#dei consultants

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Mike Ramsay

Published: Mar 7, 2024

Late last month, the public learned that the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) through its Equity, Anti-Racism & Anti-Oppression Department issued a teaching guide claiming the Canadian education system is “colonialist” and designed to uphold the dominant white culture. The document, entitled “Facilitating Critical Conversations,” specifies that “education is a colonial structure that centres whiteness and Eurocentricity and therefore it must be actively decolonized,” and “schooling in North America is inherently designed for the benefit of the dominant culture (i.e., white, middle-upper class, male, Christian, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied, neurotypical, etc.)”. It adds that, “race matters—it is a visible and dominant identity factor determining people’s social, political, economic, and cultural experiences.”

While the school board has since temporarily removed the guide pending review after the Ontario Ministry of Education called it divisive, it is important that this thinking which has captured our school systems not be ignored. 

That this handbook was actually produced and distributed by the TDSB did not come as a shock to me, because, in my view, it is representative of what is taking place at other school boards right across Ontario. A reasonable question to ask is how all of this came about.

Having served as a trustee for 24 years, I would suggest it emerged because of the work of frontline activists who truly believe in their cause and that the system is stacked against racialized students. However, many others in leadership positions, who have other motives, simply see this as an opportunity to enrich themselves. They did this by pretending to address the activists’ perception of the issues.

As a Black trustee and past chair of a large school board (WRDSB), I often wondered what good could come from paying DEI consultants upwards of $500.00 an hour to teach kids that if they are white, the successes they experience are not due to personal effort. Meanwhile, racialized students are being taught that despite personal effort, their chances of success are diminished because society is racist and therefore biased against them.

The fact is that we have both white and racialized kids who are doing well academically. Conversely, we have white and racialized kids who are not doing so well. What I have found as a member of my board’s discipline committee is that the kids (from all backgrounds) who are not doing well usually have other issues that are at play, including, but not limited to significant behavioural issues that are impacting their ability to learn. However, you can’t tell this to the proponents of DEI, who have been busy organizing events to celebrate and take credit for the academic success of racialized students who I believe were, for the most part, never in danger of failing school in the first place. The credit should go to the parents and caregivers who worked and continue to work hard to encourage and support their children.

Thankfully, with the passing of each day, more and more people are beginning to question the need for school initiatives that are fixated on identity politics. They are coming to realize that certain aspects of DEI instruction can actually lead to greater prejudice and even harm, as highlighted in a recent study released by the Aristotle Foundation and authored by Professor David Haskell. 

Haskell’s report shows that DEI related to “anti-racism” education and its promotion of “white privilege” doesn’t make participants more sympathetic to disadvantaged Black people as DEI trainers claim, and can in fact make them more hostile toward poor white people.  

As he elaborates, “Teaching students about white privilege, a core component of the DEI curriculum, does not make them feel more compassion toward poor people of colour but can reduce sympathy [and] increase blame…for White people struggling with poverty.”

In light of Haskell’s overwhelming evidence, I feel school boards should be required to justify the expense and existence of DEI in their organizations. Moreover, if it is doing harm as his research shows, do we not have an obligation to use legislation to stop the practice immediately in our classrooms?

I would say we do. And that is why I agree wholeheartedly with parent Liz Galvin who recently told the Halton District School Board: “Trustees, when your equity and inclusion policies are used to generate administrative procedures by un-elected DEI proponents that contradict the aims and prescribed goals of said policy, then you have an obligation to insist that they be scrutinized, amended and or removed.” 

It seems straightforward, but the practice will not stop if it is left solely to the discretion of the Ontario NDP supporting majority which dominates most school boards.

This is where the Progressive Conservative government of Premier Doug Ford comes in. Even though his government has made it clear through their 2023 Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act (Bill 98) that they want boards to be dead focused on tangible measurable learning achievement, rather than on faddish so-called “social justice” experiments, boards continue to double down on these DEI initiatives. I don’t know if the government is tiptoeing around the issue out of fear that the far-Left radicals entrenched in our education system will attack them. More and more parents and education workers from all backgrounds across our province are paying closer and closer attention to the damage being done. It is time for the Ford government to respond firmly and issue clear directives to boards to end these divisive practices.

==

You can tell it's a cult because they don't care about evidence.

The way to combat this is the same as combatting religion. You say, prove it. You're asking us to sink a tub of taxpayer money into your program. So, let's see your statistics. Let's see your before and after metrics. Let's see how you measured the success of your training program and the results. Let's see what we can expect for ourselves based on your success elsewhere.

They can't and won't. They'll instead morally brow-beat you with words like "white supremacy" and "danger" and "harm." Despite them making truth claims - that is, statements that are supposed to be taken as factually true - part of the scam is that they'll even claim that asking for this sort of evidence is itself part of the problem. This is the same tactic as a priest threatening you with hell to sell you salvation, or a salesman frightening you with murder and rape to sell you an alarm system.

At that point you say, so, no statistics, no metrics, no results, huh? And you invite them to leave.

[kindallevolve]

How do I become an organizational change management consultant?

Becoming an organizational change management consultant requires a strategic approach and specialized skills.

Firstly, obtain relevant education in business, management, or organizational psychology. Pursuing courses or certifications in organization consulting training enhances expertise. Gain practical experience through internships or entry-level consulting roles. Develop strong communication, leadership, and problem-solving skills, essential for guiding organizational transformations. Network with industry professionals to gain insights and potential job opportunities. Establish a personal brand by writing articles, attending conferences, and showcasing expertise on relevant platforms.

Finally, seek advanced certifications in change management to stand out in the field. With determination, continuous learning, and a passion for driving organizational success, one can become a successful organizational change management consultant, influencing positive transformations in various businesses and industries.

[ppcbug]

Glad to see the senate has their priorities straight 🤪

It’s crazy how high schoolers are being emailed about this misdirected garbage initiative!! Instead of worrying about if female hygiene products are available to students the concern is about if everyone has access 🤦‍♂️talking as if girls aren’t literally the only ones who experience menstruation?

Keep such products out of boys washrooms!

[gemstarb]

Watch "Video Game DEI Consultants Might Have a FINAL FORM?!" on YouTube

[bethechangehr]

We provide the best DEI HR strategies in New York providing a Clear Path with AAA Roadmap To DEI based on research, psychology, and HR best practices.

[blaqsbi]

Business: Thrive N Shine https://www.blaqsbi.com/3IwY

[inclusiveleadersgroup22]

DEI STRATEGY WITH INCLUSIVE LEADERS GROUP

Introduction

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have become more than just buzzwords; they are essential elements of a successful organization. Companies that prioritize DEI not only foster a more equitable workplace but also reap the benefits of increased innovation, better decision-making, and enhanced employee engagement. One powerful approach to achieving meaningful DEI outcomes is to establish an Inclusive Leaders Group within your organization. In this blog, we’ll delve into the importance of DEI, the role of an Inclusive Leaders Group, and how to craft a winning DEI strategy that propels your company forward.

Why DEI Matters

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are not just moral imperatives; they are smart business strategies. Research consistently shows that diverse and inclusive organizations outperform their competitors in several ways:

Innovation: A diverse workforce brings a range of perspectives, experiences, and ideas to the table, sparking creativity and innovation.

Talent Attraction and Retention: Inclusive workplaces attract top talent and foster higher employee satisfaction, reducing turnover and recruitment costs.

Market Advantage: Companies that reflect the diversity of their customer base are better positioned to understand and meet their needs, leading to increased market share.

Legal and Reputational Risk Mitigation: Robust DEI efforts can help prevent costly legal issues and protect your brand’s reputation.

The Role of Inclusive Leaders Group

An Inclusive Leaders Group is a dedicated team of leaders within your organization who champion DEI initiatives. Their responsibilities may include:

Setting the Tone: Inclusive leaders set the tone for the entire organization by modeling inclusive behaviors and attitudes.

Policy Development: They help shape and implement DEI policies that align with the company’s goals and values.

Training and Education: Inclusive leaders ensure that employees receive DEI training and have access to educational resources.

Accountability: They hold themselves and others accountable for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Feedback Mechanism: Inclusive Leaders Groups often serve as a channel for feedback, allowing employees to voice concerns and suggestions related to DEI.

Crafting a Winning DEI Strategy

To harness the full power of an Inclusive Leaders Group, you need a well-crafted DEI strategy:

Assessment and Benchmarking: Start by assessing your current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Benchmark against industry standards and competitors to identify areas for improvement.

Clear Goals and Objectives: Set specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals for your DEI efforts. These should align with your company’s overall mission and vision.

Inclusive Hiring Practices: Review and revamp your recruitment and hiring processes to ensure they are bias-free and attract diverse candidates.

Training and Education: Develop comprehensive DEI training programs for all employees, with a focus on the leadership team. Ensure that everyone understands the importance of DEI and knows how to contribute.

Transparency and Reporting: Implement regular reporting mechanisms to track progress toward your DEI goals. Share this information with employees to maintain transparency.

Accountability: Hold leaders accountable for achieving DEI objectives. Tie DEI metrics to performance evaluations and promotions.

Feedback Loop: Create a system for employees to provide anonymous feedback on DEI initiatives and the workplace climate. Use this input to refine your strategy.

Community Engagement: Encourage your Inclusive Leaders Group to engage with DEI organizations, attend conferences, and participate in relevant initiatives outside the company. This broadens perspectives and keeps your strategy current.

Continuous Improvement: DEI is an ongoing journey. Continuously assess and adjust your strategy to adapt to changing circumstances and evolving best practices.

Conclusion

A well-executed DEI strategy, supported by an Inclusive Leaders Group, can transform your organization. By prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion, you not only create a more equitable workplace but also unlock the potential for increased innovation, employee satisfaction, and competitive advantage. Embrace DEI as a core business strategy, and watch your company thrive in the evolving landscape of the 21st century.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Conor Friedersdorf

Published: May 31, 2023

The diversity, equity, and inclusion industry exploded in 2020 and 2021, but it is undergoing a reckoning of late, and not just in states controlled by Republicans, where officials are dismantling DEI bureaucracies in public institutions. Corporations are cutting back on DEI spending and personnel. News outlets such as The New York Times and New York magazine are publishing more articles that cover the industry with skepticism. And DEI practitioners themselves are raising concerns about how their competitors operate.

The scrutiny is overdue. This growing multibillion-dollar industry was embedded into so many powerful public and private institutions so quickly that due diligence was skipped and costly failures guaranteed.

Now and forever, employers should advertise jobs to applicants of all races and ethnicities, afford everyone an equal opportunity to be hired and promoted, manage workplaces free of discrimination, and foster company cultures where everyone is treated with dignity. America should conserve any gains it has made in recent years toward an equal-opportunity economy. Perhaps the best of the DEI industry spurred the country in that direction.

However, the worst of the DEI industry is expensive and runs from useless to counterproductive. And even people who highly value diversity and inclusion should feel queasy about the DEI gold rush that began in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd. A poor Black man’s death became a pretext to sell hazily defined consulting services to corporations, as if billions in outlays, mostly among relatively privileged corporate workers, was an apt and equitable response. A radical course correction is warranted––but first, let’s reflect on how we got here.

On rare occasions, a depraved act captures the attention of a nation so completely that there is a widespread impulse to vow “never again” and to act in the hope of making good on that promise. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination prompted the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, triggered a global war against al-Qaeda, among many other things, including the tenuously connected invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Floyd’s murder was similarly galvanizing. Arresting, trying, and convicting the police officers involved, and implementing new police training, was the most immediate response. But Floyd’s story suggested some additional possibilities. With several criminal convictions in his past, Floyd tried to turn his life around, preaching nonviolence in a neighborhood plagued by gun crime, serving as a mentor to young people, and trying to stay employed. He also struggled with drug addiction, layoffs due to circumstances beyond his control, and money problems that presumably played a role in the counterfeit bill he was trying to pass on the day that he was killed. If a callous police officer was the primary cause of his death, secondary causes were as complex and varied as poverty in America.

So how strange––how obscene, in fact––that America’s professional class largely reacted to Floyd’s murder not by lavishing so much of the resources spent in his name on helping poor people, or the formerly (or currently) incarcerated, or people with addictions, or the descendants of slaves and sharecroppers, or children of single mothers, or graduates of underfunded high schools, but rather by hiring DEI consultants to gather employees together for trainings.

In what, exactly?

It is often hard to say. What has one been trained to do after hearing Robin DiAngelo, the best-selling author and social-justice educator, lecture on what she calls “white fragility,” or after pondering a slide deck with cartoons meant to illustrate the difference between equality and equity as critical theorists understand it?

[ Illustration by The Atlantic. Sources: Getty / Interaction Institute for Social Change ]

Or after absorbing the racial-equity consultant Tema Okun’s widely circulated claims that attributes including “sense of urgency” and beliefs including “individualism” are traits of “white supremacy culture”? (Okun made these claims in a 1999 article that even she regards as widely misused. She once told an interviewer about the article, “It was not researched. I didn’t sit down and deliberate. It just came through me.” She has launched a website that explains her views in far more detail and with more nuance.)

Consider a specific PR pitch from a DEI consultant in 2021, chosen for how typical it is. It leads by invoking Floyd’s death as the impetus to “take bolder actions.” It promises expertise in “best practices” to corporate leaders. Then it pivots to naming a specific training on offer, “Microaggressions in the Workplace,” which, along with other offerings, will help “create a culture where employees feel valued and are encouraged to be their true selves, celebrating each individual’s uniqueness.” The pitch claims that this training “enables talent acquisition, retention, and career advancement.” Is it not inappropriate to use an unemployed Black man’s murder by police to justify expenditures on reducing unintentional micro-slights at work so the bosses can retain more talent?

Conor Friedersdorf: Can Chloé Valdary sell skeptics on DEI?

Of course, setting aside unseemly invocations of Floyd’s name, an initiative needn’t be a coherent response to his death to be defensible or worthwhile. All companies should invest in being equal-opportunity employers, including affirmative steps to ensure, for example, that managers haven’t unwittingly introduced unjust pay disparities or culturally biased dress codes. Beyond that, if DEI consultants made life better for marginalized groups or people of color or any other identifiable cohort within a given corporation or organization, or boosted corporate profits so that their fees paid for themselves, the industry could be justified on different terms.

But most DEI consulting fails those tests.

Harvard Business Review published an article in 2012 called “Diversity Training Doesn’t Work,” which drew heavily on research published in 2007 by  the sociologists Frank Dobbin, Alexandra Kalev, and Erin Kelly. “A study of 829 companies over 31 years showed that diversity training had ‘no positive effects in the average workplace,’” the article reported. “Millions of dollars a year were spent on the training resulting in, well, nothing.” In 2018, Dobbin and Kalev wrote that “hundreds of studies dating back to the 1930s suggest that antibias training does not reduce bias, alter behavior or change the workplace.”

Portending the 2020 explosion of DEI, they continued, “We have been speaking to employers about this research for more than a decade, with the message that diversity training is likely the most expensive, and least effective, diversity program around. But they persist, worried about the optics of getting rid of training, concerned about litigation, unwilling to take more difficult but consequential steps or simply in the thrall of glossy training materials and their purveyors.”

And no wonder that DEI consultants struggle to be effective: In a 2021 article in the Annual Review of Psychology, a team of scholars concluded that the underlying research on how to intervene to reduce prejudice is itself flawed and underwhelming while regularly oversold.

A paper published in the 2022 Annual Review of Psychology concluded, “In examining hundreds of articles on the topic, we discovered that the literature is amorphous and complex and does not allow us to reach decisive conclusions regarding best practices in diversity training.” The authors continued, “We suggest that the enthusiasm for, and monetary investment in, diversity training has outpaced the available evidence that such programs are effective in achieving their goals.”

Those outside the industry are hardly alone in levying harsh critiques. Many industry insiders are scathing as well. Last year in Harvard Business Review, Lily Zheng, a diversity, equity, and inclusion strategist, consultant, and speaker, posited that the DEI industrial complex has a “big, poorly kept secret”: “The actual efficacy” of most trainings and interventions is “lower than many practitioners make it out to be.” In Zheng’s telling, the industry’s problems flow in large part from “the extreme lack of standards, consistency, and accountability among DEI practitioners.”

Zheng was even more blunt in comments to New York in 2021:

When your clients are these companies that are desperate to do anything and don’t quite understand how this works, ineffective DEI work can be lucrative. And we’re seeing cynicism pop up as a result, that DEI is just a shitty way in which companies burn money.

And I’m like, Yeah, it can be.

What if instead of burning the money, we simply redirected it to the poor?

Yes, I understand that it isn’t as if that money would have gone to the neediest among us but for the DEI initiatives of the past few years. Still, I am being serious when I propose that alternative. (I should note that The Atlantic, like many media companies, holds DEI trainings for new hires. These trainings include discussions of Okun’s critique of “sense of urgency” and an updated version of the equity/equality cartoon.)

The DEI spending of 2020 and 2021 was a signal sent from executives to workers that the bosses are good people who value DEI, a signal executives sent because many workers valued it. Put another way, the outlays were symbolic. At best, they symbolized something like “We care and we’re willing to spend money to prove it.” But don’t results matter more than intention?

A more jaded appraisal is that many kinds of DEI spending symbolize not a real commitment to diversity or inclusion, let alone equity, but rather the instinctive talent that college-educated Americans have for directing resources to our class in ways that make us feel good.

In that telling, the DEI-consulting industry is social-justice progressivism’s analogue to trickle-down economics: Unrigorous trainings are held, mostly for college graduates with full-time jobs and health insurance, as if by changing us, the marginalized will somehow benefit. But in fact, the poor, or the marginalized, or people of color, or descendants of slaves, would benefit far more from a fraction of the DEI industry’s profits.

It would be too sweeping to say that no DEI consultant should ever get hired. Underneath that jargony umbrella is a subset of valuable professionals who have expertise in things like improving hiring procedures, boosting retention, resolving conflict, facilitating hard conversations after a lawsuit, processing a traumatic event, or assessing and fixing an actually discriminatory workplace. In a given circumstance, a company might need one or more of those skills. Ideally, larger organizations develop human-resources teams with all of those skills.

But the reflexive hiring of DEI consultants with dubious expertise and hazy methods is like setting money on fire in a nation where too many people are struggling just to get by. The professional class should feel good about having done something for social justice not after conducting or attending a DEI session, but after giving money to poor people. And to any CEO eager to show social-justice-minded employees that he or she cares, I urge this: Before hiring a DEI consultant, calculate the cost and let workers vote on whether the money should go to the DEI consultant or be given to the poor. Presented with that choice, I bet most workers would make the equitable decision.

[inclusiveleadersgroup]

In today's rapidly evolving business landscape, diversity and inclusion are not just buzzwords; they are essential components of a thriving workplace. Companies are increasingly recognizing the value of diversity consulting to foster a more inclusive environment and reap the benefits of a diverse workforce. In this article, we will delve into the world of diversity consulting, exploring its significance, benefits, and how it can transform your organization.

[kindallevolve]

Team Building Activities That Actually Work: Fun and Effective Approaches

Team building activities are powerful in fostering collaboration, trust, and camaraderie among team members. However, not all activities yield the desired outcomes. To truly enhance teamwork management, it's essential to choose activities that are both enjoyable and effective.

One effective approach is engaging in problem-solving challenges. These activities require team members to work together, think critically, and communicate effectively to solve problems. Such challenges promote collaboration, improve decision-making skills, and strengthen the team's problem-solving capabilities.

Another fun and effective approach is engaging in outdoor team-building activities. These activities, like obstacle courses or treasure hunts, encourage teamwork, communication, and trust-building in a dynamic and engaging setting. Outdoor activities also provide a refreshing change of environment and offer opportunities for team members to bond and connect on a personal level.

Is your organization 100% remote? If so, it is still important to get together in person periodically. We encourage you to implement in-person retreats or meetings where you bring your teams to a central location at least twice a year. It has a significant impact on relationship building and trust.

Ultimately, the key to successful team-building activities lies in selecting activities that align with the team's goals, promote collaboration, and create a positive and enjoyable experience. By incorporating fun and effective approaches, teamwork management can be strengthened, leading to a more cohesive and productive team.

>>Also Read: Transforming Employee Growth with Kindall Evolve: A Case Study on Successful Learning & Development Programs

[kamariarichmondmedia]

The Stroke Diva Fabulous Show with Corynne L. Corbett, President & CEO of The Chic Jones Company and Host of the Start Right Here Podcast

Today’s show with Corynne L. Corbett was an incredible blend of dynamism, insight, and information. Corynne, a multi-talented professional as a Dot Connector, Strategist, Editor, Author, Podcaster, and Senior Manager, brought a wealth of expertise that made this podcast episode truly exceptional! Link to interview:…

[nationwidechildrenshospital]

“Workplace diversity produces a sense of belonging where culture, sub-cultures and people are valued. Learning what makes us different is enlightening as we connect through traditions, values, ideals, culture and more.”

Dominiece Hoelyfield, Senior Consultant, Inclusion & Culture

[digitallearning-consulting]

Get in touch with us to find out how Magic EdTech DEI Consulting can help to define your DEI goals, create a strategy, execute the plan, and achieve your objectives.

[drchrisestout]

Coming April 1st: Doing the Right Thing: Ella F. Washington, PhD, on Tak...

[pumpkinpaix]

Regarding #EndOTWRacism’s summaries of 2023 OTW Board election candidate positions

Before I begin, let me say now that while I am a volunteer with the OTW, my views are personal and should not be taken as any kind of official statement from the org, its leadership, or other volunteers, especially not the candidates in question. My focus here is on the Asian candidates for obvious reasons, but this post is not meant as endorsement or disavowal of any of the candidates, whose bios and platforms can all be read here.

Do not take this as an excuse harass the mods running EOTWR. I cannot make myself clearer.

--

I am making this post to express my extreme disappointment with End OTW Racism’s post purporting to summarize the platforms of the candidates for the upcoming Board elections. It is no longer rebloggable, but can be read here.

The way that the candidates with Asian names were spoken of is deeply insulting when compared with how candidates with English-language names were discussed. Asian candidates had their platforms misrepresented, their expertise downplayed, and their lived experiences reduced down to “bringing an international presence” to the board, which was then further caveated with, “diversity alone is not going to solve the issue of racist harassment currently allowed in the OTW’s policies and enforcement practice”. While it is true that diversity alone is not a solution, it’s pretty offensive to essentially have “remember! Just because they aren’t white doesn’t mean you should vote for them!” tacked on to one of the Asian candidates’ platforms. 

End OTW Racism seems more concerned with whether or not candidates used the buzzwords they wanted to hear rather than with how racism is discussed holistically within the statements. While I can appreciate that EOTWR has a specific agenda, to say things like, “[s]he does not mention racism, racist harassment, or hiring a DEI consultant in her platform, so outside the outreach and support she mentions, there is not enough for us to conclude that these would be priorities for her” regarding Zixin Z.’s position, directly following the statement, “[s]he also mentions the need for outreach towards non-English-speaking fans and has a desire to provide support to volunteers from minority groups” is fucking laughable, especially after the initial mistake of stating that Zixin Z. only wanted to do more outreach to Chinese-speaking fans. Again, I understand that people make mistakes and that this mistake has since been corrected, but I hope it prompts some reflection on the sort of biases that would lead to such a mistake in the first place. It may have been completely innocuous, but in charged discussions about racism, please understand that it gives an impression that is difficult to shake. I do thank you for not trying to hide that this happened. 

Why is Anh P.’s lack of discussion on TOS/PAC a point against her, while Zixin Z.’s years of experience on PAC, her role as a mod on Weibo, and her background in nonprofits don’t even warrant a mention? For that matter, why did none of the Asian candidates’ skills or experience warrant mention? Qiao C. and Zixin Z. have both been volunteers with the organization for several years now, and Anh P. has years of moderation and volunteer experience elsewhere prior to her work with the OTW.

It is so fucking frustrating that despite each one of these candidates specifically talking about the need for diverse voices, they had their platforms essentially passed over because they didn’t use the right words, and it is particularly fucking aggravating to see that EOTWR will use Chinese issues as props when trying to press OTW leadership on the racism that occurs within the org, but then completely fail to connect the dots on why these candidates are running because the wrong language was used. Zixin Z. is one of the Weibo mods, for fuck’s sake. 

The entire post feels like an exercise in virtue signalling, from every time it was brought up that a candidate did not provide pronouns in their platform statements, despite every one of them having pronouns provided in their bios (why mention this detail at all? You could have simply used the pronouns), to what felt like willful obliviousness to the anti-racism stances in the Asian candidates’ platforms. It feels like the concern starts and ends with racism in Anglophone terms, on Anglophone terms.

I can respect the driving ideas behind EOTWR, even if I disagree with the way that EOTWR pursues their goals. I do believe that we want the same things in the end, and therefore chose not to interact with the many posts I have seen about the protest. However, I saw the summary post and could not let it pass without speaking.

For a protest group supposedly dedicated to ending racism in the OTW, this felt incredibly hypocritical, conscious bias or not. In my most charitable frame of mind, I can see this as misjudging and overcorrecting to ensure that there was no favoritism shown to the obvious non-white candidates lest EOTWR be accused of tokenizing– again, it is true, that diversity in and of itself is not a solution to racism. 

In my least charitable and most bitter frame of mind, I feel inclined to wonder if EOTWR, much like the OTW itself, is uncomfortable with the lack of influence they could exude over an international candidate. It would be much, much easier to push their agenda forward with more culturally familiar candidates, particularly white ones. Guilt and public scrutiny are powerful weapons and easy to wield against those with perceived privilege in our current atmosphere, often to the detriment of the actual discussion at hand in my experience. I know that’s cynical. It’s hard not to be. (For clarity's sake: I do not know the other candidates' races. This is a hypothetical.)

This isn’t a demand for an apology. I think we fetishize the capital-A Apology to the point where I find them sort of meaningless unless they are given freely. I don’t need EOTWR to agree with me, and I don’t really want to keep talking about it. Rather, I would prefer that EOTWR take action to do better as they continue in their campaign. What that action is is their decision. If they truly mean to stand against racism in the OTW, then I’d like them to demonstrate it.

--

DO NOT HARASS EOTWR MODS. I AM FUCKING SERIOUS ABOUT THIS.