Popular in Sociology

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Culture and Society

Carceral Entrapments: Views from the Prison/Street Interface in India

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Mahuya Bandyopadhya

Culture and Society

Pre-problem families: predictive analytics and the future as the present

University of Southampton Rosalind Edwards

Ethnicity and Racism

Were Muslim Barbarians Really Knocking On the Gates of Ontario?

University of Ottawa Natasha Bakht

Culture and Society

Poor People’s Survival Strategies

The University of Texas at Austin Javier Auyero

Ethnicity and Racism

Sociology of Whiteness

Arizona State University Monica McDermott

Ethnicity and Racism

Narratives of Harm and the case for detention abolition

Queen's University Sharry Aiken

“Are You Calling Me a Racist?”

View more insights in Books - Social Sciences - Sociology - Ethnicity and Racism

View more figures from OCAD University

Read the Study

Sarita Srivastava shows that racial encounters among well-meaning people are ironically hindered by the emotional investment they have in being seen as good people.

Image courtesy of interviewee. February 22, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

The speaker has spent decades researching organizations focused on equity and social change, observing a consistent contradiction: a gap between intentions and outcomes in anti-racism and diversity efforts. Many organizations invest heavily in diversity policies and trainings, yet these often yield minimal or counterproductive results, leading to emotional conflicts rather than meaningful change.

The speaker explores this dynamic in their book, "Are You Calling Me a Racist?", seeking to understand why well-intentioned efforts frequently do not lead to effective outcomes, even in environments committed to equity. The concept of "feel good racial politics" highlights how organizations often prioritize emotional comfort and individual feelings over substantive systemic change.

The speaker discusses an incident at Starbucks where two Black men were arrested for simply waiting for a colleague. In response, Starbucks invested in a costly anti-racist workshop, rather than enacting straightforward policy changes that could prevent such incidents in the future. This video video example illustrates how organizations often focus on educating individuals, assuming ignorance is the root of racial issues, rather than addressing systemic practices.

Research for the book included interviews with anti-racist activists, revealing that discussions often get sidetracked into individual emotions instead of targeting organization-wide practices. The speaker advocates for shifting the focus from individual change to systemic reform. They suggest organizations should gather data and analyze practices to identify areas for tangible improvement, which could lead to significant change more effectively than traditional workshops focused on knowledge or emotional growth.

Ultimately, the book calls for a reorientation in anti-racism strategies, emphasizing practical, organizational changes over individual awareness-raising as a means to foster equity and combat racism.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.105 --> 00:02.565
For decades, I've been working in organizations

00:02.745 --> 00:05.405
and researching organizations that are committed to equity

00:05.405 --> 00:08.205
and social change, universities, social movements,

00:08.205 --> 00:10.925
community organizations, and over all those years,

00:11.025 --> 00:12.845
and across all those organizations,

00:13.045 --> 00:14.805
I see the same key contradictions

00:14.805 --> 00:17.685
that concern me when it comes to questions of anti-racism

00:17.685 --> 00:20.245
and diversity, the contradiction

00:20.245 --> 00:22.885
between good intentions and weak outcomes.

00:23.225 --> 00:25.965
And that's the contradiction that I explore in this book.

00:26.425 --> 00:29.485
So many organizations devote such a significant amount

00:29.485 --> 00:31.165
of energy and resources,

00:31.305 --> 00:33.765
and often millions of dollars developing diversity

00:33.765 --> 00:36.645
statements, policies and trainings, and workshops.

00:36.985 --> 00:38.165
In fact, about half

00:38.165 --> 00:40.565
of all US corporations have a diversity officer.

00:41.105 --> 00:43.205
And yet, research shows that those policies

00:43.225 --> 00:45.085
and this training are largely ineffective

00:45.385 --> 00:46.765
and sometimes make things worse.

00:47.065 --> 00:48.925
If there are any changes in attitudes

00:49.025 --> 00:51.445
and, biases, they're short lived

00:51.745 --> 00:53.405
and there's no relationship necessary,

00:53.405 --> 00:56.365
necessary relationship between a shift in an attitude

00:56.525 --> 00:59.325
and a bias and concrete practices in organizations.

00:59.985 --> 01:02.605
And in many cases, those workshops and trainings

01:02.605 --> 01:05.885
and, facilitated conversations also become a site

01:05.885 --> 01:10.005
of tension conflict, sometimes eliciting anger, defensive,

01:10.005 --> 01:12.485
personalized, emotional reactions, such as,

01:12.545 --> 01:13.725
are you calling me a racist?

01:14.345 --> 01:18.325
And other times eliciting, introspection, empathy, guilt.

01:18.905 --> 01:22.845
And so often these policies and trainings actually divert

01:22.865 --> 01:25.925
or drain energy from organizations rather than

01:26.265 --> 01:27.605
propel us towards change.

01:28.465 --> 01:31.405
So I began to ask, why does anti-racism

01:31.665 --> 01:34.165
and diversity efforts, why do they flounder

01:34.165 --> 01:36.005
where they should be most likely

01:36.065 --> 01:39.645
to succeed in those organizations that are already dedicated

01:40.025 --> 01:41.485
to equity and social justice?

01:42.545 --> 01:45.485
Key question I pose, why is meaningful change

01:45.585 --> 01:48.805
and thoughtful analysis elusive even when they're good

01:48.805 --> 01:52.765
intentions and resources and commitment, genuine commitment?

01:53.265 --> 01:55.845
So in writing my book, are you calling me a racist?

01:56.285 --> 01:58.965
I wanted to call attention, not only to the problem,

01:59.065 --> 02:02.045
but also to understand why has this been this problem in

02:02.045 --> 02:05.165
this dynamic, this contradiction being

02:05.225 --> 02:06.805
so tenacious on longstanding.

02:07.345 --> 02:08.725
Um, and I also wanted to be able

02:08.725 --> 02:12.085
to propose alternative approaches to equity and anti-racism.

02:12.625 --> 02:15.965
So I use the concept feel good racial politics

02:16.185 --> 02:17.525
to describe the moral

02:17.585 --> 02:18.845
and emotional landscape

02:18.915 --> 02:22.005
that shapes all our racial encounters, feel good.

02:22.005 --> 02:24.525
Racial politics is a phrase, a shorthand

02:24.715 --> 02:26.685
that describes the deep moral

02:26.745 --> 02:29.405
and emotional undercurrents in conversations

02:29.485 --> 02:30.605
about race and diversity.

02:31.265 --> 02:33.965
The, the impulse to feel both feel that we are good,

02:34.075 --> 02:36.725
that we're moral, upstanding, and progressive good people.

02:37.185 --> 02:40.125
And also to feel good, to feel warm, positive,

02:40.125 --> 02:41.845
hopeful, empathetic, helpful.

02:42.705 --> 02:45.445
And this leads organizations to focus on practices

02:45.715 --> 02:49.565
that are educational, therapeutic, introspective,

02:49.955 --> 02:52.565
focused on essentially changing the individual

02:53.105 --> 02:55.245
rather than on changing every day

02:55.245 --> 02:58.845
and organizational practices. So I, I sta

02:58.925 --> 03:00.045
I share a story in the book

03:00.235 --> 03:03.525
that illustrates this practice, quite strikingly.

03:03.865 --> 03:06.605
Uh, it's a cafe in Philadelphia called Starbucks.

03:06.985 --> 03:09.645
Two men are waiting in a for a meeting for a colleague

03:09.645 --> 03:12.485
to show up for a meeting, and the Starbucks employee

03:12.595 --> 03:13.645
asks them to order something.

03:13.645 --> 03:15.205
They say, no, we're waiting for someone.

03:15.745 --> 03:18.445
By the time the third person shows up, the two men

03:18.445 --> 03:19.845
who are black have been arrested.

03:20.505 --> 03:22.525
So it becomes, there's a patron in the cafe

03:22.665 --> 03:24.005
who films the whole event.

03:24.425 --> 03:25.645
And so it ends up on Twitter,

03:25.715 --> 03:29.125
ends up a huge international controversy bringing a lot

03:29.125 --> 03:30.525
of attention to that organization

03:30.585 --> 03:32.005
and their policies on racism.

03:32.905 --> 03:36.445
And so the response of Starbucks was

03:36.565 --> 03:40.605
to spend $12 million on holding an anti-racist workshop

03:40.985 --> 03:44.285
by closing down all its cafes for one afternoon,

03:44.505 --> 03:46.445
to teach them about experiences of racism

03:46.585 --> 03:47.765
and what does racism look like.

03:48.505 --> 03:51.925
The question is, would that workshop have stopped

03:51.925 --> 03:54.485
that incident from happening if it had happened before?

03:54.905 --> 03:57.885
Or would there be effective simple concrete practices

03:57.885 --> 04:01.805
and policies of cafes, and workplaces and

04:02.545 --> 04:06.085
and so on, public spaces that could shift the relationship

04:06.225 --> 04:07.925
of people that are in them to the people

04:07.925 --> 04:09.965
that manage them simply, for example,

04:10.455 --> 04:12.725
don't call the police on patrons that,

04:12.835 --> 04:14.125
that don't order coffee

04:14.545 --> 04:17.965
or allow patrons to sit in a cafe without ordering a coffee.

04:18.225 --> 04:21.125
And in fact, that is, was a policy change that came about

04:21.125 --> 04:22.165
after this incident.

04:22.665 --> 04:24.605
And so one was a very simple, straightforward,

04:25.045 --> 04:26.365
concrete organizational change.

04:26.665 --> 04:29.525
And the other was a very expensive,

04:29.915 --> 04:34.165
educational practice aimed at teaching people,

04:34.305 --> 04:36.045
giving them more knowledge about racism

04:36.585 --> 04:38.085
and changing them as individuals

04:38.085 --> 04:41.245
because the assumption is that people, are ignorant

04:41.265 --> 04:43.725
or they're either ignorant or they're bad if they're racist.

04:44.225 --> 04:45.445
Um, and so it's the,

04:45.445 --> 04:47.285
the change is always focused on the individual.

04:47.705 --> 04:50.725
And that's what I, that's the phrase feel feelgood politics,

04:50.725 --> 04:52.685
racial politics refers to this dynamic.

04:53.615 --> 04:55.915
So to do the research for this book, I began

04:55.915 --> 04:57.955
with my own experience in social movements,

04:57.975 --> 05:00.155
but I quickly realized that I needed to talk

05:00.155 --> 05:01.635
to other anti-racist activists.

05:01.695 --> 05:04.915
And at the core of the research is based on interviews

05:04.915 --> 05:06.995
with anti-racist activists across a number

05:06.995 --> 05:09.035
of organized community organizations.

05:09.385 --> 05:11.235
They spoke to me about their experience

05:11.235 --> 05:13.435
and their difficulties with trying to initiate

05:14.225 --> 05:15.995
anti-racist organizational change.

05:16.295 --> 05:18.955
The core of what they said was, this always gets emotional.

05:19.015 --> 05:20.675
It always gets focused on the individual.

05:21.055 --> 05:23.435
It always goes to conflict resolution instead

05:23.435 --> 05:24.715
of actual practical change.

05:25.145 --> 05:27.515
That led me to a number of other areas of research

05:27.895 --> 05:30.595
to archival research about, of movement publications

05:30.815 --> 05:34.515
to histories of, research on education and,

05:34.575 --> 05:36.435
and therapy wise that education

05:36.435 --> 05:39.075
and therapy are seen as key sites of change.

05:39.575 --> 05:43.235
So, archival research, interviews, theoretical analysis,

05:43.475 --> 05:46.795
genealogical research, discourse analysis, all these form,

05:47.175 --> 05:48.835
the variety of methods

05:48.975 --> 05:51.795
and threads of inquiry that form the research from my book.

05:52.375 --> 05:55.355
To be clear, I believe in both education and therapy,

05:55.665 --> 05:57.075
however, educational

05:57.225 --> 06:00.085
And therapeutic approaches have become the go-to

06:00.085 --> 06:02.045
strategies to address concerns about

06:02.045 --> 06:03.445
diversity and anti-racism.

06:03.625 --> 06:06.565
And there's some key pitfalls and concerning outcomes.

06:07.535 --> 06:10.005
Since these approaches arise from a feel good racial

06:10.045 --> 06:12.725
politics that's focused on enhancing psychic comfort

06:12.825 --> 06:15.325
and a sense of morality, the focus often

06:15.485 --> 06:19.165
of these practices is on both feeling good and being good.

06:19.395 --> 06:23.485
There's often a preoccupation with individual knowledge,

06:23.485 --> 06:25.685
individual feelings, and

06:25.685 --> 06:28.645
however, those are not ideal tools for systemic change

06:28.645 --> 06:30.245
or for cultivating systemic change.

06:30.885 --> 06:33.725
Changing hearts and minds is an effective strategy at times,

06:33.865 --> 06:35.765
but it takes a long period of time.

06:36.145 --> 06:38.245
And it's not focused on concrete practices

06:38.245 --> 06:40.045
that we can change now, particularly within

06:40.335 --> 06:41.845
workplaces and organizations.

06:42.345 --> 06:44.965
So these strategies of anti-racist training,

06:45.035 --> 06:47.805
anti-bias training, they're rarely focused on the practices

06:47.805 --> 06:48.805
that actually need to change.

06:49.825 --> 06:52.045
So, for example, part of the problem is the assumption

06:52.045 --> 06:54.405
that ignorance is at the root of the problem.

06:54.505 --> 06:58.445
And that if organizations train their efforts on,

06:58.595 --> 07:01.085
knowledge acquisition, learning more about others,

07:01.445 --> 07:03.365
learning more about racism, learning,

07:03.365 --> 07:06.645
maybe looking inwards to our own biases, changing ourselves

07:07.445 --> 07:09.605
res resolving conflict between other individuals in the

07:09.605 --> 07:12.085
organization, that this will lead to a change.

07:12.935 --> 07:14.605
Let's talk approach. Um,

07:14.605 --> 07:17.725
and there's a, a whole tool toolbox, a variety of toolbox

07:17.725 --> 07:20.125
of techniques of var of, of various techniques

07:20.125 --> 07:22.125
that facilitate this kind of

07:22.645 --> 07:24.085
dialogue about diversity and racism.

07:24.665 --> 07:27.245
But these diversity strategies pay less attention

07:27.585 --> 07:28.845
to the concrete changes

07:28.915 --> 07:32.085
that can make a real difference in organizations such as

07:32.725 --> 07:34.925
allocation of resources, delivery of services,

07:35.035 --> 07:37.965
content design, hiring practices,

07:38.035 --> 07:39.805
even just data gathering, for example.

07:40.225 --> 07:43.205
So it won't surprise you to to learn that the alternative

07:43.805 --> 07:45.685
approach that I suggest in the book,

07:45.755 --> 07:48.525
it's not a one size fits all.

07:48.985 --> 07:51.525
Um, it's the, the key concern that I have

07:51.525 --> 07:52.605
with the strategies is

07:52.605 --> 07:54.205
that they're very focused on the individual.

07:54.345 --> 07:55.565
The target is the individual,

07:56.185 --> 07:59.245
and the assumed locus of change is often the individual,

07:59.585 --> 08:01.005
my book advocates, that we have

08:01.005 --> 08:04.005
to shift the emphasis from the individual as the focus

08:04.005 --> 08:06.685
of change to the systemic and the organizational.

08:07.355 --> 08:09.165
This will mean different things for each space.

08:09.425 --> 08:10.525
It might mean, for example,

08:10.525 --> 08:13.085
that we shift from a focus on individual feelings

08:13.105 --> 08:14.645
to a focus on collective wellness.

08:15.145 --> 08:17.725
It might mean that we shift from hearing participants

08:17.725 --> 08:20.925
individual stories and journeys to specific projects

08:20.925 --> 08:22.525
of organizational transformation.

08:22.985 --> 08:26.045
In each case, it means looking closely at the ways our

08:26.045 --> 08:27.445
organization is doing things

08:27.465 --> 08:29.285
and asking what needs to change,

08:29.935 --> 08:31.245
where might we make a difference?

08:31.465 --> 08:32.645
The first step might be small.

08:32.705 --> 08:34.565
It might be simply asking that question

08:34.985 --> 08:37.045
and doing some local focused research

08:37.045 --> 08:38.885
to investigate the answer gathering data.

08:39.225 --> 08:41.405
So for example, in one of the interviews that I did in one

08:41.405 --> 08:44.765
of the organizations, the activists that was trying

08:44.765 --> 08:46.685
to make change to the organization talked about

08:46.685 --> 08:48.645
what happened, which was bringing in an external

08:48.715 --> 08:51.685
facilitator, getting everyone to talk about their feelings,

08:51.685 --> 08:53.445
talk about who hurt whom,

08:53.445 --> 08:54.685
what was the problem, what was the

08:54.685 --> 08:55.685
Dynamic. And

08:55.685 --> 08:56.965
she said, we don't wanna do that.

08:56.965 --> 08:58.525
We actually want to change the way things

08:58.835 --> 09:00.005
work in this organization.

09:00.105 --> 09:02.485
We want to look at the dis division of labor,

09:02.865 --> 09:06.285
the unfair racialized division of labor who was doing what.

09:07.065 --> 09:08.845
And they decided to do research in that

09:08.845 --> 09:11.525
and showed that the white women in the organization,

09:11.555 --> 09:14.805
despite the fact that it was a collective, were doing more

09:14.805 --> 09:17.005
of the management work, the grant application work,

09:17.265 --> 09:19.885
and the women of color were doing the more day-to-day,

09:20.445 --> 09:23.085
reproductive, concrete labor of

09:23.645 --> 09:24.645
maintaining the organization.

09:24.865 --> 09:28.125
And simply that very concrete data gathering,

09:28.195 --> 09:30.485
highlighted some practices that need to change,

09:30.485 --> 09:32.005
that everyone assumed,

09:32.225 --> 09:34.165
and took for granted and never questioned.

09:34.505 --> 09:37.365
So something, something as simple as looking at

09:38.165 --> 09:40.445
concrete practices, gathering data can be the first step.

09:40.505 --> 09:43.685
And even though it sounds small, can take us much further

09:44.235 --> 09:47.285
than many, many workshops that are about learning about

09:47.705 --> 09:50.205
how racism in the outside world,

09:50.565 --> 09:52.605
learning about ourselves, learning about others,

09:52.925 --> 09:54.965
learning about the experiences of others,

09:55.105 --> 09:57.005
but in fact takes us to a kind of a

09:58.165 --> 10:00.845
practice-based workshop rather than a feelings based

10:01.165 --> 10:02.965
workshop or a knowledge based workshop,

10:03.195 --> 10:04.885
knowledge acquisition based workshop.

00:00 - For decades, I've been working in organizations and researching organizations that are committed to equity and social change, universities, social movements, community organizations, and over all those years, and across all those organizations, I see the same key contradictions

00:14 - that concern me when it comes to questions of anti-racism and diversity, the contradiction between good intentions and weak outcomes. And that's the contradiction that I explore in this book. So many organizations devote such a significant amount of energy and resources, and often millions of dollars developing diversity statements, policies and trainings, and workshops. In fact, about half of all US corporations have a diversity officer.

00:41 - And yet, research shows that those policies and this training are largely ineffective and sometimes make things worse. If there are any changes in attitudes and, biases, they're short lived and there's no relationship necessary, necessary relationship between a shift in an attitude and a bias and concrete practices in organizations. And in many cases, those workshops and trainings and, facilitated conversations also become a site

01:05 - of tension conflict, sometimes eliciting anger, defensive, personalized, emotional reactions, such as, are you calling me a racist? And other times eliciting, introspection, empathy, guilt. And so often these policies and trainings actually divert or drain energy from organizations rather than propel us towards change. So I began to ask, why does anti-racism and diversity efforts, why do they flounder where they should be most likely

01:36 - to succeed in those organizations that are already dedicated to equity and social justice? Key question I pose, why is meaningful change and thoughtful analysis elusive even when they're good intentions and resources and commitment, genuine commitment? So in writing my book, are you calling me a racist? I wanted to call attention, not only to the problem, but also to understand why has this been this problem in this dynamic, this contradiction being so tenacious on longstanding.

02:07 - and I also wanted to be able to propose alternative approaches to equity and anti-racism. So I use the concept feel good racial politics to describe the moral and emotional landscape that shapes all our racial encounters, feel good. Racial politics is a phrase, a shorthand that describes the deep moral and emotional undercurrents in conversations about race and diversity.

02:31 - The, the impulse to feel both feel that we are good, that we're moral, upstanding, and progressive good people. And also to feel good, to feel warm, positive, hopeful, empathetic, helpful. And this leads organizations to focus on practices that are educational, therapeutic, introspective, focused on essentially changing the individual rather than on changing every day and organizational practices. So I, I sta I share a story in the book

03:00 - that illustrates this practice, quite strikingly. it's a cafe in Philadelphia called Starbucks. Two men are waiting in a for a meeting for a colleague to show up for a meeting, and the Starbucks employee asks them to order something. They say, no, we're waiting for someone. By the time the third person shows up, the two men who are black have been arrested. So it becomes, there's a patron in the cafe who films the whole event.

03:24 - And so it ends up on Twitter, ends up a huge international controversy bringing a lot of attention to that organization and their policies on racism. And so the response of Starbucks was to spend $12 million on holding an anti-racist workshop by closing down all its cafes for one afternoon, to teach them about experiences of racism and what does racism look like. The question is, would that workshop have stopped

03:51 - that incident from happening if it had happened before? Or would there be effective simple concrete practices and policies of cafes, and workplaces and and so on, public spaces that could shift the relationship of people that are in them to the people that manage them simply, for example, don't call the police on patrons that, that don't order coffee or allow patrons to sit in a cafe without ordering a coffee. And in fact, that is, was a policy change that came about

04:21 - after this incident. And so one was a very simple, straightforward, concrete organizational change. And the other was a very expensive, educational practice aimed at teaching people, giving them more knowledge about racism and changing them as individuals because the assumption is that people, are ignorant or they're either ignorant or they're bad if they're racist. and so it's the,

04:45 - the change is always focused on the individual. And that's what I, that's the phrase feel feelgood politics, racial politics refers to this dynamic. So to do the research for this book, I began with my own experience in social movements, but I quickly realized that I needed to talk to other anti-racist activists. And at the core of the research is based on interviews with anti-racist activists across a number of organized community organizations.

05:09 - They spoke to me about their experience and their difficulties with trying to initiate anti-racist organizational change. The core of what they said was, this always gets emotional. It always gets focused on the individual. It always goes to conflict resolution instead of actual practical change. That led me to a number of other areas of research to archival research about, of movement publications to histories of, research on education and,

05:34 - and therapy wise that education and therapy are seen as key sites of change. So, archival research, interviews, theoretical analysis, genealogical research, discourse analysis, all these form, the variety of methods and threads of inquiry that form the research from my book. To be clear, I believe in both education and therapy, however, educational And therapeutic approaches have become the go-to strategies to address concerns about

06:02 - diversity and anti-racism. And there's some key pitfalls and concerning outcomes. Since these approaches arise from a feel good racial politics that's focused on enhancing psychic comfort and a sense of morality, the focus often of these practices is on both feeling good and being good. There's often a preoccupation with individual knowledge, individual feelings, and however, those are not ideal tools for systemic change or for cultivating systemic change.

06:30 - Changing hearts and minds is an effective strategy at times, but it takes a long period of time. And it's not focused on concrete practices that we can change now, particularly within workplaces and organizations. So these strategies of anti-racist training, anti-bias training, they're rarely focused on the practices that actually need to change. So, for example, part of the problem is the assumption that ignorance is at the root of the problem.

06:54 - And that if organizations train their efforts on, knowledge acquisition, learning more about others, learning more about racism, learning, maybe looking inwards to our own biases, changing ourselves res resolving conflict between other individuals in the organization, that this will lead to a change. Let's talk approach. and there's a, a whole tool toolbox, a variety of toolbox of techniques of var of, of various techniques that facilitate this kind of

07:22 - dialogue about diversity and racism. But these diversity strategies pay less attention to the concrete changes that can make a real difference in organizations such as allocation of resources, delivery of services, content design, hiring practices, even just data gathering, for example. So it won't surprise you to to learn that the alternative approach that I suggest in the book, it's not a one size fits all.

07:48 - it's the, the key concern that I have with the strategies is that they're very focused on the individual. The target is the individual, and the assumed locus of change is often the individual, my book advocates, that we have to shift the emphasis from the individual as the focus of change to the systemic and the organizational. This will mean different things for each space. It might mean, for example,

08:10 - that we shift from a focus on individual feelings to a focus on collective wellness. It might mean that we shift from hearing participants individual stories and journeys to specific projects of organizational transformation. In each case, it means looking closely at the ways our organization is doing things and asking what needs to change, where might we make a difference? The first step might be small.

08:32 - It might be simply asking that question and doing some local focused research to investigate the answer gathering data. So for example, in one of the interviews that I did in one of the organizations, the activists that was trying to make change to the organization talked about what happened, which was bringing in an external facilitator, getting everyone to talk about their feelings, talk about who hurt whom, what was the problem, what was the

08:54 - Dynamic. And she said, we don't wanna do that. We actually want to change the way things work in this organization. We want to look at the dis division of labor, the unfair racialized division of labor who was doing what. And they decided to do research in that and showed that the white women in the organization, despite the fact that it was a collective, were doing more of the management work, the grant application work,

09:17 - and the women of color were doing the more day-to-day, reproductive, concrete labor of maintaining the organization. And simply that very concrete data gathering, highlighted some practices that need to change, that everyone assumed, and took for granted and never questioned. So something, something as simple as looking at concrete practices, gathering data can be the first step. And even though it sounds small, can take us much further

09:44 - than many, many workshops that are about learning about how racism in the outside world, learning about ourselves, learning about others, learning about the experiences of others, but in fact takes us to a kind of a practice-based workshop rather than a feelings based workshop or a knowledge based workshop, knowledge acquisition based workshop.

Faculti AI can make mistakes