i’d like to make an a distinction between being inclusive and eliminating exclusivity. And you may be thinking, but when we improve inclusivity, doesn’t that automatically eliminate exclusivity?

It doesn’t and let me explain why.

A THREAD.

Organizations working on inclusivity - even those doing so with all enthusiasm - often leave virtually untouched the kinds of exclusivity that allocate power to certain groups (generally white men).

They will ensure representation in important committees, but leave untouched the fact that most of those committees are still led by white men

They will follow demographics of people promoted on time each year, but leave untouched the fact that EARLY promotions go almost exclusively to white men.

They will hold diversity gatherings and social events, but leave untouched the more meaningful networking, the informal secret-handshake socializing that happens on golf courses and after hours over drinks.

In other words, they will do visibly inclusive actions, while preserving power through exclusivity.

That is why inclusivity is the cardboard cutout of equity, as long as exclusivity is left untouched.

By all means be inclusive. But please demonstrate how you are stomping out exclusivity at the same time. This is the magnesium to your hypokalemia when you can’t figure out why pouring in potassium does not fix the problem.

I have spoken.