Understanding the DEI Backlash

A conversation with DEI Thought Leader & Social Activist, Deborah L. Johnson

I had a chance to sit down and talk with the person to whom I owe much of who I am today. Deborah L. Johnson is my teacher and has been since 2004. She’s been a corporate diversity trainer for 40 years, is an academic, started at USC at 15…you know what, there’s not enough room on this page to share all of her accomplishments. Just know that she’s seriously badass. Case in point, this conversation we had about what some folks are calling "The DEI Backlash". We had an in-depth conversation about what it is, where it comes from, and how to respond to it as conscious leaders in a troubled world. 

We hope this helps paint a picture and provide some historical and social context to what you may be experiencing as you try desperately to move your organization forward to being more diverse, equitable and inclusive. May it help you get a new or deeper perspective of angst going on behind the resistance, defensiveness, the questioning, “why is corporate communications doing DEI?” and the eye-rolling. 

Pull up a chair. Let’s have a real talk. 

Kim Clark: That dinner was yummy. Glad we could get together and if it’s okay with you, I’d love to get your take on something I’m asked about quite often.

Deborah: Definitely, let’s do it.

Kim: There's a lot of people talking about the DEI backlash right now, and the main question I hear is why. What is going on? Why are we seeing this DEI backlash? 

Deborah: Well, to be honest with you, I'm surprised at people’s surprise. Whenever you change the status quo, there’s a backlash. 

Kim: No matter what that status quo is? 

Deborah: No matter what that status quo is. If you're opening up things based on gender, if you're opening up things based on class, if you have more immigrants coming in--with anything that shifts the configuration and constellation of perceived power, there's always backlash and resistance. There’s always a perception that someone else's progress is at my expense. That's the game that we keep playing, and very rarely have I found us able to articulate not only why progress is a good thing, but why it is also a good thing for the people who think they are losing something. 

Kim: So historically, where else have you seen these patterns? This happened, then this happened, then this happened…basically that MLK Jr. quote about the arc of justice being long but…

Deborah: Bending towards justice. Yes. Well, you can look at several examples--we have an abolitionist movement, end formal enslavement, and have this wonderful reconstruction period. But then you have the backlash of the Jim Crow era. We have World War II and women in factories are thriving. And then the men get out of the war and there's the backlash of ‘let's put 'em back in the kitchen.’  So that pattern of progress, backlash, progress, backlash, to a certain extent, is physics. For every action, there's an opposite and equal reaction. You can't elect an Obama and then not expect a Tea Party to follow. So that's why I say that I'm surprised at the surprise. 

Progress isn’t linear

And I believe that that's been our biggest failure.  We have acted like progress is linear without understanding that it's not, there are these circular patterns that happen. We also treat progress as though everybody is going to enjoy it and like it, and so we're not addressing the backlash in real-time. We're not being preventative. We wait until there's a big resistance that catches everybody off guard, but it isn't that there's some new backlash. These are the people who didn't agree with progress all along. They now just have a sense of empowerment based on the socio-political climate and feel like it's safe enough to articulate it. 

So for the most part, we've just been trading off who's in power and who gets silenced. And we're in the middle of that now, ‘let's take back the power so we can be the ones to silence this idea of forward progression for all.’  I just think, generally speaking, the progressive movements have not done a very good job of addressing the real concerns that those of the backlash are going to have. What is under those real concerns is a feeling that they have been left behind. Okay, but what's underneath that?  

Kim: They don't see themselves in DEI. 

Deborah: Correct. They don't see themselves in DEI. So you say DEI and they're thinking, not me. They're thinking exclusion, which becomes a nice, euphemistic way to say that I'm not valued. And it's a real angst to feel like you're not going to be valued, like you’re not going to have a seat when the current round of musical chairs ends. 

What I have also found is that people who have been in the position of being the oppressor are terribly afraid of the tables being turned. That's always the first thing in men's minds because they're afraid of being put in the position that women and other marginalized people are in. We have this whole history of marginalization, genocide, Jim Crow, and the list goes on. And even though folks who are resisting DEI may not know all of that history intellectually, subjectively there is this understanding or this fear of the table being flipped. If they really thought that there might be some honest sharing, that would be different, but their fear is not the sharing. Their fear is a reverse of power where they're going to be treated the same way that their groups have treated other people.

Kim: So what do we do? Where do we go from here? How long does a backlash last? How do we come out of one? What's it going to take? 

Do the work WITH people, not FOR them

Deborah: I think it's going to take some real concern and empathy when you're doing social justice work.  It's important that you do things with people, not for them. That means we’re talking to the wrong people in a lot of these discussions we’re having. It's like talking to women about what's going to move men, or talking to White people about what's going to move Black people. I don't see enough of these discussions happening with the ones who are most impacted and affected.  

Are we listening to the pain?

Are we really listening to where the pain is? Are we really asking what exactly do you need? What would be the sign of fair play to you? There's been a lot of stuff crammed down people's throats, without them having a chance to really be heard. There really has been a lot of silencing, and I'm saying that as a professional diversity consultant. So there's a balance that has to be restored. And quite frankly, I don't see it happening in many places, whether it's in our political environment or our corporate environment. There's too much, ‘how do we stay in power and persuade everybody else to go along with our agenda?’

The imbalance isn’t going to work anymore

And it seems really clear that this imbalance is not going to work anymore. It's not working politically and it's not working corporately, but the people in power haven't figured that out yet.  

I feel like we've lost the capacity to have real discourse. You know it's pushback, but when you label it as just pushback, there's a value judgment and a marginalization that happens. There’s a portrayal of anybody that's not on ‘our’ same page as backwards, ignorant, defensive and unenlightened. It demeans their dignity, which is what they're trying to protect.  I love the way that Martin Luther King puts it--you lose all moral authority with ones who can feel your contempt. So then it just becomes this game of protectionism.  

We have to remember that there is a loss of power for those spearheading a backlash. There really is. It's actually happening, and we've been ignoring it. This is not unlike the conversations you and I have had through the years about marriage equality. The gay community was not assuming any responsibility for the fact that they were rocking the world of these straight people for whom man plus woman equals marriage. You can disagree with their one plus one equals two math, but you can’t disagree with the reality of that math crumbling.

So I feel like we keep forcing these changes without the underlying discussion. The only movement that I think did a fairly decent job of it was the feminist movement. And I think that's because of the demographics of it--there were men and women in most households and so it was harder to have one-sided discussions. When our position as women was changing, we were very clear with the men about what this meant for them and what this meant to us. We had to work through it with them, the demasculinization of so many things. How can we work this out so you can still feel like a man and change some diapers every once in a while? I realize this is upsetting the whole apple cart here, so what are we gonna do?  We figured out together what it was going to look like moving forward. But I feel like part of the reason why we're in our current mess is because we're not using these principles that we know work. The same things that work to empower marginalized populations are the same things you have to do with the dominant populations who are on their way to experiencing a sense of more marginalization. 

Kim: Which is unknown territory. 

Deborah: Yes, but you have to work both ends equally. Even when we’ve been working with both ends, we've been erring on the side of the marginalized, but we haven't really spent much time on those losing power. So now, what is the impact there? For example, we tried to make sure that people of color and women had mentors. We thought, it's just gonna naturally happen with the White dudes so you're on your own. In that light, what we're calling backlash can be likened to sibling rivalry. Who's the favorite child and who gets more attention? And just like with the family, as the family grows, you have to figure that out. You have to figure out how the first or the second kid doesn't feel less important when the fourth and the fifth kid come around.

Kim: And you have to recognize that impact. 

Recognize that there’s an impact

Deborah: Bingo. Yeah. You have to recognize that there is an impact. You have to acknowledge that and help walk with people through it. And we've just been in such denial about it. People are fighting for their identity, and I feel like we keep missing that. If I can go back to marriage equality for a moment, you saw people talking about homophobia but a lot of them weren't homophobic. They didn't give a rats ass about gay couples. It was about them, because if you have a marriage, what does that say about mine? All of the surveys said they could have the rights. They could have all of it, but just don't call it a marriage because marriage is our dominion.  That's what keeps being at stake over and over and over and over again. If you become the breadwinner, what does that say about me as the man of the household? If these Black folks get more opportunities, what does that say about the opportunity I have? 

Write folks into the story

So we have to write them into the story. As White people--they are people who are fighting for their identity. They are not just fighting against you. They're fighting not to lose their own sense of position. 

So we do this revisionist history when marginalized people start coming into their own. Those who have been in the position of power start screaming and hollering and projecting that they're being treated the same way they treated everybody else. When you listen to Trump, or any of them, the picture that they paint is they've been the victims. That's how they're experiencing it because they've done it to others. So there's this loop that just keeps happening. And I think until we understand this backlash is a fear that what they've done is going to happen to them, it will keep happening. I forgot who said it, but they said, if you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu. 

Kim: So if it's not a DEI backlash, what would you call it? 

Angst

Deborah: I would call it the angst of losing majority privilege. And that's the big fear everywhere, whether it's in the corporate or the socio-political level, that we're going to be replaced, that we are dispensable. We are not valued. And other people are going to come in and replace us. Other people will be the ones that get the privileges and the perks and the advancement and all of it. They’ll get what I just identified as the perks of privilege--the visibility, the opportunity, the influence, and the deference (VOID). It creates a deep sense of loss and mistrust that the playing field's actually going to be level for once. That's why they keep referring to it as reverse racism.  But we have to analyze this resistance because we don't need more othering. That's what we're trying to dismantle. 

You've got some White people who are on board with the diversity stuff, and then you’ve got some White people who are over here saying, let's keep it White. And they’re in this battle with each other, the same battle playing out in corporate America. You’ve got some who are ready for change, and then you've got others who are in the, oh hell no we're not losing our power, camp. We're losing our position and we can't trust them to have our backs. 

So here’s the real question as diversity practitioners…are we trustworthy so far? We haven't earned it yet. 

Deborah L. Johnson, MBA, diversity trainer, social activist and thought leader

Deborah L. Johnson is a dynamic public speaker, strategist, trainer, and facilitator with over 40 years of professional experience in the field of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Known for her ability to bring clarity and humor to complex and emotionally charged issues, her clients have included MCA Universal, AT&T, Apple Inc., and Kaiser Permanente. She is an instructor at several institutes of higher learning including 13 years on the faculty of UCLA Anderson School of Management’s Executive Leadership Diversity Institute. A co-litigant in two landmark California civil rights cases, her lifetime social justice work has garnered numerous lifetime achievement awards. Author of “The Sacred YES” and “Your Deepest Intent,” she serves on the board of Pachamama Alliance with founder Lynne Twist and the Leadership Council of the Association of Global New Thought. She is also the founder of Inner Light Ministries and a founding member of the Agape International Spiritual Center with Michael Bernard Beckwith.

Watch her TEDx Talks:

It’s Time to Evolve How We Resolve

Fact, Fiction, or Freedom?

—-----

Kim Clark, Diversity, equity & inclusion communications educator and consultant

Kim has long focused on teaching, storytelling, messaging, audiences, and how culture and communications shape people’s experiences of themselves and the world. Kim’s career spans an array of fields, including radio, documentary filmmaking, media agencies, partnerships with Discovery Channel, and has been a lecturer at a University for 20+ years since earning an M.A. She led employee communication teams and strategies at PayPal, GoDaddy, and GitHub.

All the while, she’s been an advocate and educator for diversity, equity, and inclusion across the business, within teams, and throughout the employee experience. She has focused her consulting on DE&I communications and DE&I strategy for the last few years. Kim partners with Ragan Communications and Employera, a talent innovation firm.

She has studied with the precedent-setting diversity trainer, Deborah L. Johnson, for 18+ years. Kim is on a non-profit Board specializing in equine therapy for folks with physical, emotional, and mental disabilities, including her son.

She is co-author of The Conscious Communicator: the fine art of not saying stupid sh*t with TED speaker and diversity pragmatist, Janet M. Stovall. Pre-order the book here and get some cool bonuses: https://5m6g2ue0go2.typeform.com/preorderbook