Fearless Futures Podcast Q&A Episode 1: Dominant Groups Standing Up for Equity + People Who Are Not Ready [Transcript]
Listen to the episode on Apple, Spotify and Spreaker.
Hanna Naima McCloskey: Hi, you’re listening to The Fearless Futures Podcast. I’m your host, Hanna Naima McCloskey, the CEO and founder of Fearless Futures. This is the show where we unpack and interrogate mainstream methods for equity and inclusion. I’ll be sharing new perspectives, as well as alternative approaches we have developed and deployed working in daring companies across sectors around the world. Each week, we’ll explore a new angle you won’t want to miss. So, stick around.
In this episode, I’ll be sharing answers to questions we’ve received from listeners of this podcast series. As we released earlier episodes, lots of people got in touch to ask questions that had come up for them. Realizing there was probably a lot going on for folks, we also opened up the opportunity to ask any questions in our newsletter. Over the course of this episode and the following two, I’ll be offering the answers to a select set of questions that we received. Enjoy.
So, here’s one of those questions: “We speak a lot about the importance of dominant groups standing up for equity, not leaving the work solely to groups that are persistently placed at the margins of society. Being in a dominant group, though, brings access, comfort and very tangible benefits. So, why question all of that? In your experience, what’s the most effective way to start breaking this inertia? Thanks!”
This is a question that comes up a lot, of course, as you can imagine - particularly as we move towards the end of our learning programs where we move into the application phase of our education. This is something that kind of niggles at people: why would I challenge the access, comfort and the very tangible benefits that I’m receiving because of particular positions I might hold in relation to oppressive systems?
Of course, the answer is really simple: You choose to.
There isn’t any special magic that happens — it’s a principle [and] it’s a value. As a consequence, we make decisions in line with our values and our principles every single day, and we also sometimes fall short of that. This issue when it comes to thinking through the ways in which we can act in service of equity, and justice even in our day to day, is one of those very things. We make choices all the time and we get to continually — and I think this is really important — we continually to get to recommit to our values and our principles when we mess up and we fall short of them, because nobody lives perfectly aligned with their values all the time. It’s impossible.
This is really about getting your compass aligned — being really clear about what it looks like for you to be aligned with your anti-oppression compass, and moving in accordance with that. For the most part, it’s about getting really clear about the paradigm that you want to be operating and the risk that you are prepared to take, because we know that there is no way to remove risk when it comes to anti-oppression work. Of course, those risks, as I’ve shared in previous episodes, are going to be differential depending on people’s identities and their relationship to living within sites of oppression. It really is: make a choice to act in alignment on certain principles and values. And then when we’re out of alignment: realigning, re-choosing, recommitting and getting on our way.
So, another question that we’ve received is: “How do you engage with people who aren’t ready?” Again, I’m really glad this was sent in because it also comes up an awful lot, to be honest — and I think there are a few things here. The first is: how do you determine somebody’s readiness?
For me, I’d really avoid presuming that based on someone’s identity or identities that you’re able to determine whether they’re ready or not. People can really surprise you. One thing I think, with being an educator and a facilitator, is really practicing open heartedness and removing expectation from who people are, what they might be, and what they might bring into the space in order to be in a place of possibility for what comes up in people’s learning. And that, I think, is a really great practice and essential, actually, for doing the kind of facilitation and education work that we do at Fearless Futures. But I also think it’s really powerful in general, when you’re engaging people with ideas of equity and anti-oppression, that we meet them with that open heartedness and with that sense of possibility of what could be learned, of what could be unlearned, of what could be acquired. Conversely, some people who’re really bang on about how ready they are, are in fact putting on a really elaborate performance.
What’s really interesting in our learning is that often, and not always, but sometimes (or often maybe is a little too much…so sometimes) those who really claim to be ready for this kind of departure into building their equity muscle are often those who, when push comes to shove, are the most reticent. I’m going to use the word, “fragile”, that’s because (as you know, I’ve spoken about before) they’re really committed to this idea of themselves as good person and their readiness comes from this real commitment, too. “I’m a good person” and their identity as a good person in the world is really then difficult for them to engage with the idea of their participation and our collective participation within the systems that are bigger than any one individual. So, they often can then exhibit lots and lots of resistance that’s also met with this performance of their “good person” identity. So, I’d also be wary of those who are like really committed to this departure, because sometimes that isn’t often (to me) what they’re able to live out (not always! But as I say, sometimes that does also happen).
The other thing I’d think about when we think about what is readiness is: what is the context in which we’re determining people’s readiness? So, despite my effectiveness as a facilitator and an educator, over dinner with friends, for example, I have been notoriously useless at “changing anybody’s mind” when it comes to this. That’s because when I just enter a conversation with another person, as any of you might, we all are…coming into the conversation as equally legitimate in opining on any particular topic, for example, because we’re just having a conversation amongst friends. That means that being open to correction or getting it wrong [isn’t] really possible, or they’re made much less likely because there’s this assumption that we all have an equal stake in the opinions that come with the subject matter. Of course, we might have an equal stake more broadly — but obviously, that’s very different to a learning environment where people are coming into the space, knowing that they want their cup to be filled up as it were with the experience, with the exploration that comes with their engagement with co-participants, and so on.
So, when you enter a learning space, you’re automatically, by definition of it being learning, saying there are things that I don’t know here, and therefore, I’m yearning for that. Obviously, at a dinner conversation, everyone is there just to eat and socialize, so that paradigm isn’t there. That can often mean that the way in which we all enter that space isn’t conducive to reflection, to interrogation, to being vulnerable to what we don’t know.
A final thought when it comes to dinner party conversations, when we’re having ad hoc conversations with friends, one of the things we rarely think about is: are the ideas that we’re both sharing in this conversation in service of equity and justice? That’s something that I actually bring into my own practice increasingly, if I’m having a conversation with someone or it’s getting frustrating because I’m not necessarily being heard, or they think I’m not hearing them, or as things happen amongst humans is: are the ideas that we’re sharing in service of equity? That’s a really, really good compass alignment for either party to be like, “Oh, actually, no. The idea that I’ve just shared, even though, I feel really committed to it, isn’t actually in service of this end goal that we’ve both agreed is: why we’re having this conversation to figure X, Y, Z out.”
But if someone isn’t ready, convincing people rarely, rarely works. If it was easy to say: “Well, I deplore you! Honor this person’s humanity.” I really think that we wouldn’t be where we are at this moment. This podcast wouldn’t need to exist, neither would Fearless Features education and all the other manifold ways in which people are working towards building equity across our society in various guises, right? Convincing people is not useful. And we don’t actually ever think that that’s a worthwhile endeavor in our own learning work. We don’t seek to convince participants in our learning. What we do say and what we are really committed to is offering people a lens or an analysis, if they wish to prioritize equity in their lives and their work. So, allocate your energy and your resources where you have a higher chance of making a difference.
“Islamophobia and anti-semitism are rife in politics, and our media outlets which continue to cause bias, conflict and negative ideas, leading to in continued oppression and lack of safety for many folks across the world. Yet, they are often systemic oppressions which are addressed the least in the workplace, and many feel uncomfortable to discuss. Any thoughts on the best way to approach introducing this topic into our workforce for awareness and learning, especially when it has never been addressed or spoken about before?”
I’m really pleased, actually, that this was raised. I would say that there is no time like the present, because I think what’s really important is not to place oppressions outside the wider context of history [or] to separate it from the wider ways in which oppressions exist because, of course, oppressions [are] lived out connectedly. So, it’s really important that we’re seeing these issues, while they might have particular dynamics, of course, as connected and as interlocking. I would say that the things that you’d need to do for any oppression would be the case for anti-semitism and islamophobia, which is: as always, ensure you have a really sound analysis of these oppressions before you engage in these discussions. And then, as I’ve said in previous episodes, just do. Don’t feel that you need to do something really grand in order to get underway, unless of course your workplace is enthusiastic about allocating resources once you’ve shared your analysis and the commitment you have to a complete and holistic ways in which different oppressions interact, which, of course, would be fantastic. But really, you can start small to get things going. And you might find an article that you think really speaks to the kind of particular ways in which Jewish pain is denied as one of the ways in which Anti-Semitism exists, for example. And you might have two or three colleagues that you’ll come together with, and you’ll have a discussion. And that can kind of build on — and you might do the same for Islamophobia or you might find a film that you think is really powerful that you suggest that you will watch and then come together and discuss as a starting point, or you might recommend that everybody starts receiving the newsletter from Prevent Watch, which is an organization that monitors particular UK policy called Prevent, and which targets Muslims. And you might say, well, let’s all join this newsletter, and we can keep up-to-date. And there might be actions that we can take and get involved in, for example.
So, there’s no time like the present. There’s no special way for you to kind of include certain oppressions. But starting small is often a really powerful way to get momentum rather than feeling like you need to come up with something really grand. And obviously, that’s going to be different depending on people’s levels of influence within an organization.
If you’re a CEO right now, and you’re feeling energized and committed about this, and obviously, you could do something really grand. And I would encourage you to do that once you’ve kind of worked through your analysis and where the best points of entry are going to be for this in your organization.
Thank you for listening to The Fearless Futures Podcast. If you like what you hear, be sure to subscribe, rate and share this episode with a friend. If you’re interested in learning more about the work that we do at Fearless Features, please visit our website fearlessfutures.org, till next time.
