Seattle hosts Segregated Diversity Training for Employees

[GP270watch]

A fair number of Atlas posters thoughts can be summarized as "Let me be racist in peace".

Do you think segregating people for a day is a good idea?

 Yes because people who do this type of training have to account for the completely insane ways some white people react. I've read a lot about this and it's crazy the anger, entitlement, and fragility they are encountered with.

 If you find this type of training unwanted or even patronizing, don't be a damn racist at work, admonish your white coworkers when they are racist. It's 2020 already and we shouldn't have to be doing diversity training, the fact we do is the real outrage.

Do you think people are reacting negatively because they're being segregated based on race? I would react negatively to something such as that. If we're really trying to end racism that is not the way.

I agree that admonishing white co workers who are racist is needed, but you don't need to make the workplace 1959 Alabama for a day to accomplish that.

You can dislike training such as this and also not be racist. This isn't an either or.

 Not all the training is always separated. But one of the key factors that is common is that some white people feel they're being "attacked" and usually go on the defensive, some even freakout, cry, insult the trainer, or even justify their racism because of "stuff like this". I would imagine the separation like most things was done for the benefit of whites.

 I mean you seen that same attitude in this thread. Liberals are going to lose because of "stuff like this". If you're not a racist what's so hard about sitting through the talking points, maybe learning something, while you're being paid.

[Horus]

A fair number of Atlas posters thoughts can be summarized as "Let me be racist in peace".

Do you think segregating people for a day is a good idea?

 Yes because people who do this type of training have to account for the completely insane ways some white people react. I've read a lot about this and it's crazy the anger, entitlement, and fragility they are encountered with.

 If you find this type of training unwanted or even patronizing, don't be a damn racist at work, admonish your white coworkers when they are racist. It's 2020 already and we shouldn't have to be doing diversity training, the fact we do is the real outrage.

Do you think people are reacting negatively because they're being segregated based on race? I would react negatively to something such as that. If we're really trying to end racism that is not the way.

I agree that admonishing white co workers who are racist is needed, but you don't need to make the workplace 1959 Alabama for a day to accomplish that.

You can dislike training such as this and also not be racist. This isn't an either or.

 Not all the training is always separated. But one of the key factors is the white people feel they're being "attacked" and usually go on the defensive, some even freakout, cry, insult the trainer, or even justify their racism because of "stuff like this". I would imagine separating the like most things people was done for the benefit of whites.

 I mean you seen that same attitude in this thread. Liberals are going to lose because of "stuff like this". If you're not a racist what's so hard about sitting through the talking points, maybe learning something, while you're being paid.

The fact that I'm not a racist is precisely why i have a problem with segregation...

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Makes sense. Racism is really a “white person problem,” not a “people of colour problem.”

As for trying to emphasize the racist implications of individualism, I’d say the message is clear. Individualism likes to presuppose that one’s work ethic, character, and merit fairly determine one’s station in life. If you’re poor, it’s because you haven’t worked hard enough, and if you’re rich, it’s because you’re special and deserving. This worldview makes it so challenging for white people to accept that there are invisible barriers standing in the way holding people of colour back. This worldview makes it so easy for white people to shout that everyone should just shut up about racism because it will magically go away if we only stop talking about it—and that black people have “all the same opportunities as we do” to “make something of their lives.”

If you ask me, these are exactly the beliefs that sit at the centre of white people’s problems with diversity and racism, so I’m all for any program that tries to eat away at these cancers directly. Race is real. Racism is real. Equity preaches that we recognize people may need different things to succeed, and that we try to give everyone appropriate, targeted supports. In this case, it’s very clear that white people need a hell of a lot more to uproot their biases than racialized folk do. Let’s give it to them—it’ll help everyone.

[Horus]

Makes sense. Racism is really a “white person problem,” not a “people of colour problem.”

As for trying to emphasize the racist implications of individualism, I’d say the message is clear. Individualism likes to presuppose that one’s work ethic, character, and merit fairly determine one’s station in life. If you’re poor, it’s because you haven’t worked hard enough, and if you’re rich, it’s because you’re special and deserving. This worldview makes it so challenging for white people to accept that there are invisible barriers standing in the way holding people of colour back. This worldview makes it so easy for white people to shout that everyone should just shut up about racism because it will magically go away if we only stop talking about it—and that black people have “all the same opportunities as we do” to “make something of their lives.”

If you ask me, these are exactly the beliefs that sit at the centre of white people’s problems with diversity and racism, so I’m all for any program that tries to eat away at these cancers directly. Race is real. Racism is real. Equity preaches that we recognize people may need different things to succeed, and that we try to give everyone appropriate, targeted supports. In this case, it’s very clear that white people need a hell of a lot more to uproot their biases than racialized folk do. Let’s give it to them—it’ll help everyone.

Race is only real in our society because Europeans made it real 400 years ago. Other than that it's a social construct. Are you using Eurocentric norms to define race?

Also, I certainly haven't seen anyone in this thread say "shut up about racism" or anything close to it. We just don't think segregation, however brief, is means towards ending bigotry.

To me at least, comments such as this, from lily white Canadians who probably have a grand total of one black associate, are just "race realism" with good PR on top.

[lfromnj]

They are going to be doing this with children as soon as schools open back up.  The woke racialism stuff is really popular in the education profession.

Brown v Board 2.0 in 5 years.

[lfromnj]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is the Seattle city government and stop calling it "liberalism" The Seattle city council is absolutely controlled by woke socialists. The Amazon backed corporatism all lost.

[GP270watch]

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is the Seattle city government and stop calling it "liberalism" The Seattle city council is absolutely controlled by woke socialists. The Amazon backed corporatism all lost.

Durkan is a liberal, the leftists are useful idiots.

[lfromnj]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is the Seattle city government and stop calling it "liberalism" The Seattle city council is absolutely controlled by woke socialists. The Amazon backed corporatism all lost.

Durkan is a liberal, the leftists are useful idiots.

Yet one side has a super majority, leftism and this type of wokeness isn't always separable. They see anything which they see as racist as a form of hierarchy which must be torn down. This includes terms such as individualism and similar as individualism can very often perpetuate a hierarchy according to them.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is the Seattle city government and stop calling it "liberalism" The Seattle city council is absolutely controlled by woke socialists. The Amazon backed corporatism all lost.

Durkan is a liberal, the leftists are useful idiots.

I'd argue it's not especially liberal although that term has been bastardised in the context of US politics.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Makes sense. Racism is really a “white person problem,” not a “people of colour problem.”

As for trying to emphasize the racist implications of individualism, I’d say the message is clear. Individualism likes to presuppose that one’s work ethic, character, and merit fairly determine one’s station in life. If you’re poor, it’s because you haven’t worked hard enough, and if you’re rich, it’s because you’re special and deserving. This worldview makes it so challenging for white people to accept that there are invisible barriers standing in the way holding people of colour back. This worldview makes it so easy for white people to shout that everyone should just shut up about racism because it will magically go away if we only stop talking about it—and that black people have “all the same opportunities as we do” to “make something of their lives.”

If you ask me, these are exactly the beliefs that sit at the centre of white people’s problems with diversity and racism, so I’m all for any program that tries to eat away at these cancers directly. Race is real. Racism is real. Equity preaches that we recognize people may need different things to succeed, and that we try to give everyone appropriate, targeted supports. In this case, it’s very clear that white people need a hell of a lot more to uproot their biases than racialized folk do. Let’s give it to them—it’ll help everyone.

Race is only real in our society because Europeans made it real 400 years ago. Other than that it's a social construct. Are you using Eurocentric norms to define race?

Also, I certainly haven't seen anyone in this thread say "shut up about racism" or anything close to it. We just don't think segregation, however brief, is means towards ending bigotry.

To me at least, comments such as this, from lily white Canadians who probably have a grand total of one black associate, are just "race realism" with good PR on top.

I don’t really care what you think about my motives. I do take issue with the way you seem to think I’m stupid, though. Believe it or not, I’m well aware that race is a social construct, thanks—but the fact that it’s a social construct doesn’t make it any less real. It’s way too real. The way to stop it from being the all-too-deterministic factor it is, however, is not to shut anti-racists up. And contrary to the words you put in my mouth, I was not accusing anyone of doing that in this thread (that is, until you decided to attack me personally so you could call my words cheap). I was saying that an ideology of individualism tends to go hand-in-hand with the lie of meritocracy. Pretending we can just have a fair meritocracy without doing anything about existing, race-based inequality of opportunity is a huge problem that perpetuates systemic racism. That is what’s tantamount to calling on everyone to shut up about race. We here in this thread may know better, but I should hope that we aren’t the people who most need diversity training (though, of course, we could still benefit from it).

Not sure what to say in response to your belief that white folk and people of colour should always have the same diversity training, though. We “segregate” training based on need all the time. I’ll admit it’s not typically done by race, but if the issue itself is race, it makes a lot of sense. The only reason we wouldn’t do it is because we’d be “scared” to talk frankly about the realities of racism or to acknowledge something “awkward.” We need to get rid of that stigma. Plus, I can’t even imagine what it’s like to be a black person sitting through a diversity training session listening to that one token white guy “play devil’s advocate.” Or to be the person everyone looks at in the room. Or to be relied on as “the expert.” Or to receive the implicit message that racism is something I need to work on too, as if I am to blame for white people treating me differently.

To argue that this is “segregation” in the way that whites-only pools were is intellectually dishonest. It’s needs-based training. If you think white people don’t need different anti-racism training than people of colour, that’s a whole different can of worms.

[Horus]

Makes sense. Racism is really a “white person problem,” not a “people of colour problem.”

As for trying to emphasize the racist implications of individualism, I’d say the message is clear. Individualism likes to presuppose that one’s work ethic, character, and merit fairly determine one’s station in life. If you’re poor, it’s because you haven’t worked hard enough, and if you’re rich, it’s because you’re special and deserving. This worldview makes it so challenging for white people to accept that there are invisible barriers standing in the way holding people of colour back. This worldview makes it so easy for white people to shout that everyone should just shut up about racism because it will magically go away if we only stop talking about it—and that black people have “all the same opportunities as we do” to “make something of their lives.”

If you ask me, these are exactly the beliefs that sit at the centre of white people’s problems with diversity and racism, so I’m all for any program that tries to eat away at these cancers directly. Race is real. Racism is real. Equity preaches that we recognize people may need different things to succeed, and that we try to give everyone appropriate, targeted supports. In this case, it’s very clear that white people need a hell of a lot more to uproot their biases than racialized folk do. Let’s give it to them—it’ll help everyone.

Race is only real in our society because Europeans made it real 400 years ago. Other than that it's a social construct. Are you using Eurocentric norms to define race?

Also, I certainly haven't seen anyone in this thread say "shut up about racism" or anything close to it. We just don't think segregation, however brief, is means towards ending bigotry.

To me at least, comments such as this, from lily white Canadians who probably have a grand total of one black associate, are just "race realism" with good PR on top.

I don’t really care what you think about my motives. I do take issue with the way you seem to think I’m stupid, though. Believe it or not, I’m well aware that race is a social construct, thanks—but the fact that it’s a social construct doesn’t make it any less real. It’s way too real. The way to stop it from being the all-too-deterministic factor it is, however, is not to shut anti-racists up. And contrary to the words you put in my mouth, I was not accusing anyone of doing that in this thread (that is, until you decided to attack me personally so you could call my words cheap). I was saying that an ideology of individualism tends to go hand-in-hand with the lie of meritocracy. Pretending we can just have a fair meritocracy without doing anything about existing, race-based inequality of opportunity is a huge problem that perpetuates systemic racism. That is what’s tantamount to calling on everyone to shut up about race. We here in this thread may know better, but I should hope that we aren’t the people who most need diversity training (though, of course, we could still benefit from it).

Not sure what to say in response to your belief that white folk and people of colour should always have the same diversity training, though. We “segregate” training based on need all the time. I’ll admit it’s not typically done by race, but if the issue itself is race, it makes a lot of sense. The only reason we wouldn’t do it is because we’d be “scared” to talk frankly about the realities of racism or to acknowledge something “awkward.” We need to get rid of that stigma. Plus, I can’t even imagine what it’s like to be a black person sitting through a diversity training session listening to that one token white guy “play devil’s advocate.” Or to be the person everyone looks at in the room. Or to be relied on as “the expert.” Or to receive the implicit message that racism is something I need to work on too, as if I am to blame for white people treating me differently.

To argue that this is “segregation” in the way that whites-only pools were is intellectually dishonest. It’s needs-based training. If you think white people don’t need different anti-racism training than people of colour, that’s a whole different can of worms.

The intent might not be the same, but at the end of the day you can call it "needs based training"  all you want, and your intentions may be noble, but it is still segregation based on race. This reminds me of George Carlin on soft language, it went from "Jim Crow" to "segregation" to "needs based training."

Also, no one can convince white people to not be racist by talking down to them in "diversity training." Other than maybe Jane Elliott. Only through interracial friendships, dialogue and understanding can we move past race. It's our duty to call out racism yes, but it has been shown time and time again that diversity training like this does. not. work. Once again, no one has said they don't "want to do anything" about systemic racism. We just don't believe that segregation is a step in solving it. You keep throwing out outrageous strawmen.

If race is way too real, and I agree it is, putting black people in one room and white people in another will not make it less so. It will amplify it.

[HillGoose]

segregation is for massive idiots

[fhtagn]

If there were any real racists made to attend this "diversity training", segregated training intended to put down white people isn't going to make them change their minds.

[HillGoose]

If there were any real racists made to attend this "diversity training", segregated training intended to put down white people isn't going to make them change their minds.

yeah i'm wondering what they would do if somebody identified with no race bcuz race is a scam invented by big gov to keep us down and taxed to death and sh**t.

[Badger]

What is the hypothetical rationale behind this anyway?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

What is the hypothetical rationale behind this anyway?

something about getting in touch with your whiteness in order to overcome it.

[dead0man]

Honestly, where is the Honest Liberal Outrage on this issue?  There is nothing "liberal" about this; it is about as liberal as laws in countries that put your whole family in jail if you do something wrong.

Fuzzy, 4 of the 5 red and maroon avatars in this thread have taken a position on this, and 3 of those 4 oppose it just like you do. That's only a 25% approval rating.

it got worse....3 out of 8 I think now.  And maybe our more sheep like lefties are probably scared to come in because of the lack of consensus from their side of the aisle.

The Biden presidency is going to be very entertaining, watching all the fights inside your big tent will be fun.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is the Seattle city government and stop calling it "liberalism" The Seattle city council is absolutely controlled by woke socialists. The Amazon backed corporatism all lost.

Durkan is a liberal, the leftists are useful idiots.

Yet one side has a super majority, leftism and this type of wokeness isn't always separable. They see anything which they see as racist as a form of hierarchy which must be torn down. This includes terms such as individualism and similar as individualism can very often perpetuate a hierarchy according to them.

Say what you like about them, Jacobin magazine (probably the most important DSA affiliated news outlet) is definitely on the "diversity training cynical" side.

[Badger]

What is the hypothetical rationale behind this anyway?

something about getting in touch with your whiteness in order to overcome it.

Okay, does anyone have a non troll answer?

[T'Chenka]

What is the hypothetical rationale behind this anyway?

something about getting in touch with your whiteness in order to overcome it.

Okay, does anyone have a non troll answer?

As far as I can tell, that's actually the real answer, or close to it anyways. Maybe substitute "privilege" for "whiteness".

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

What is the hypothetical rationale behind this anyway?

something about getting in touch with your whiteness in order to overcome it.

Okay, does anyone have a non troll answer?

I see you are blessedly unfamiliar with Robin DeAngelo.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

more to the point, there is no evidence that "diversity training" actually does anything than provide cover for institutions and corporations to cover for lawsuits while a small number of middlemen collect their salary; while ensuring racial solidarity is broken down to deter unionization etc.

Basically its a window in to the mind of the liberal. Solve poverty by giving cheques and properly funded education to the poor, who are disproportionately black? Nah, that's too hard; better just spend the equivalent amount of money to pay some college educated snake oil salesman so they can boring and patronizing powerpoints to sanitation workers.

This is happening in service of a growing but still disproportionately small Black (and more broadly non-white) professional class. The professional class in general is wildly blind to its own elitism and inaccessibility - if you have rapidly growing inequality between the elite professional and middle/working classes combined with marginally more non-white people in elite ranks, very few people will actually be served. The people demanding this training are so incredibly blind to the experience of a poor person or subordinate worker that they simply don't know what would help them.

There are some generous interpretations justifying diversifying the non-white professional class at the expense of the even more non-white working class that are worth considering. One is that fostering a larger Black professional class will begin to produce multi-generational wealth that has given whites a half-century (at least) in economic and social dominance. Another is that a larger professional Black (and refugee, etc.) class will, because it will typically (but certainly not always) have more connections and commonalities with the dispossessed, will be less closeted and guarded in their elite professional attitudes. I'm skeptical of the goodness and truth of both of these arguments but they're worth considering.

Of course, the city is likely offering these services because they are getting more demand from businesses staffed by uncreative professional "diversity" and "inclusion" officers who have no idea what they are doing. The people making these demands likely don't understand how businesses generate and wield the power they have in a place like Seattle.

[Adam Griffin]

I'm personally a strong believer in negative reinforcement and berating in general, so I'm absolutely against this. Put everybody in the same room, let the victim-framing white types go on the defensive, get yelled at by PoC, cry, scream, try to stomp out, etc: it merely speeds up already-occurring sociological processes. Either they're already too far gone and burrow even deeper into the well of racism - making it harder to hide and easier for the body politic to excise them - or they end up genuinely reflecting upon their thoughts and actions, and make a serious attempt at bettering themselves. Either way, the training serves its purpose (and far more expediently).

[Blue3]

I'm not reading this entire thread, but this is a ridiculous interpretation. Ever hear of affinity groups?

It's a workshop on diversity.

For part of it, employees self-sort into which session is most appropriate for them: a place for white people to examine their white privilege and deconstruct biases and unjust systems of privilege/oppression, and to self education; or a place for people of color to examine how systems of privilege and oppression have been holding them back and how to better support each other and advocate for themselves.

How unfair would it be to put a white person in an irrelevant session, or a person of color in an irrelevant session? It is not the burden of people of color to educate white people. White people need to educate themselves.