The Wave

The Problem with CNN's Latino/Black/er...Others-In-America Series

CNN has just finished airing “Latino in America” the second of two major documentary/news reports on life as a “minority” in the US.  While I can easily acknowledge the intrinsic value of educating people about these large groupings, both series have had some unintended negative consequences.

The first is the myth of homogeneity – in other words, that when we speak about “Latinos” for example, the public jumps to the general assumption (which was briefly pointed out in the documentary) that all Latinos are of direct Spanish (meaning from the country of Spain) descent. 

Now, it is true that a large majority of Hispanics (separate from Latinos) have some Spanish ancestry, the reality is most Latinos are not of direct non–Latin American Spanish descent. In fact, many are not primarily of Spanish descent; and some are not of Spanish descent at all. If you think about it for just a second, you’ll realize that there are Latinos in America who have European ancestries (e.g. Italian, German, Polish), as well as Middle Eastern (Lebanese, Egyptian, etc.) not to mention Black, Native American, and Asian ancestries.

This brings us to the second myth – that the vast majority of Latino/Hispanic/Mexican-Americans are either first generation, or second or third generation descendants of illegal immigrants.  CNN’s own Lou Dobbs fuels this misconception with his fiery, inflammatory anti-immigration rhetoric (and he’s married to a Latina and has hired illegals to work his horse farm!).

Facts: In 2007 the US Census Bureau estimated (conservatively) that the number of residents who are immigrants (legal and illegal) was 37.9 million.  Of those, the Census estimates one third or 12.6 million are illegal immigrants (from all nations, not just Mexico or Central or South America).  But, it acknowledges the numbers of illegals may be much higher because they tend not to report themselves to census takers. Fair enough: but it’s this “not really knowing” that leads to news commentators like Dobbs claiming that we’re awash in “illegals” gobbling up all of our precious resources and jobs.

But turn that last figure around for a moment – it means that two thirds, or 25 million immigrants are “legal” – in other words lawfully here in the US!  And that’s not counting all of those who are second and third generation descendants of other “legal” immigrants. Now, of course, we could have a debate about whether or not American immigration laws are too liberal, but that’s a different topic, entirely.

My point is, when we start throwing labels around like “Latinos” and “Blacks” it’s human nature for our minds to immediately jump to the easy generalizations – often untrue – about these particular groups.  This is because most of us cannot instantly embrace the vast complexity of these hugely diverse communities: doing that requires having a lot of data easily on hand, and we’re just not wired for that.  And besides, CNN is trying to drive eyeballs to their programming – they have to make their show titles short and to the point, basically taking commercial advantage of our very human and unfortunate tendency to generalize about other groups of people.

At the end of the day, or programming, it seems to me a little "cultural competence" is called for. Essentially, if we’re to have a civil and productive public discourse on “differences” in this country then we first need to acknowledge that Latinos and Blacks and Whites and Asians and on and on… are simply catchall names for incredibly diverse and complex groupings of people; and secondly that we are – like it or not – a nation of immigrants, most of whom came here legally.

Besides, if anyone has a real right to complain about all of the immigrants taking up their precious resources and jobs, it's Native Americans.

Crossing Invisible Lines

Ten years ago, when I first moved to San   Diego and was looking for a home, a new acquaintance advised me to restrict my search to “north of Interstate 8.” A total newcomer, I innocently asked why. Looking around before replying, he leaned forward and whispered, “Because ‘the 8’ is an invisible line. Most whites live north of ‘the 8,’ ” he said guiltily, “everyone else lives south of it.”

To be honest, I was so stunned I didn’t know how to react. Having lived in New York City Boston, and Cincinnati, I was well aware that there are parts of most big cities where, depending on your race, you’re welcome, or not. I’d even heard about “red-lining” - an onerous practice used by some banks and mortgage lenders who took a red pen to a city map to mark off those areas in which they would not make a home loan to a person of color. So I was no stranger to invisible lines.

But when I arrived in San Diego, I assumed that open discrimination was an East Coast illness; that America’s finest city, filled with entrepreneurs, teeming with active duty and retired military personnel of every race and ethnicity, from all over the country and from every socio-economic background, was more welcoming of diversity. I believed there would be fewer invisible lines dividing the races. Looking back ten years later, I realize how naïve I was.

“What Straight, White Guys Don’t Get About Diversity & Why”

This article recently appeared in the May 2006 Issue of "Diversity Works!" Magazine...

In my work as a diversity consultant, coach and trainer, I often hear women and people of color quietly talking with each other about their white, male colleagues and bosses, saying “Most straight, white guys in the corporate world just don’t get it about diversity.” And although I’d like nothing better than to refute them, to defend my straight, white brethren, I’m afraid I have to agree: when it comes to diversity, we just don’t get it. So, at the risk of falling into the trap of generalizing about an amazingly large and diverse group of white guys, I have to ask: what is it about diversity that we don’t get and why don’t we get it?

The first thing we don’t get is that diversity is about lot more than just race and gender conflicts. We hear the word “diversity” and we automatically think racism, bigotry and discrimination against women and people of color. We don’t think about all the other issues underneath the diversity umbrella.

We do this because we white guys are a uniquely visual lot (no, I don’t have studies to support this, just 46 years of straight, white male experience). We focus on the surface diversity issues – race and gender – because they’re easy to see, not much time or thought required. We also do it because the media does it too; bombarding us 24/7 with stories about race and gender conflicts, with the word diversity in the headline. Stories about diversity conflicts drive ratings; you know, “if it bleeds, it leads.” And nothing bleeds like a black man being beaten by white cops, or women workers being the target of crude, sexual advances.  So, like Homer Simpson, the quintessential straight, white guy, we take what we see at face value. We don’t have the time or inclination to look beneath the surface - doh!

London Bombings May Increase Workplace Violence

When times are tough, often as not, people get tough on each other.

 The recent attacks in London, and the revelation that the suicide bombers were U.K. citizens, have once again raised the unpleasant possibility that both sides of the Atlantic may experience an increase in racial intolerance and bias-related incidents and violence towards Arabs, Muslims or anyone else perceived to sympathize with the terrorists’ aims.

 It's more than likely that some of these incidents may occur in the workplace; which nobody wants to see.  Hey, I'm not saying "be nice to terrorists!"  I'm saying that some innocent people could get hurt because other people can't control themselves.

 Here's why: In 2003, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), released a study showing a dramatic 1,600% increase in the number of U.S. bias-related incidents from the year 2000, (before the 9/11 attacks), to 2001.

 The FBI reported the same thing:  in 2,000 only 28 hate incidents towards Muslims and those perceived to be Muslims such as Sikhs (who often wear turbans and long beards), leaping up exponentially to 481 in 2001.

 These included physical assaults, vandalism of Muslim-owned stores and shops, and cross-burnings on mosque and Muslim school front lawns. In one case a California Muslim suffered a broken jaw and other facial injuries after an attack by a group of more than 20 people. Police say teenagers using baseball bats, golf clubs and beer bottles attacked the man while yelling “white power.”

Since these are just the incidents that were reported to the authorities; it stands to reason that many more incidents occurred but went unreported. And, although it appears that no one organization or government agency is tracking workplace violence relating to diversity issues, since so many Americans spend most of their waking hours at work, some incidents must have occurred in the workplace.

So, what can you do about it?

When A Good Manager Goes Bad

Recently I got a call from a C.O.O.  on the  east coast who'd bought my book  and wanted an objective ear and advice on solving a problem with one of their back office managers, named Fred.

After a year and a half in management, it seemed Fred had become comfortable enough to give his candid opinion to a number of his subordinates on all sorts of politically charged issues - from the war in Iraq, to illegal immigration, to the upcoming fight over whoever the President was going to nominate for the Supreme Court.

Apparently, he was quite passionate about how he felt about these things and used language and comparisons that most of us might find  objectionable if not downright inappropriate for the workplace - words like "towel-head" for Arabs;  "wet-back" for Mexicans and something unprintable for Jews - you get the drift.

Knowing that its rare for this kind of behavior to simply spring up overnight, I asked if they'd heard anything about it before Fred became a manager.  "Absolutely not," replied my client, "he always got glowing evaluations.  That's why we promoted him.  We only started hearing about this stuff after he wrote up four of his workers for poor performance."
"Eureka!" I cried, (not really, but it would be cool to say that some day and get away with it) I'm was beginning to see what's  up here."

"Let me guess," I said...

"It's not race and gender conflicts..."

...I'm worried about at my company,"  said the head of HR on the phone last week.  "It's the subtle  conflicts that are driving me nuts.  You won't believe how petty some people can be!"

Actually, I do believe it, because I've heard it over and over again during the last 15 years I've been doing this work.  Like the one about the secretary who deliberately and repeatedly spelled her boss' name incorrectly because she felt he didn't treat her "like a grownup" (Now, I wonder why he would do that?).  Or the software engineer who "keyed" (deliberately scratched) his colleague's new car because they couldn't agree on specific solution to a fault in some code they were writing together.

Let's face it, most workplaces are filled with nasty little remarks, gestures and behaviors that are designed to very subtly insult, offend or undermine other people.  Diversity experts call them "micro-inequities," (some of my more cynical clients have dubbed them "micro-disses" or micro-disrespects).  Although flying below the typical HR person's "diversity radar," micro-inequities can wreak havoc within a team; sometimes even leading to bigger headaches and even dismissal.  Unfortunately, micro-inequities often go unremarked, not to mention unchecked.   Why?