Toward a More Nuanced Conversation…Getting to “Both/And”
Last week was a momentous one for the burgeoning culture of inclusion at Joy Global. We spent two days kicking off the work of our Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) Advisory Council, bringing together a very diverse team from across the organization to discuss the opportunity, intent and strategy for D&I at our company. It was energizing and exciting, but also challenging and messy at times. Like the topic itself, our discussions about D&I were complex and nuanced, and the path to determine a way forward for the group was not a simple, straight line.
The first day was spent in a workshop, to ground the group in some basic ideas and best practices from the D&I space. We recognize that, as a company, we’re not on the cutting edge of this issue. But that means that we have a great opportunity to learn from those who’ve come before us, and that’s largely what we set out to do. Early in the afternoon, we participated in an exercise where we were asked to go around the room and indicate things that we “Can Say” or “Can’t Say” in our organization regarding gender, race/ethnicity, disability, and sexual orientation. There was a sheet of paper posted for each topic, and we went from one sheet to another in groups, writing our thoughts.
During the session debrief, our facilitator noted that someone had written “Say nothing” under the “Can Say” column for sexual orientation. The facilitator challenged the group, saying “If you don’t say anything, then you really don’t care about having an inclusive culture. You either continue saying nothing, or you move toward inclusion.” It was stated as fact, and it rubbed people the wrong way. It was “either/or”, and we needed to have a more nuanced discussion.
Fortunately, that nuanced discussion emerged. Over the next 90 minutes, the group talked about the fact that we need to set expectations for all employees of what having an inclusive culture at our company means. We talked about the need to equip leaders to have open, affirming conversations in those moments when an employee chooses to share something that might be difficult or frightening to share. We talked about moving from tolerance for others, into respecting others’ uniqueness, and ultimately toward celebrating what makes each of us different.
Perhaps most importantly, we got away from “either you care about changing or you don’t”, into a more complex conversation about where we are today, and where we want to go, and what the map to get there might look like. It was a messy 90 minutes, but it was ultimately productive, and it became a touchpoint for the remainder of the meeting.
Of course, last week there was much said and written about the mass shooting in Orlando at the Pulse nightclub. The topic came up briefly, and it was interesting to me that there seemed to be this effort by many media outlets to quickly, cleanly categorize the violent attack. It seemed to be either a terror attack, or a hate crime. It was reported as an attack on the LGBTQ community in one space, and an attack on the Hispanic community in another. Culturally, we seem to gravitate toward these simple categorizations. But, as some outlets have begun reporting, it’s so much more complex than that. Intersectionality, a word used to describe the effect of being a part of multiple minority groups, is pertinent here, and a necessary part of the larger conversation. The oppressive systems (e.g. homophobia, racism, sexism, class) that adversely impact someone from the LGBTQ community, for example, can become multiplied when that same person is also part of the Hispanic community.
“Both/And” matters. It matters in the coverage of a tragic event, and it matters in the way that we talk about diversity and inclusion. If we choose to talk about diversity in simplistic terms, disregarding the layering of multiple aspects of identity, we’re only getting part of the picture. And the complexities that we ignore are vital to creating a truly inclusive culture.
Earlier this week, I was listening to the Nerdist podcast[1], and host Chris Hardwick was talking with television producer Chuck Lorre and actress/neuroscientist Mayim Bialik. At one point in the conversation, Hardwick asked Mayim Bialik whether she felt a conflict between her scientific work and her Jewish faith. Her answer was profound:
“I don’t really feel a conflict, you know?...For me, the notion of having a power greater than myself is helpful. It’s humbling, and it’s grounding. It gives me perspective, and I feel like, for me, once I started learning more about the philosophy of religion and understanding why humans behave the way they do in structured groups, for me, it gave me a lot of comfort. And I’m a person who likes structure, and I like ritual. I’m part of a people that, even if we’re not religiously identified, we’re culturally identified for thousands and thousands of years. So I don’t really feel a conflict about it. Everything beautiful I learn about science affirms my faith that I didn’t make it, and everything beautiful about feeling connected to something bigger than me makes me wonder about the neurochemistry behind that set of sensations, and where is consciousness in the brain, and what does it mean to feel in love with someone…I love knowing about that. I think that’s divine. The brain is an unbelievable thing. That’s why I chose to study that in particular.”
**************************************************************************************
In a week where I was thinking a lot about “either/or”, and the complexities of this D&I space, I was given the chance to listen to someone talk about the complexities of her career, her faith, and her scientific pursuits – and conclude that all of these things exist together. They are all a part of her integrity, and not only does one not cancel the other out. Each aspect of what she talked about needs and feeds the others.
Our brains are amazing. We’re built, physically, neurochemically, and philosophically, to handle the complexities of our world. But we often don’t. Maybe it’s that simple categorization and stereotypes allow us to make faster decisions. I don’t think, though, that they allow us to make better decisions. Or more innovative decisions. Or engage in more fulfilling relationships.
We need to embrace the complexities of “both/and”. We have it in ourselves to do it. We owe it to ourselves and each other.
[1] Nerdist Podcast Channel, http://nerdist.com/podcasts/nerdist-podcast-channel/
