Does Everyone Deserve a Seat at the Table?

I strongly believe that everyone should be offered the opportunity to gain a seat at the proverbial “table”. Once seated, however, your behaviour dictates your worth to societal and organizational development. Should your behaviour become an intentional blockade to betterment, I firmly believe that your seat should be removed, and you should be directed to the nearest exit.  

As I have mentioned previously, we are very proud of our social media voice. We utilize our space to curate quality materials from around the globe that can all be tied back to impactful diversity, leadership, and, in turn, human resource content. 

There is a great responsibility that comes with being a media source and we have a firm understanding and appreciation of that responsibility, specifically when it comes to diversity and inclusion. Behind each piece we choose to post, we believe there is useful take-away information that will help to better yourself, your work-life and your place of business.

We uphold this responsibility with an empathetic mindset and constantly ask ourselves what the piece is saying of value, who is producing it, and what will it lead our followers to not only think, but also to feel. We must be accountable for the information we are offering and the brand names / thought-leaders we are promoting for further insights. The power of social media is so great, that even the mere mention of a name in a negative light still garners valuable attention.  Some certainly believe, “There is no such thing as bad press”.

No stranger to grabbing the headlines with aggressive discriminatory language, American lawyer, conservative social and political commentator, author, and syndicated columnist Ann Coulter has violated her way into the media several times in the last month or so.

A couple of prime examples: 

Several weeks ago, we celebrated “National Coming Out Day”, a day where the LGBT community and their allies are encouraged to publicly identify themselves. 

Ms. Coulter chose to respond to National Coming Out by tweeting:

"Last Thursday was national 'coming out' day. This Monday is national 'disown your son' day."

Soon after, the recent U.S. Presidential debates were the dominant topic of choice in the social media world, as one would of course expect. 

Ms. Coulter chose to tweet the following about President Obama:

"I highly approve of Romney's decision to be kind and gentle to the retard"

She chose to counter the beautiful letter written to her by Special Olympian John Franklin Stephens – one that politely, intelligibly, and calmly explained to her why her choice words matter – with:

“I was not referring to someone with Down syndrome. I was referring to the president of the United States,” said Coulter, adding that she views “retard” as a synonym for loser. “Do you call people with mental disabilities retards because I don’t. I think that’s a nasty thing to do.” – Disability Scoop

When it comes to aggressive behaviour, it’s important to figure out what the aggressor’s goal is in order to best assess how it will affect you.

Ms. Coulter chooses to be emotionally violent because she and her team have a very specific understanding of the outcomes that her words attract. Media outlets, large or small, will print her name, which leads to her personal financial gain, and an attraction of like-minded people to her preferred political party.

Popular television programs such as “The View” and “Piers Morgan Tonight” invited Ms. Coulter to their program to specifically discuss her “views and beliefs” of the diversity conversation.  They choose to invite her, ostensibly to offer a different view of the world to the public, no matter how puerile some might believe that view to be.

As a diversity professional, I firmly believe in hearing all sides of the story, inside and out –even if that means enduring “opinions” with which I disagree. However, by using the type of language she does and by showcasing her lack of empathy or public class, Ms. Coulter doesn’t offer an opinion, only infliction.

Seeking to outrage people by utilizing discrimination does nothing but attract attention. When there is no substance to what you are saying, you are now officially a nuisance to society. Additionally, justifying your intentional verbal violence by calling it “free speech” is dismissive and offensive to the true argument behind the reason for freedom of speech.  

Effective points can be made without defaming another person. There is so much brilliance to be shared and gained across political lines, cultures, and beliefs. People such as Ms. Coulter are the true barricades to that un-tapped and sorely-needed innovation.  

We can certainly be bold with what we have to say. We can even be “shocking”. But to be bold and shocking for the sake of public attention and notoriety is just plain wrong in our opinion. Arrow-pointing discriminatory language accompanied with a complete disregard for all around you is just a cheap sucker punch.  

Global Learning encourages all persons – be they liberal, conservative or moderate – to speak their minds; but when you seek to provoke harm to others, we should no longer offer you the space or venue in which to promote your narrow-minded goals. We hope all bloggers and media sources might consider the same tactic.

This will be the last time we post anything about Ann Coulter to any of our accounts. She is not worthy of our time, nor yours, if you are a true diversity champion.

She is no longer welcome at our table.

“Whoever one is, and wherever one is, one is always in the wrong if one is rude.”

  ~Maurice Baring

The Shore's Tides Have Changed

Within each of our demographics, we find even more demographics. Each of us is a vast, never-ending source of subcategories, which equate to our individual identity. We must consistently focus on that identity to find emotional understanding and development. That individual identity is diversity.

I watched an episode of MTV’s “Jersey Shore”. For one full hour, I had a glimpse into the reality-TV lives of Snooki, J- Wow, DJ Pauly D., Vinny, Ronnie, Sammy “Sweetheart”, Deena, and of course Mike “the Situation”. 

There, I said it. I actually struggled to write that. I attempted to come up with several clever ways of bypassing the odd shame I was feeling in the admission; so I opted to just dive right in. 

After hosting a Thanksgiving dinner for family and friends, and all had left for the evening, my teenage son popped on the television in the midst of cleaning up. Sifting through the PVR (DVR for you U.S. folks), he chose MTV’s “Jersey Shore”, which is now airing its final season.  

Through the years, I have caught a minute or two of the show, which inevitably included lots of aggressive behaviour, foul language, alcohol, and enough sexuality to make even Kinsey flinch. 

My first reaction was to tell my son to turn the show off; but then, out of nowhere, he began to describe to me some of the interesting changes the cast members have been going through. 

He told me in his own words about how Sam and Ronny, after years of volatile behaviour, are actively trying to maintain a calm, healthy relationship based on communication. He mentioned how D.J. Pauly D. –featured on his own MTV show “The Pauly D Project” – is now a world famous club D.J.; his brand is built on dedication to skill development, reliability, team building and positive attitude. Vinny, after revealing last season his struggle with anxiety, has now become a mental health and equality advocate.

Then there are the two heavy-hitter topics brought to the table this season:

• Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi is now sober, engaged, and pregnant.  
• Mike, “the Situation” sought addiction treatment, and is now allowing us to watch his resurgence into his life while maintaining his sobriety. 

With examples such as Snooki removing herself from the house to live separately from her housemates and “the Situation” reaching out to his housemates to apologize for his past behaviour, MTV is going out of their way to showcase some of the life altering, healthy choices the cast members are now making. 

While my son was describing to me each of these cast members’ journey from day one until now, he was conveying to me – without realizing it – that he knows change can be made. He knows that we can not only choose to remove ourselves from negative situations, but that we can avoid them altogether. He knows that we can choose to take responsibility for our actions, and actively seek to heal the emotional damage our poor behaviour can cause. He knows that yes, while we in most cases operate within group settings, we each have individual journeys and needs. 

These lessons, despite their unexpected origins, are invaluable.

The cast of “Jersey Shore”, believe it or not, represents how diversity permeates all demographics. I am by no means advocating for you to bust out a recording of the latest “Jersey Shore” episode in your next diversity training session; but here is my thinking:

We have eight people, each of whom look similar to one another, grew up in similar areas, and share a culture that some might not believe is real, until you actually visit the Jersey shore for yourself. But each of these eight people carries a private story. They each walked a journey that led them to my television set, and that led my son to some interesting and important examples of life’s trials and tribulations.

“They always say time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself.”
- Andy Warhol

Choice Language

The language we use, both casually and deliberately, has proven to have a deeper significance when it comes to the emotional health of ourselves and those around us.

Unless you are living with a disability that dictates otherwise, we – as the human race – choose our words. Sometimes we choose them too quickly, and we haven’t thought about the broader impact they may carry. Sometimes we choose words specifically as a tool to hit a direct emotional target. Regardless of the intention (or lack thereof), at the most microscopic level, our brains and hearts have decided to say the things we do.

Casual use of any discriminatory language, even if not directly being used to dominate or demean another person, can still suggest that the behaviour of using the language is permissible.

This week Jezebel released a fantastic article and video from Wisconsin news anchor Jennifer Livingston, responding to a viewer email which stated: 

“It's unusual that I see your morning show, but I did so for a very short time today. I was surprised indeed to witness that your physical condition hasn't improved for many years. Surely you don't consider yourself a suitable example for this community's young people, girls in particular. Obesity is one of the worst choices a person can make and one of the most dangerous habits to maintain. I leave you this note hoping that you'll reconsider your responsibility as a local public personality to present and promote a healthy lifestyle.” 

Here is Ms. Livingston’s brilliant response:

In the video Ms. Livingston states: 

“Now I am a grown woman, and luckily for me, I have a very thick skin — literally, as that email pointed out, and otherwise. That man's words mean nothing to me. But what really angers me about this is there are children who don't know better… The internet has become a weapon. Our schools have become a battleground. And this behaviour is learned. It is passed down from people like the man who wrote me that email. If you are at home, and you are talking about the fat newslady, guess what? Your children are probably going to go to school and call someone fat. We need to teach our kids how to be kind, not critical, and we need to do that by example.” 

Children have to decipher what’s appropriate or not by navigating the influences of their parents/family, peers, educators, the media and society at large. That’s no easy task, for an extremely impressionable mind. Are you being mindful of the permissions you are subtly granting the children around you? 

 

October marks National Bullying Prevention Month. There are a multitude of organizations, such as GLSEN, GLAAD,  The Trevor Project, the Born This Way Foundation, who are spending millions of dollars to actively dismantle the bullying culture.

Bullies can be easily identified: they are those that choose language specifically to harm. However, what about those who casually use discriminatory language with no real hurtful intentions?

I was left a bit dismayed when reading a recent article released from GOOD magazine about the meaning and variety of uses for the word “gay”. When I first came across the article, my initial thought was that I was going to find a piece dedicated to derailing the casual use of the phrase “that’s so gay.”

To my unwanted surprise, the writer suggested the issues that arise from using the term “gay” in a negative connotation, would dissipate should we as a society accept the next shift in language when it comes to the definition of the word. That the casual use of the phrase “that’s so gay” is really just to point out that something is of off-kilter in a negative way, having nothing to do with sexual orientation. The writer cautions that perhaps, just perhaps, gay people are being a touch oversensitive. 

It always amazes me when people question “political correctness”. What many deem as “political correctness”, I simply view as very basic respect.

I have a rather simple theory: if I know that there is someone who validly would rather I not use certain terminology as it depicts their demographic in an inferior light, regardless of my intention, I’m not going to use it. Not just “do my best” to remember; I’m going to actively remove the terminology from my lexicon. 

De-contextualization is complicated. If this is your goal in using derogatory terminology than what else are you doing to promote your cause? Are you creating petitions? Are you starting a real social movement? Just tossing in the phrase “that’s so gay” in casual conversation is nothing short of lazy.

It’s your right to feel, think and speak any way you choose. But allowing yourself to be verbally harmful intentionally is criminal. Allowing yourself to be unintentionally harmful is truculent. 

“The limits of my language means the limits of my world.“ – Ludwig Wittegenstein
 

FYI: NoHomophobes.com has launched a running ticker of twitter updates that use the following terms. Between July 5th, 2012 and October 2nd, 2012:

• The word “Faggot” had been tweeted 2,690,629 times.
• The phrase “So Gay” had been tweeted 960,073 times.
• The phrase “No homo” had been tweeted 902,891 times.
• The term “Dyke” had been tweeted 371,165.