Facilitators: Emily Schatzow Rick Pinderhughes [email protected] [email protected] © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 1 Guidelines For Effective Cross -Cultural Dialogue “Try on” n It’s okay to disagree n It is not okay to blame, shame, or attack, self or others n Practice “self-focus” n Practice “both/and” thinking n Notice both process and content n Be aware of intent and impact n Confidentiality n © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 Guidelines Activity In groups of three discuss: Which guidelines come easy to me? n Which are challenging to me? n © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 3 Levels of Oppression and Change Personal n - values, beliefs, feelings Interpersonal n - behavior Institutional n - rules, policies Cultural n - beauty, truth, right © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 A Working Conceptualization of Historically Excluded (Target) and Historically Included ( Non-Target) Groups Types of Variable Historically Historically Oppression Included Groups Excluded Groups Racism Race/Color/Ethnicity White People of Color (African, Asian, Native, Latino/a Americans) Sexism Gender Men Women/Transgender Classism Socio-Economic Class Middle, Upper Class Poor, Working Class Education Level Formally Educated Informally Educated Elitism Place in Hierarchy Managers, Exempt, Faculty Clerical, Non-Exempt, Students Religious Oppression Religion Christians, Protestants Muslims/Catholics, and Others Anti-Semitism Christians Jews Militarism WW I&II, Korean, Vietnam Veterans Military Status Gulf War Veterans Ageism Young Adults Elders Age Adultism Adults Children/ Youth Heterosexism Sexual Orientation Heterosexuals Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Ableism Physical or Mental Ability Temporarily Able- Bodied Physically or Mentally Challenged Xenophobia Immigrant Status US Born Immigrant English as a Second Linquistic Oppression Language English Language Non-English © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 “Historically Included” “Historically Excluded” Group Behaviors Group Behaviors  Old Fashioned “ISMS”  Survival Behaviors  Modern “ISMS”  Internalized Oppression (I.O.) – Use by members of historically – Internalizing attitudes included groups of non-”ism” about inferiority or related reasons for continuing differentness by members to deny equal access to of historically excluded opportunity (e.g., use by groups whites of non-race related reasons…”it’s not the blacks, – The reaction to unhealed it’s the mistreatment over time buses”) – Well-intentioned, sometimes subtle behaviors that continue the historical power imbalance © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 Modern “ISM” and Internalized Oppression Theory n Modern “ISM” Behaviors n Internalized Oppression Behaviors – System beating – Dysfunctional rescuing – Blaming the system – Blaming the victim – Antagonistic avoidance of contact – Avoidance of contact – Denial of cultural differences – Denial of differences – Lack of understanding of the political – Denial of the political significance significance of oppression of differences *Political significance includes the social, economic, historical, psychological and structural impacts of oppression. Alternative Behaviors for Modern “ISM” and Internalized Oppression Behaviors  Functional Helping  Confrontation/Standing Up (instead of Rescuing) (instead of System Beating)  Problem Solving/Responsibility  Take Responsibility (instead of Blaming) (instead of Blaming)  Make Mutual Contact  Share Information/ Make Contact (instead of Avoiding) (instead of Antagonistic Avoiding)  Notice Differences  Notice and Share Information about one’s own Differences, Culture (instead of Denying Differences) (instead of Denying target group)  Notice, Ask, and Share Information about  Learn, Ask about, and Notice the the impact of the “ism on me and my target Impact (instead of Denying the Impact) group” (instead of Denying the Impact) For all behaviors, personal and organizational problem-solving at the personal, interpersonal, institutional, and cultural levels to generate ongoing multicultural structures and processes. © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 Case Study: Judith Jamison and Raising CAIN Raising Children As Invariably Nice, Inc. (Raising CAIN, Inc.) is a publicly-funded non-profit that operates 6 childcare centers and 5 after-school programs in the neighborhoods of Cambridge, MA. The classroom teachers and other front-lines staff are a fairly mixed group demographically, although more than half are Black. Two of the 6 childcare Center Directors are Black, as is one of the after-school Center Directors, while another of the After-School Directors is Latina. The Executive Director of Raising CAIN, Bill Biscomb, has been in his position for many years. Bill is white. Judith Jamison, a seasoned Black professional with a wealth of experience in both early and elementary education, is the long-time Director of Education. When the Raising CAIN’s Lead Teacher moved to Philadelphia, Judith hired Molly Merkins, who had a degree in early childhood education and brought some interesting ideas about how they might improve their services. Molly was white and had worked in the field for about three years. Within a few weeks of hiring Molly, Judith began to notice that her staff -- particularly, but not exclusively, her white staff -- were increasingly turning to Molly for the kind of advice and feedback that they’d previously gotten from Judith. When Judith asked some of the staff why this was, they said that Bill had suggested they see if Molly could be helpful. Judith felt sidelined and so she went and talked very diplomatically with Bill. Bill insisted that Judith was doing a great job, that he had a great deal of faith in her and that he knew the staff did, as well. It was just, he said, that she had a great deal on her plate and he wanted to “give her a break.” As time went on, however, nothing changed except that Molly’s role became increasingly central. Judith talked again with Bill and, once again, he told her he felt everything was fine and that she was worrying too much. Judith began to wonder if she should look for another job. © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 9 Case Study: Judith Jamison and Raising CAIN Which Modern Racism/Internalized Racism behaviors do you n see here? What are some options you see as to how best to handle the n situation. What might each of the players done differently? © VISIONS, Inc. 2011 10