal power to impose their prejudices on others. In fact, the power vs. non-power paradigm may be used as disempowering and reinforcing of a divisive "us vs. them" mentality.Top of Page
The Anti-Racism Approach (AR)Anti-Racism is at the heart and soul of the "diversity movement," for without it, the other approaches would not exist. It is activist in focus and is firmly rooted in the struggles of the civil rights movement. It is based on an understanding of the history of racism in the US and explicitly emphasizes the distinctions between personal prejudice and institutional racism. Terms such as power, oppression, and activism are indicators of an AR perspective. It may seem obvious, but it is worth stating that the use of the word "racism" itself usually signals an AR perspective. That word may be seen as divisive by followers of some other models, who often consciously avoid it.The goals of AR are not limited to improved interpersonal relations between people of different races, but a total restructuring of power relations in society. Its desired outcome is a world free of racist oppression. It is internationalist, expressly political, and tied to activist movements for social justice.AR training developed in the 1960s, although its predecessors include the "race relations" training movement of the 40s and 50s as well as the many and often anonymous efforts throughout history that brought black and white people together to challenge racism. In what I call "old-style AR," much of the focus was on educating white people, and confrontation was a favorite training technique. Racism and oppression were boldly defined and studied. The "in your face" activities tended both to sound an alarm that motivated some toward anti-racist action but also shut many people down, leaving them feeling blamed, guilty, angry, and powerless.The problem wasn't in the analysis or in the goal, but in the process. We didn't recognize the importance of making space for the personal part of this work nor had we yet devloped the skills to facilitate it effectively. The personal and the political were kept quite separate, and we were distrustful of those who tried to link them too closely.Lastly, "old-style AR" focused almost exclusively on black/white issues. This is not meant to imply that those issues do not have primacy in the US context. However, the struggles of Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans were not fully included, and there was an even greater reluctance to examine sexism and heterosexism.Although "old-style AR" had its limitations, some critics seem to be looking for ways to discredit not only the model but the radical analysis it represents. I have heard AR written off as "too 60s." This comment itself reveals a great deal about how the popular media have rewritten history to demonize that era rather than portray it as one ofthe most profoundly powerful periods in the struggle for social justice. AR has grown and evolved, and I am convinced that, combined with techniques and strategies from the other models, it can help us build the base for authentic social change.
Where is Anti-Racism Today?Anti-racism education has been developing into something that has been called "Liberation Theory." "Anti-Oppression work" is another term being used. Whatever we call it, it is the idealogy that has nourished liberation movements around the globe.The other approaches define the core problem primarily as one of exclusion, viewing the dominant culture and structure as basically healthy, arguing that the problem is solely a matter of access and inclusion. This definition omits issues of power and privilege and the underlying ideology of domination/subordination. Hierarchies are reinforced and maintained, even if the players and trappings may change."New-style AR" avoids this trap, while appreciating the helpful aspects of other diversity approaches. It takes a knowledge of cultural dynamics from the Interculturalists and an understanding of the need for legal supports from the Legal-Compliance approach. From Managing Diversity, it takes the recognition of the impact of diversity on organizational effectiveness. Like Prejudice Reduction, it is committed to emotional exploration and healing, and like Valuing Differences, it focuses on a wide spectrum of human differences."New-style AR" takes all these in and adds something more. Anti-racism education understands that the core culture and institutional structures must fundamentally change, while recognizing that changes in our personal attitudes are also essential. It explicitly examines power relationships and sees the parallels, intersections, and distinctions between all forms of oppression and the ways they manifest themselves. It understands the primacy of white supremacy, and why a focus on racism must always be a core component of our educational efforts. Anti-racism understands the concepts of dominant group privilege and internalized oppression and sees the overlap and distinctions of the work that needs to be done with both dominant and oppressed group members."New-style AR" clearly links the micro-analysis and the macro, the personal and the political. It requires deep self-examination and demands action in our personal and political lives. It is inclusive and transformative, rather than additive, reformist, or assimilationist.As the noted author and anti-racism activist Vincent Harding has observed, "What we want is a new transformed humanity, not equal opportunity in a dehumanized one."This article originally was printed in a longer form for Issue No. 240 of the newsletter PeaceWork. Patti DeRosa is President of ChangeWorks Consulting, 28 South Main Street, #113, Randolph, MA 02368. She may be reached at 781-986-6150.Originally published in: Bright Ideas, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Winter 1996)Publisher: SABES/World Education, Boston, MA, Copyright 1996.Posted on SABES Web site: December 1997Top of Page
Bright Ideas (now titled Field Notes) was published by SABES, the System for Adult Basic Education Support, and was funded by the federal Adult Education Act (?353), administered by the Adult and Community Learning Services (ACLS) Unit of the Massachusetts Department of Education.
