Critical Race Theory- Pro or Anti-American?

MARCH 2023

by Kim Harris, M.Ed.

Distinctive Voice Consulting

 

One of the things I value most about being American is the freedom to choose our religion, the freedom to choose our careers, the freedom to choose where we’d like to live, but most importantly I value freedom of speech. Our country was founded on democracy and in a democracy, we listen to various perspectives which stems from our diverse backgrounds. As a diversity trainer and consultant, I honor various perspectives and focus on elevating diverse perspectives so that we can learn from one another and respect our differences.

 

In 2020 the United States and the world experienced a racial awakening. We witnessed disparities in health care and wellness which Covid-19 highlighted and we recognized disparities in policing in black and brown communities.  Having taught about equity, diversity and inclusivity since 2013, I was overjoyed to see every day Americans talking about systemic racism, inequity and disparities of achievement in black and brown communities as compared to their white counterparts. When I started my business in 2013, people asked me why I was talking about diversity and inequity, fast forward to 2020 and I felt as if the world was ready to hear what I had been teaching about for so many years. People were ready to talk about systemic racism and I was overjoyed. Then the pendulum began to swing in the other direction. Some people felt that the open discussions that our country was having about race and inequity was not a good thing. It made people feel uncomfortable. And when you look at equity like a piece of pie, and someone points out that some people have been receiving more pie while others are receiving less pie, unrelated to the work ethic of both groups, it can be uncomfortable. And instead of being fair, those that are enjoying more pie decry, “Why don’t the other people make another pie for themselves?” They can’t. There’s only one pie!

 

And in some respects, we cannot point the finger at those who are enjoying more pie for taking advantage of a system that is structured for them to receive more pie whether they have achieved it or not. This system is referred to as systemic racism. This is behind the creation of Critical Race Theory (CRT). CRT helps to explain systemic racism through an academic and legal framework. This framework allows people to analyze American systems such as laws, policies and institutions that uphold and reproduce racial inequalities in America leading to some folks getting more than their fair share of that pie.

 

The theory is credited to have been initiated by the late Harvard law professor Derrick Bell. Bell initiated teaching about racial disparities in law and how race and law interact. Bell resigned from Harvard over what he claimed was discriminatory hiring practices. Later, student Kimberle Crenshaw enrolled at Harvard after Bell’s departure and picked up the torch along with other fellow students to explain the importance of understanding racial inequities through a legal lens.

 

The inequities in 2020 gave rise to a resurgence in the discussion in this theory but as stated earlier, the pendulum swung leading to a backlash by conservative Americans, who did not want the fact that some people were having more pie, exposed. CRT had been transformed into the new anti-American theory that is dividing our nation. In other words, exposing systems of inequity and looking at the history of these systems became synonymous with being divisive, blaming white people for what others did in the past, and teaching Americans to hate America. Proponents of CRT believe that it provides a lens to teach the whole truth about systemic inequity in America and that actions to shut down CRT provides a cover for those who are not comfortable hearing the truth about the history and state of race relations in the U.S.

CRT opponents have taken their opposition to the political realm where legislation has been created at both state and the federal level to ban CRT teachings. Common elements of some state legislation include:

• Banning any discussion or teaching that the U.S. is inherently or fundamentally racist
• Bans on divisive concepts
• Teachers being required to teach without giving deference to any one perspective
• A ban on discussions of systemic racism and sexism that would make someone feel guilty about their skin color
• Drastic funding cuts for anti-bias training
• Provisions allowing the state to withhold funding for schools that violate these bans

 

Action at the Federal level includes the former presidential administration’s “Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping” in September of 2020. This Order directed federal agencies to end trainings about diversity, equity and inclusivity and discussions on critical race theory. There was even a phone number for people to report their employer for hosting such trainings. Thankfully, a federal judge later blocked the directive and the Biden Administration has rescinded the Order.

And in the spirit of this rescinded order, I aim to continue to speak the truth about inequitable systems that privilege certain people over others which create disparate outcomes, by offering a workshop on Critical Race Theory. I offer this workshop, not in the spirit of making anyone feel badly about who they are because talking about systemic racism is not personal or race blaming, but to raise awareness about inequity so that we can do better. Thinking critically about America requires Americans to separate their personal identities from American institutions and to think about inequity from a systemic perspective. Once we do this, we can have a real conversation about equity and inclusion that will make America great for everyone.

 

Are you interested in having a respectful conversation about whether Critical Race Theory is pro or anti-American? If so, please visit to register for this workshop: https://www.distinctivevoiceconsulting.com/store/critical-race-theory-pro-american-or-anti-american-workshop-saturday-march-18-2023-1000-am-12-noon-pst-via-zoom

 

 

DISTINCTIVE VOICE CONSULTING

FEBRUARY 2023

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

by Russell Harris Jr

 

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

ALL OUTCOMES WOULD BE THE SAME

OR HAVE A STRIKING SIMILARITY

TO A WORLD WITHOUT POLARITY

 

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

THERE WOULD BE NO PERCEPTION

OF A THREAT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE

OR ANY VALID SIGNIFICANCE

TO YOUR FEAR DRIVEN IGNORANCE

 

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

WE WOULD AS PEOPLE OF COLOR

 ALSO LIVE TO TELL THE TALE

ABOUT GETTING A WARNING

A CITATION OR AT WORST – A SAFE RIDE TO JAIL

 

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

THEN POLICE WHO COMMIT OFFENSES

AGAINST THOSE WHO ARE DEFENCELESS

WITH EVIDENCE INSURMOUNTABLE

WOULD BE HELD EXTREMELY ACCOUNTABLE

 

IF ALL LIVES MATTERED

ALL HUMAN LIFE

 WOULD BE VALUED THE SAME

POLICE WOULD POLICE THE SAME

CHARGES WOULD BE THE SAME

JUDGES WOULD RULE THE SAME

STATISTICS WOULD REFLECT IT

AND NO ONE WOULD REJECT IT

BLACK LIVES MATTER

 

An equity, diversity and inclusiveness Gratitude List

By Kim Harris, M.Ed.

Distinctive Voice Consulting

January 2023

www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

In honor of the new year, I’d like to take a break from calling out bigotry and inequity to discuss strides in equity and inclusiveness for 2022. Below are some things that came to my mind but I would like to see this list grow. To that end, I am asking that you help me grow this list by adding to this list in the comments section of this blog.

 

2022 Equity, Diversity and Inclusivity Gratitude List

 

1.       The Justice40 Initiative to ensure that federal agencies deliver 40% of the overall benefits of climate, clean energy, affordable and sustainable housing, clean waters and other investments to underserved communities.

2.       An executive order was signed to improve public safety and criminal justices for Native Americans, and address the crisis of missing and murdered indigenous people.

3.       The DOJ restricted the use of chokeholds and carotid restraints by federal law enforcement offices, placed some restrictions on the use of no-knock warrants and required the use of body cameras.

4.       Justice has finally been served for Atatiana Jefferson, an un-armed African-American woman who was murdered in 2019 by a Fort Worth Texas police officer, responding to a wellness check call.

5.       The President signed Executive Orders to advance educational equity for Black, Hispanic and Native-American students.

6.       The COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act was signed into law which aims to stop the increase in violence against Asian American communities.

7.       The first African-American woman was sworn in as a Supreme Court justice.

8.       In Washington State, Seattle’s Chinatown International District (CID) community organized protests to stop the expansion of a Sound Transit station in their neighborhood. Expansion opponents claimed that the CID bore an unfair amount of burden for this project.

9.       In Whatcom County, Washington, the county council passed a resolution to establish the Whatcom Racial Equity Commission on November 22, 2022. The commission aims “to gather, review, and evaluate data and to make recommendations on eliminating racial inequities, in all its forms throughout Whatcom County.”

 Your EDI Gratitude entry here… (Please add below in the comments)

 

 

Black Friday Bias: How White Supremacy Culture Reared its Ugly Head this Holiday Season

Winter 2022 

By Kimberly Harris, M.Ed.

Distinctive Voice Consulting

www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

“You only had to wait an extra five minutes,” said the dominant culture/white appearing store employee at a major department store in my home town. I could see the pleading look in her eyes begging me to let it go. But I wouldn’t. Me and my husband’s time was just as valuable as the dominant culture/white appearing person’s time who cut in line.

 

It started out as a pleasant shopping trip. My husband and I went to catch some Black Friday sales at the mall. After selecting our deals from one store, we approached a check stand with a short line. When we reached the check stand, I noticed a woman standing off to the side and saw that she was in line so my husband and I yielded to her and stood behind her. When it was her turn, she approached the check stand and to our dismay, whipped out three sheets of paper with bar codes on them and proceeded to try to return or exchange something. The clerk attempted to help the customer but after several minutes it became increasingly clear that the customer was not going to be able to accomplish what she set out to do. My husband and I continued to wait patiently but the thought did cross my mind, “Who tries to return things on Black Friday?”

 

After several more minutes the white appearing employee who I referenced at the beginning of this story, came to the check-stand and began to help a white appearing customer who was not in line. My husband and I gave each other a look and he approached the checker to explain that we had been waiting in line for awhile and should be next. The checker ignored my husband and continued logging in to her cash register. My husband then knocked on the counter to get her attention and she still ignored him. So, I approached the area and joined in to explain that we were next in line and had been waiting for several minutes. She looked at us and continued what she was doing.

 

In the meantime, the line cutting customer’s eyes were wide with fear but neither the customer nor the employee made any attempt to right the wrong. They just ignored the conflict and continued on as if my husband and I did not exist. Because my husband and I refused to be ignored, the employee finally opened her mouth to apologize but continued helping the customer. I asked for a manager and the other checker helping the customer with the return stated that the employee allowing the line cutting was the manager. My heart sank because she was in a leadership role, modeling white supremacy culture.

 

I then thought of the dynamic, Black man and Black woman customers waiting, white woman customer and white woman manager being called out on not being fair. The dynamic brought to mind two points from Tema Okun’s model of White Supremacy Culture which can be found here: https://www.whitesupremacyculture.info/

 

The two points that I believe were at play here were: “defensiveness and denial” where the cashier initially denied my husband’s voice when he tried to tell her we were waiting first. The other point I see here from Tema Okun’s model is the “right to comfort and fear of open conflict”. The employee did not want to admit that she was wrong and preferred denying my husband and I fair treatment while she prioritized the white comfort of herself and the white customer. She also demonstrated a fear of open conflict. The entire exchange soured my holiday spirit. After helping the line-cutter the clerk then rang up my husband but I left my purchase items on the counter in protest.

 

To help prevent these types of exchanges, i.e., the marginalization of BIPOC people, I started Distinctive Voice Consulting in 2014 to train community members and business employees on how to handle these types of interactions. The employee’s reaction was to ignore us, then apologize, but continue her behavior of helping the white-appearing customer first. Both white folks had a responsibility: the employee should have stopped what she was doing, acknowledged that there was a line, apologized to the person she was helping and asked her to get in line and wait her turn. The customer should have acknowledged her transgression and followed the rules of our social construct which is first come-first-serve. But of the two people, I expected the employee to do the right thing: to be willing to be uncomfortable by serving the Black customers before the white appearing customer. This action takes work. It takes training and willingness to look deep into ourselves to unearth our unconscious bias and to retrain our brains to avoid white supremacy culture. This is difficult because we have all been indoctrinated into white supremacy culture in the United States. White supremacy culture is as invisible as the air we breathe. Unlearning white supremacy culture may feel like someone is taking our breath away. But it is what needs to happen. I started my business to help create a world of true equality, help people see their bias, and awaken people to behaviors, practices and policies that disadvantage some and advantage others.

 

To this end, I have created a new offering to help individuals acknowledge their unconscious bias. It is called a personal diversity audit. This audit is different than my institutional audit where I evaluate bias within an organization. With a personal diversity audit, I provide you with an individual 30 question survey to assess your bias, equity and inclusion. I have one test for staff and one test for managers. I have various packages based on all budget types.  If you are interested in a personal diversity audit, an institutional audit for your business or place of employment, diversity training or having me facilitate conversations about equity and inclusion, please contact me at DistinctiveVoiceConsulting@gmail.com or visit my website www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

***

 

 

Student Loan Forgiveness from an Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Lens

Fall 2022 

By Kimberly Harris, M.Ed.

Distinctive Voice Consulting

www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

 

After my divorce I found myself in the position where I was a stay-at-home mother with three kids to raise. At the time of my divorce, I had been out of the work force for seven years and my skills were outdated. So, I decided to return to college to earn a Master’s degree in education. I worked part-time and went to school part-time while raising two school aged boys and a high school daughter. I did this with little financial support which made things really tight. So, to give myself breathing room, I decided to take out student loans to make ends meet. I figured once I graduated, I could get a full-time job and pay back those loans. I took out those loans twelve years ago and due to interest, job lay-offs, and various other setbacks, I am still paying those loans off today. For me, the $10,000 in student loan forgiveness is a blessing because that amount basically covers the interest on my loans over the years. Having this forgiveness waive my interest seems fair to me because I will pay back what I borrowed. The tax payers will not be paying for my circumstances.

 

I share my story to enlighten folks on the diversity of reasons for student loan debt. I don’t know many folks who borrow money when they don’t need it so in my view, there is a story of need behind every student loan. When I look at the polarization on this issue, I see a political divide between those who support student loan forgiveness and those who don’t: Democrat versus Republican. This year, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI), alongside Reps. Greg Murphy (R-NC) and Dusty Johnson (R-SD), introduced the “Stop Reckless Student Loan Actions Act of 2022” bill. Among other things the bill would prohibit the president from cancelling outstanding federal student loan payments due to a national emergency and forgive $10-$20K in student loan debt for Americans making less than $125K per year. I see two issues here: waiving interest on loan payments during a national emergency and forgiving $10-$20K of debt outright. This bill addresses both of these matters and claims that the forgiveness of interest and payments during a national emergency disproportionately benefits higher income earning borrowers. This may be true for people who earn more than $125,000 per year and can afford to pay their student loans, but the second matter of the $10-$20K loan forgiveness for people earning less than $125,000 per year does not disproportionately benefit high income earners, but the contrary. It allows for a break and financial support for middle class and lower income families, and mostly people of color who are struggling to repay their student loans.

 

Across the board, statistics show that:

 

• More than 1 in 5 U.S. families hold student loan debt (totaling $1.6 trillion dollars)
• Black families borrow student loans at higher rates than other races- and own more debt
• Many families where the student loan borrower didn’t finish college, still hold substantial amounts of student loan debt
• The least wealthy Americans are most likely to own student loan debt- and owe more of it

 

What this tells me is that those who oppose student loan debt forgiveness are waging a war against Black and poor people in America. Biden’s student loan bail-out plan is estimated to cost between $469-$519 billion dollars. It is quite an expensive plan, but what will be the gain to the economy from these Americans with this new financial freedom? Proponents of student loan forgiveness are trying to kick start debtors’ lives by relieving some of the burden of student loan debt. Many borrowers have put off starting families and buying homes, activities that are the bedrock of feeding the U.S. economy.

 

Opponents of student loan forgiveness assert that such a bail out would trigger inflation. The jury is still out on this as economists are divided on whether or not student loan forgiveness based on Biden’s plan would trigger inflation. And on the matter of inflation, where were these fiscal stewards and their concerns of inflation when the U.S. government funded the war in Iraq to the tune of $1.922 trillion dollars? A war over weapons of mass destruction that were later determined to not have existed. Where were these stewards when the taxpayers bailed out the banking industry in 2008-2009 with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to the tune of $498 billion dollars? Tax payers bailed out the banks then the banks turned around and foreclosed on many of these same taxpayers’ homes and 4,500 of these folks in the banking industry gave themselves million-dollar bonuses.

 

It is quite obvious to me that certain Americans favor supporting business over people. But I believe we need to support both, fairly. Helping business does benefit society because businesses employ people. Similarly, helping people benefits society because people are consumers that spend to drive our economy. If people don’t have jobs, they cannot spend. If people are in debt, they forego major purchases and spend less. Both help our economy and are important. Supporting student loan forgiveness benefits our society by helping relieve the burden of all borrowers, but particularly people of color who borrow in greater numbers. People of color who are aspiring to obtain an education to increase their skills so that they can have a higher income, a better way of life and be greater contributors to our tax base. I see great equity in helping people educate themselves when they are not born with silver spoons in their mouths and come from families that could not help them pay for college. Each borrower has a story. Whether it is an immigrant that has come to America for a better life, or a divorced parent who is trying to kick start their career, education is a good thing and that is why I believe that student loan debt cancelation for lower income families is an equitable initiative.

 

If you are interested in training and more conversations about equity and inclusion, please contact me at DistinctiveVoiceConsulting@gmail.com or visit my website www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

 

 

 

Why I Don’t Share My Pronouns: Confessions of an EDI Trainer and Consultant

By Kimberly Harris, M.Ed., AMP

Distinctive Voice Consulting

 

Its pride month and I have a confession to make. As an equity, diversity and inclusion trainer and consultant, I don’t share my pronouns (though in my workshops I encourage people to do so if they choose to). I understand that this choice is one of privilege because I am a cisgender woman (my gender identity and expression match my assigned gender at birth). I first heard of sharing pronouns in the summer of 2015. I was on the board of the Bellingham Racial Justice Coalition, a group that I co-founded to fight racism and injustice after the Michael Brown killing in 2014 by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri. I was at a meeting and one of my colleagues started the meeting by telling people to introduce themselves and share their pronouns. I didn’t understand the concept at that time so I shied away from doing so until I could better understand the meaning behind this practice. After the meeting I asked why this was necessary and was told that sharing pronouns creates inclusivity for people from the LGBTQ+ community. And while I am an ally for the LGBTQ+ community and am definitely a proponent of inclusivity, the practice didn’t sit well with me because I felt it exclusionary to other marginalized groups by only focusing on inclusivity for the LGBTQ+ community. I watched over the past few years as people encouraged this practice in meetings and I observed people sharing their pronouns in their emails.

 

As pronoun sharing grew over the last few years, I couldn’t shake the feeling that this practice left me unsettled. I attended several diversity trainings and asked among the trainers and participants why they encouraged this practice and the responses were very similar: it creates a space of inclusion for the LGBTQ+ community and moves society away from gender as a binary concept. I wrestled with this concept for seven years now, debating writing about this subject. My feelings came full circle this past week as it occurred to me why I am unsettled with this practice. For years I felt badly about not feeling peace with the practice- was I, a Black woman from two marginalized groups jealous? I reasoned not because the term “Black Lives Matter” became commonplace after the murder of George Floyd in 2020, so I didn’t feel left behind. What came to me is the irony in the rationale to share pronouns: that it creates an atmosphere of respect and inclusion. But respect and inclusion for whom? Certainly not all marginalized groups. The thought occurred to me that I’d like to see a society create a practice of using an acronym that represents and demonstrates respect and inclusion for people from all marginalized groups. I would like to see a society where people introduce themselves and sign their emails with something like, “AMP” as in, “Ally for Marginalized People.” We could also introduce ourselves this way as in, “Hi, my name is Kim, AMP.”

 

By suggesting an acronym that represents inclusion for all marginalized people, would I be taking away from the LBGTQ+ community in the same way the phrase, “All Lives Matter” minimizes the phrase, “Black Lives Matter”?  I don’t believe so. Saying “All Lives Matter” ignores the marginalization and oppression of Black and Brown people by dilution, but by saying you are an ally for all marginalized people, this expands the circle of human concern for people from all oppressed groups. In the United States, the LGBTQ+ community made up 3.5% of the population based on a study released in 2011 by the UCLA School of Law Williams Institute. Other groups relegated to the margins of society such as women made up 58.4% of the U.S. population in 2020 according to the U.S. Census, obese people made up 41.9% of the U.S. population in 2017 according the Centers for Disease Control, physically disabled people made up 12.6% of the U.S. population in 2015 according to the U.S. Census, and undocumented immigrants made up 3.2% of the U.S. population in 2017 according to the Pew Research Center.

 

Though not an exhaustive list of marginalized people, we may find ourselves in meetings with people who are part of any of these groups. So while I don’t want to subtract from the LGBTQ+ community being seen and brought into the circle of society, I encourage people who like to use their pronouns to continue to do so. Also, in an effort to expand safety and inclusion, I believe that we as a society need to find an additional way to express that we are allies and safe people for anyone in the room who feels they may not be welcomed or included because of who they are or where they come from. I’d like to suggest an additional acronym option in an effort to increase the circle of inclusion for all marginalized people.

If you would like to learn more about equity, diversity and inclusivity or belong to a group or organization that needs equity, diversity and inclusivity training, visit my website www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

                                                                             ***

 

 

Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen

By Kimberly Harris, M.Ed.

www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

 

It was the fall of 2021 when I visited my car dealership to pick up a part that I’d ordered. I rushed in after work to catch the parts department before they closed. I was in a good mood because fall is my favorite season and there was sunshine in the Pacific Northwest. When I entered the service department, there were three customer service desks, one for each car brand. As I turned the corner of the service department, I found myself face to face with a young white woman who stood to attention when she saw me. She asked me if I was there for Volkswagen service. I replied “no,” that I was there to pick up a part from the parts department. Suddenly I felt it: that sting of a thinly veiled instance of racism, a put down, being made to feel less than. I brushed away the feeling, as many people from historically marginalized groups in the United States do daily, and proceeded to pick up my part. As I waited for the young man to retrieve my item I couldn’t shake the feeling of why the woman assumed I was there for service for the least expensive car that the dealership sold. Was she a history major that understood systemic racism and how marginalized people in the United States have been systemically discriminated against that created financial oppression? Did most people of color she saw on a day to day basis go there for Volkswagen service? Or did I look like a Volkswagen owner? If so, what does a Volkswagen owner look like? I had a sinking feeling of being stereotyped and it hurt. I then realized that I was a victim of a micro-aggression. A micro-aggression, according to Kevin Nadal, a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, is “defined as the everyday, subtle, intentional — and oftentimes unintentional — interactions or behaviors that communicate some sort of bias toward historically marginalized groups.” And let’s be clear here. There is nothing wrong with owning a Volkswagen. My very first car was a Volkswagen and I loved it. The problem here is the assumption that I could not have been at the dealership for service for one of the more expensive cars. Why couldn’t I have been there for Porsche or Audi service? I didn’t have an, “I love Volkswagens” shirt on, or a Volkswagen button or a baseball cap, so there was no external concrete reason why this employee could have made her assumption. And this doesn’t just happen to me. Oprah had this experience in Zurich when a store clerk would not show her a handbag because the clerk thought it was too expensive for her https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/09/world/oprah-winfrey-racism-switzerland/index.html

As a person of color I had a choice to make: one, do I want to let this slide and forget about it, or two, do I want to use this opportunity to share with this person how her subtle act made me feel. In the end I decided as an equity, diversity and inclusivity educator, I would chose to educate. And let’s be clear, no person from a marginalized group bears any burden to educate anyone from the dominant group unless they chose to. It is not the minority person’s burden to educate the dominant culture, though I do so professionally because I believe it is my calling. Similarly, it is not the responsibility of a person with a disability to educate an able-bodied person about their disability. Nor does an immigrant to the U.S. have to explain to a U.S. born citizen how they were able to immigrate to America. In my circumstance, I chose to educate because I wanted this young woman to be aware of her behavior. I chose to educate because I wanted to make her aware of her assumption. I chose to educate because I wanted her to be aware so that she doesn’t sterotype others like she did me.

I completed my transaction and headed towards the desk where I saw the young woman earlier and to my disappointment she wasn’t there. Her desk was clear and it appeared that she had gone home for the day. “A missed opportunity,” I thought. I made one last effort to give her the benefit of the doubt and inquired of another employee if the woman who asked me if I was there for Volkswagen service worked at the Volkswagen service desk. If she did, this would explain her enthusiasm to help me with Volkswagen and I could put this whole incident to rest. But alas, my effort to unburden her of being a micro-aggressor was squashed as her co-worker told me she did not work for Volkswagen. With my micro-aggression confirmed, I shook my head, swallowed my pain, and stuffed it in the “oppressive experiences” box in my head to write about it in a cathartic way today. I wasn’t able to educate a soul that day so I will save it for another day, maybe.

If you would like to learn more about equity, diversity and inclusivity terms like micro-aggression, or belong to a group or organization that needs equity, diversity and inclusivity training, visit my website www.DistinctiveVoiceConsulting.com

                                                                             ***