You are a man ? Are you “White”? Are you a sports person? Do you have a typical weight? Are you a parent? Are you a Francophone or an Anglophone? So you have power and privileges. At least that’s what a graph from a training document on equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) presented by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) tells us.
Aiming to “create inclusive research environments”, this document further teaches us that racialized people, people of immigrant origin and women would by definition be “disenfranchised” of power and privilege and incapable of displaying racism. According to this simplistic and arbitrary segmentation of our society, Dominique Anglade, a multimillionaire woman who led the Liberal Party of Quebec and who gravitates in the upper echelons of society, would be an oppressed person. And an American actress like Whoopi Goldberg couldn’t make anti-Semitic remarks because she has black skin – remember here that she was once suspended from her ABC show for saying that the Holocaust “wasn’t not a matter of race”.
On the other hand, any “white” man who ticks several of the characteristics of this graph would necessarily have power and privileges, especially if he plays sports!
Whether he is recovering from cancer, was a victim of sexual abuse or grew up in a disadvantaged environment would not have much weight in the balance. In terms of power and privileges, her skin color would be more decisive than the many advantages enjoyed by a “racialized” woman like Dominique Anglade. Moreover, as the document indicates in black and white that “Power + privilege = racism”, we understand that we should put this gentleman on trial before doing that of a woman like Whoopi Goldberg whose remarks have been decried several times. .
Training questioned
In recent years, EDI consulting firms have flourished in the country, providing training on diversity in our governmental institutions, in our schools and in our private companies. However, these formations are the subject of many criticisms. In a review of the literature, researchers Frank Dobbin (Harvard University) and Alexandra Kalev (Tel-Aviv University), co-authors of a study based on data collected from 829 American companies over three decades, argue that such training , the effects of which may wear off within a few days, do not reduce bias or change behavior.
In addition to being ineffective and very costly, this training aimed primarily at so-called “dominant” groups would even be counter-productive.
Thus, it has been observed that by arousing a feeling of guilt among “whites”, these formations can reinforce prejudices or lead to more hostility towards minority groups.
They also lead many participants to believe that they have to walk on eggshells when in contact with members of minority groups, whom they come to see as fragile and easily offended. Consequently, members of the dominant group become less inclined to try to form relationships or collaborate with people from these minority groups. None of this promotes social integration and living together.
By seeking more to generate a new understanding of race relations than to solve the specific problems of organizations, the contemporary EDI approach misses the mark while undermining relations between fellow citizens. Who will look into these training courses which are multiplying and are dispensed by pseudo-experts without their effectiveness being demonstrated? Who will question the long-term effects of these “white” man re-education workshops? Who will worry about the stigmatization of minority groups through ideological concepts that have no scientific basis?
Finally, who will have the courage to denounce this business that has become anti-racism? Because our common humanity is already paying the price.