We’ve Gotten Reports About You by The Enigma

The dilemma, when this type of situation presents itself, is that the subject is not provided any kind of solid evidence to back up the claims made in such reports.  It is a frustrating thing to be told you’re a problem but refused an explanation as to why, or more importantly provided evidence to support the claim! 

Not too long in the distant past a nonwhite had recently been hired to work in a community.  The nonwhite’s job was to provide an important service to families in need.  For the first year or so, everything went swimmingly; they were interacting with colleagues in and outside of work, regularly meeting with their supervisor with ease and learning the ins and outs of their position.  It was not until the second year that they detected a subtle change in the environment.  People the nonwhite would regularly greet and share banter with withdrew, requests to hang out after work decreased and occasions of being completely dismissed in group settings occurred.  Before long, the nonwhite learned that a colleague had spread a false rumor.  This seemingly innocuous thing ravaged the once harmonious and cooperative environment.  It contributed to the development of a hostile environment where people began to mistreat and disregard the nonwhite based on the false rumor.

An attempt to address the party responsible was met with denial and they attempted to blame someone else!  One interesting part of the conversation the nonwhite had with their white counterpart is they refused to disclose what the false rumor was, but admitted to its existence. 

More often than not, if you are nonwhite and you give the slightest hint of intelligence, confidence, assertiveness etc…you may encounter this kind of dilemma.  When hearing, discussing and experiencing dilemmas like this, a question comes to mind:  why is it so easy to construct a nonwhite body as a problem?  Being a problem can be a big responsibility!

At this point, you might be thinking that the nonwhite probably did, said or expressed something that was inappropriate, and they were justly punished.  Even someone of the fairest disposition may wonder, “well, what if they deserved it?”  I would agree with you; in any social category of people, you can have irresponsible people.  However, the fundamental difference between a white person and a nonwhite who are irresponsible is the degree of threat perceived.  A white person may get a friendly warning; a nonwhite person might get a letter in their permanent file or even be fired.    

To return to the example of a supervisor who says, “I’ve been getting reports about you” naturally the nonwhite employee would ask for the details of the complaint.  But, the response by the supervisor or boss is often that they are not at liberty to disclose what the reports entail.  Additionally, the information the reports contain or what relevance it holds to the actual issue at hand are withheld.  The nonwhite employee gets responsibility for the problem without either their perspective nor thoughts considered.  One never quite gets the routine down of how to respond to a statement like “we have been getting reports about you” because statements of this kind strike a chord of contradiction. 

It is analogous to a car dealer informing you there is a problem with the car, but that you can drive the car anyway.  What do you do?  Do you take it to a mechanic to learn the extent and nature of the problem?  Do you assume the problem will work itself out?  Do you get another car?  When information is presented like this you wonder whether there is even any interest in finding resolution!  This is where racial dynamics might come into play.

What the boss or supervisor needs to do is start by telling all the parties involved in the perceived problem: “…we have a problem and we need to figure out how WE are going to resolve it…”  This is necessary because, for instance, if there are three people involved but only one person is asked to bear the burden of resolving the problem, the perception, feeling and actions of the other two people are excluded.  These two people won’t share the responsibility of seeing how they contributed and how they can help resolve the problem.

What is particularly frustrating about these kinds of situations is if the nonwhite individual is inclined to remedy the situation, the action or statement in question is hardly ever specified; it is shrouded in vagueness.  There is an assumption that the nonwhite person is fully aware of the behavior or action that contributed to the problem and that their contribution can be attributed to a bigger portion of the cause of the problem – in other words, it’s their responsibility to solve the perceived problem and theirs alone. 

Here’s another example from a professional office setting:  A white person shares personal information with a nonwhite team member.  When the nonwhite colleague does not reciprocate with personal information of their own, the white person becomes uncomfortable and that discomfort leads to anger.  After chatting with white team members who give them support, they complain to a supervisor, “I felt uncomfortable…I felt threatened…they seemed aggressive etc”).  It is the beginning stages of the problem unfolding. 

Then, a representative from human resources is called in and talks with the nonwhite employee because of the white person’s anger-fueled complaint.  The human services staff member jumps to the entirely incorrect conclusion that the nonwhite talked about personal information with their white counterpart.  They give the nonwhite employee a reprimand and instruct them to refrain from conversations of a personal nature.  The assumptions underlying the claim made by the white employee go unexamined and the interpretations by the non-white human services staff person go unchallenged.  Ultimately, the inequitable treatment of the information from the nonwhite employee compared to their white counterpart is fundamental to the maintenance of the problem.

What accelerates the rate of thinking to go to the extreme for members of one social category of people and not another?  From a historical perspective, a significant factor that contributes to the conditions which allow for seeds of this kind to germinate and grow is the history of racism in the U.S.

Since 1619, the word black has been given a negative connotation and anything associated with it equally so.  The fate of a small town called Rosewood comes to mind where the negative associations made with the word black were a contributing factor to the outcome. 

One afternoon in Rosewood, Florida, a white woman named Fannie Taylor ran out of her house frantic and yelling that a black man had violated her.  After a short period, the town sheriff got wind of this, and quickly assembled some men.  That group turned into a mob to pursue this “violator”.  The mob made quick work; interrogating, chasing and in some instances executing every black man they came across.   Not only did the mob’s work extend to destroying black bodies, but the town where these black bodies resided was burned to the ground.  Rosewood was completely destroyed.  Although there was evidence that Fanny Taylor lied, she was never prosecuted. Thus, another story of brutality against black bodies was added to the collective consciousness.

The general approach to the problem is usually foisted on the shoulders of nonwhites associated with social categories considered to be natural or physical.  Natural and physical refer to the racial classification that formulated theories of a biological basis to make sense of this thing called race and to determine who fits into what racial category.  As a matter of course, racial categories that departed from eurocentric traits, qualities and physical characteristics were correspondingly treated as less developed. 

There is no shared responsibility when it comes to this problem.  Only certain categories of people, the nonwhite categories, get the honor of bearing the weight of it.  Whether in the context of work, school, community etc., the problem is unrelenting in its pursuit to apply pressure to nonwhite bodies and minds.   

Recommendations

If we assume white people are involved in situations like the workplace examples above, how can they explore and examine their possible contributions to the problem?

For nonwhites who are truly interested in helping their white sisters and brothers manage and accept responsibility for their anger in these situations, it is important to start by tapping into the emotion.  It is necessary for white people to begin to think, feel and see in ways where they reimagine themselves in the context of the problem.  By doing this, a white person’s anger might be better managed, and support provided by white and nonwhite colleagues to the white person can be used to promote the notion of a shared responsibility for the problem.  After all, is it not in everyone’s interest to learn to hold both white and nonwhite people accountable for their actions?  

What is one action a white person can take in such situations?  


Historically, if an issue arose, the nonwhite assumed responsibility for it and white people generally, unknowingly or knowingly, colluded with this. 


Surprisingly, a nonwhite may assume culpability not necessarily out of desire, but out of a tendency based on historical patterns and relationships – culpability is assumed out of a tendency for survival!  This is especially true in the workplace when issues arise due to miscommunication, misperception or misinterpretation.  The basic presumption is that because the person is nonwhite they either did or said something that caused the miscommunication.  Sadly, a nonwhite may accept that presumption in order to stay out of trouble and keep their job.

One basic action a white person could take is to increase their ability to recognize and questioning this dynamic.

To break it down, increasing their ability to recognize and question this dynamic can be thought of in two ways:  A white person can 1) reflect on their experience of conflict between themselves and nonwhite staff and examine the constructiveness of their actions, and 2) increase their ability to identify patterns of dismissiveness during anger-provoking events with nonwhite staff where they might display hostility unknowingly for a nonwhite perspective and experience.

The saying it takes two to tango is suitable for our purposes here because it implies a shared responsibility – resolution for the problem is a shared endeavor.   The problem of racism attempts to undermine our capacity to relate to each other in meaningful ways.  Although understandable, saying things like, “I don’t see color” or “We need to focus on the content of peoples’ character,” do not quite get us to where we need to be for this and variations of this statement to be appropriate.  First, we must establish a foundation so that such statements correspond to a social reality, a workplace where race no longer factors into human relations.


Racism seeks refuge in taken-for-granted assumptions of what our responsibility as citizens is.  It hinders our ability to learn, understand, and simultaneously acknowledge racism’s social, political and economic significance.  Because of racism we lack the ability to imagine what interactions/relations would look like without it.  This hinders our ability to be able to see, feel and think in nonracial terms.  It becomes necessary then to walk through those closed doors in our private inner worlds to untangle the jumbled mass of emotion connected to the subject of race – this is at the core of racial work. 

There are no laws or rules to tell us to do this, which provides a huge incentive not to embark on this journey.  However, if we do not dare to embark on this journey, statements like, “I don’t see color” or “We need to focus on the content of peoples’ character” or “the merit of peoples’ work and ideas needs to count above all else” become empty vessels without a destination-floating aimlessly in the wide abyss.    

As members of the human race, we need to do something that is rather counter-intuitive – acknowledge the effects of racism in order to experience race relations in nonracial terms.

###

Photos:  
1. “Let’s Talk About Race” Flickr, gdstream.  Pictured is Tia Priest, Diversity and Inclusion Manager, GDS.  Creator: Graham Higgins | Credit: Government Digital Service. Copyright: UK GDS © Crown Copyright 2019 Creative Commons License
2. rawpixel.com. CCO Public Domain
3. Richard Elzey, Roseland Memorial Plaque. https://www.flickr.com/photos/elzey/