[23321] in APO-L
[APO-L] support or focus groups for non-dominant subgroups
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Zonuts)
Sat Dec 21 16:19:21 2002
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:25:17 -0500
Reply-To: Zonuts <zonuts@ALUM.RPI.EDU>
From: Zonuts <zonuts@ALUM.RPI.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <200212210006753.SM01148@listserv.iupui.edu>
>ya know... I'm becoming really sorry that ^&@ was
>founded by a bunch of white guys. That fact seems to
>have created quite a stigma for any of the other races
>that attempt to provide service under the name of ^&@.
When a person is part of a dominant subgroup within a group, and the
non-dominant subgroups start surfacing issues around the misunderstandings
and miscommunications and cultural differences that occur, the side effect
of shaming the members of the dominant group does need to be addressed. I'm
very involved in diversity work in my corporate life, and were I in better
health, I'd probably get more involved in our fraternity's diversity work.
The backlash of discomfort that people in the dominant group experience
does need to be acknowledged and respected. Many diversity efforts forget
to do this.
There is NOTHING shameful or wrong about happening to be a member of a
dominant subgroup, so long as you are willing to learn about how to be
sensitive to the issues of other groups, to the best of your abilities, and
as long as you respect those issues and associated cultural differences.
After all, members of non-dominant subgroups *have* to be sensitive to the
issues and cultural norms of the dominant subgroup(s) to fit in, so why
should people from dominant subgroups have the "special privilege" of not
having to make that effort?
>I'm just recalling, in my mind, the story of the
>founding and not finding anything in my recollection
>that talks about conforming to a cultural norm;
>rather, as I understood it, ^&@ was about creating a
>higher standard and leading others by example...
Actually, one of the cool things about our founding, based on Scouting's
then-progressive thinking that diversity of religion should not separate
those who committed to our cardinal principles, is that diversity *was* an
inherent principle in our founding, albeit a very different perception of
diversity than that which is more prevalent in this era.
>And, frankly, i'm tired on stepping on pins and
>needles because of my ancestry....
Frankly, people in non-dominant subgroups spend their lives stepping on
pins and needles to be part of the larger group. Now you get a chance to
feel the same emotions that the majority of people in non-dominant
subgroups feel every day whether in college, in A Phi O, in the workplace,
or just going to the mall to shop. How do you like it?
>^&@ is about
>service, leadership, and friendship in the current
>age. Leaders face adversity and conquer it. If we've
>an image issue, then let's find a way to work on
>that... but I also know of some chapters that have
>religious toleration issues. Or even political view
>issues. Are we going to create support groups for them
>too???
One approach I have seen work well is having focus groups. These are
different than support groups. Focus groups are small groups of selected
individuals who either fall into a specific non-dominant group within a
larger group, where the non-dominant groups needs and/or norms often lead
to misunderstandings and some degree of conflict and/or alienation, or who
fall into dominant sub-groups and who need to work out their emotions about
the cultural changes happening in the group as the group becomes more
diverse. At the company I work for, we came up with 18 groups. They met a
few times, with one or two objective and trained facilitators to keep
things orderly and fair, to let issues specific to their subgroup bubble
up. The facilitators captured the essence of the issues. Then, the
facilitators took the information from each of the groups, and did a larger
report to identify the various issues, as they pertained to each group, and
specific issues that came up as significant problems. Then each focus group
sent one or two people to a larger group meeting where potential solutions
could be identified that would be satisfactory to a reasonable majority of
the people in the meeting.
It's an amazing approach. And yes, we had a focus group for white men, and
one for white women, as well as sixteen other groups that were identified
as having specific sub-group issues that caused misunderstandings and
conflict (people with disabilities, people from non-dominant religions and
agnostics and atheists, GLBT group members, people from a younger age group
in relation to our company's median age group, people from an older age
group in relation to our company's median age group, African-American men,
African-American women, Latino men, Latino women, Asian men, Asian women,
and a few others I can't remember off the top of my head). The process is
very powerful, but it's hard work, and can be very painful, and it takes a
long time to see it through and to then follow up on the action
resolutions. That being said, it really does help to make things better if
done well.
>And, personally, Brothers I have met from some of
>those "teasing" fraternities you mention are some of
>the most bigoted, uptight, militant, arrogant idiots I
>have ever met. And every time I see a license plate
>frame with their letters, I don't hesitate to make
>sure they see my ^&@ license plate frame.... but
>that's been MY experience.
There are bigoted, uptight, militant, arrogant idiots among any group, even
ours. That does not mean that we should paint all members of a group by the
brush of a dumb few.
>And I say all of this living in the heart of a
>neighborhood just outside of Baltimore populated
>primarily by those of darker skin than mine... and I
>get along just fine with my neighbors. So enough of
>this "boo,hoo" entitlement crap.
May I ask what you consider to be "entitlement crap"? I'm not being
facetious. You've hit a sensitive issue that needs to be clarified. When
people of different backgrounds discuss what "entitlement" or "special
rights" mean, in a properly facilitated discussion, it's amazing how much
gets clarified.
>I'm tired of being
>ridiculed for my race, or my gender, and knowing that
>people discriminate against me because of it.
Guess what? You've identified the emotions that most people in non-dominant
subgroups in American society live with every day. And you probably haven't
experienced a fraction of what members of these subgroups have experienced.
Most people in a subgroup (or especially in more than one subgroup) just
suck it up, and then let things build until they explode, or just spend
their lives in quiet resentment. If you are a straight white Christian male
in good health raised among predominantly other straight white Christians
in good health, then there are worlds of experience you probably have not
been exposed to. That doesn't make you a bigot or a bad person, that just
means that there are things that you probably have not experienced.
>(in case you're not aware, i'm Irish, English, and
>Sicilian -- Celtic for all historical intents and
>purposes. What you might call "white")
Nothing wrong with that - Celtic heritage is amazingly rich and
interesting, and very poorly understood in this country. I've studied a bit
of it, and find it fascinating.
>And in case anybody has read this far without
>understanding my position -- I do not support such
>support groups. ^&@ should be a support group in and
>of itself... segregating in such a way is counter to
>the entire goal of unity.
The idea is not to create separate A Phi O's for each different subgroup.
The idea is to give people from underrepresented groups who are
experiencing cultural conflicts a certain amount of space and time to
bubble up the stuff that hurts, that needs to be aired out, so that then
the issues can be addressed, and people from *ALL* of A Phi O can get an
idea of how to be more aware and sensitive to the issues that cause pain to
the people from the underrepresented group. These sort of subgroup
assemblies help to *UNITE* a larger group, if done right, and they are not
intended to divide or exclude.
Sharon Zohar
Alum EZ '87
Sectional Staff '88 - '96/'97 or so
Future Staff of some flavor or other when my health finally bounces back
