July 11, 2023 • 43 mins
In this episode of Communicate Like You Give A Damn, Kim Clark talks with Maria Gamboa. Maria talks about the takeaways from her dissertation leading into consultant work. Gamboa believes there needs to be a major shift in mindset for inclusion. There are many group rights around voting. We must try to understand what policies impact certain groups. Maria believes that there are many inequities in language, concerning policy - especially under the DEI lens. How can we take responsibility to do better in policy creation? We must have discussion around integrity when creating and enforcing political campaigns. We must have the difficult discussions with everyone about what is considered ‘normal’ and what are stereotypes. Maria shares we must acknowledge the realities of inequities and always create discussion around policy reinforcement for certain groups.
About the Guest:
Maria is a first generation immigrant, mother, wife, former academic and historian, and currently works as a consultant helping nonprofits and foundations develop strategic plans. She grew up in the US and Mexico, and is currently based in San Diego.
Maria recently launched a blog where she examines mental health in the workplace for first generation professionals. You can follow her on LinkedIn or Instagram.
About Kim:
Kim Clark (she/her) focuses her work on the communicator and content creator's role in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). She is the co-author of The Conscious Communicator: The fine art of not saying stupid sh*t, an Amazon #1 bestseller and the leading voice for DEI communications and social justice messaging for brands.
She speaks at conferences, writes custom workshops, writes inclusive communications guides, and consults with companies on all things related to diversity, equity, and inclusion communications. Kim is a member of the LGBTQ+ community, a cisgender woman, Native American (Muscogee Nation) and a mom of two kids with disabilities. These marginalized identities and the privileges that come with society seeing her as White motivate her daily for social change.
Communicate Like You Give A Damn Podcast
Thank you for listening! Please review, leave a comment and subscribe!
Here is the NYT article on the Fulbright, and my blogpost on "diversity money". Here is Amber Cabral's post on Juneteenth and the Walmart ice...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Kim Clark (00:00):
Hello, welcome back. Thank you for being here. Maria,
(00:04):
I am so excited to have aconversation with you, you and I
have been on in a couple oftrainings together, you helped
me out and put together aYouTube video that talks about
how not to be performativeduring Hispanic Heritage Month,
we're going to talk about theterminal lateen, Latinx, etc. So
(00:27):
that's why I hesitated stuff. SoI, I am so fascinated by your
background, and I really enjoyour conversations. And I know
that you're going to be bring avery unique angle to this
conversation around diversity,equity and inclusion,
communications, and inclusivelanguage as it relates to
policies. This is gonna be areally interesting conversation.
So please introduce yourself,and we'll get into it.
Maria Gamboa (00:51):
Thanks. My name is Maria Gamboa. I'm a consultant
and my prior life was asacademic trained as a historian.
And so that's what I that's whatI did, I studied the history of
a lot of policies to understandthem. Yeah, and I think what I
do, too, is help improveprograms and understand the
(01:11):
purpose of programs and howthey're written and who they're
actually for. And if they'reachieving their goals. So no, we
do Yeah, now we do. Now I dostrategy consulting for
nonprofits and foundations, anda lot in health care and
education. But, you know, that'smy day job. And so I'm always
(01:32):
asking hard questions aboutprograms, what their goal is,
and also resistance toimplementation, because that's
one of the things right thatit's one thing to write
something down, it's anotherthing to implement it and
enforce it and fund it. So thoseare some of the questions How
does it work in practice?
Kim Clark (01:54):
Well, you have your PhD, which is so impressive. And
I would like to learn about whatgot you to do the topic that you
did on your dissertation? Andwhat were some of the key things
that kind of you they weretakeaways from surprise you
within the work that you now doin your consulting?
Unknown (02:15):
Yeah, so my research was actually on the history of
comprehensive immigrationreform. So the 1986 Act that
many remember is amnesty, butwhich actually started as an
employer sanctions bill. So howdid that happen? I study that,
and I study how Latinos werebeing recognized as a domestic
(02:38):
minority group that neededprotection, and resources, at
the same time that undocumentedimmigration was growing. And so
the problems that that createdfor these advocacy groups that
were trying to increaseprotections for Latinos in
education and employment andvoting and housing, you know,
all the areas where it shows up.And people were testing the
(03:03):
limits of that inclusion, backthen in the 60s and 70s 70s,
especially, to see if itincluded immigrants. And
sometimes people hadn't thoughtthat it could include immigrants
or that immigrants would everaccess rights and resources. And
so once that started happening,they started to write exclusions
to make sure that immigrants didnot, were not included. And so
(03:26):
now we're in a moment wherestates are rewriting policies to
be inclusionary or exclusionary.And that's important when we
talk about inclusion justbecause inclusion makes some
people very uncomfortable,because it requires a shift in
mindset. And sometimes peoplethink, have very definitions
(03:48):
just of what it means somepeople think that means
inclusion at the bottom. Andthat that people will be
satisfied with that. And otherpeople think it means inclusion
at all levels, even at the top,even in leadership. So that's
some of what I examined. And forexample, just real quick, this
is when they were debating ifundocumented kids should have
(04:09):
the right to go to publicschool. And when it went to the
Supreme Court, the justices wereasking, Okay, what are the
implications? If if undocumentedkids are given the right to go
to public school? Do they get togo to college to what if they
ever want to go to college? Andthe lawyers for the kids were
saying, well, we're not talkingabout college, we that's not
included. We're only talkingabout K through 12. So even
(04:32):
then, there are limits on howmuch inclusion we're talking
about. And so that's alwayssomething to keep in mind.
Kim Clark (04:38):
You had mentioned inclusion can be uncomfortable.
And, you know, if we were justlike, look at that sentence, it
it seems like inclusion would beuncomfortable. Doesn't everyone
want inclusion, however, thework that you do in looking at
programs policy policiesspecifically because policies
(05:02):
are where theinstitutionalization of racism,
sexism, sexism, homophobia, etcexists, but it's what we talked
about here is language leads tobehavior. So there is
intentional language writteninto these policies to your
point that is exclusionary.However, on the surface, we may
(05:24):
not necessarily see it. We maynot notice it, are there some
common phrases, or some examplesthat you can share where you've
come across language thatactually seems like it's a good
thing, a positive thing? Butactually, it's quite
exclusionary in practice? Yeah,I
Unknown (05:45):
mean, I'm thinking of examples from the present and
the past. So sometimes, it's thegroup's omitted. So sometimes
when you have a policy, it'llsay things like for, and I'm
thinking like, then the NationalLabor Relations Act, for
example, that included newprotections for workers, right.
The fine print said thisexcluded farm workers and
(06:08):
domestic workers, which wereracialized categories. So
sometimes the fine prints likethis, this policy is for
everyone, except this group,which is a group that is not
called to a no, you're notsaying black and Latino, but
you're saying by some othername. And so I'm just thinking,
so many examples. Anotherexample, in history is just are
(06:32):
you able to enforce the thing?So things that sound good, but
so I had written down like theGI Bill, you know, which had
given people the opportunity togo to college and buy a home.
But the reality was, likesegregated schools, segregated
neighborhoods, and so how do youenforce it? But when you talk
about language, I think there'ssome of the things are ignoring
(06:58):
present inequities. So I couldsee policies were voting rights,
for example, there's bills,right now to say that we don't
need protections anymore forvoting, you know, for voting
because we've reached equalityor parity. And so it means
getting rid of kind of oversightto ensure that the process is
(07:21):
being carried out in a way thatpeople have access to voting.
But if you think historically,right, in 1965, when the Voting
Rights Act passed, you know,just because you're given
something doesn't mean you cando it. So now, I think there's
bills to require ID or to makeit harder to vote by mail. Even
(07:41):
things like in reproductivehealth care, which we do a lot
of work, sometimes the group'smost affected by policies are
not named. Right. So withrestrictions on abortion, for
example, they don't say thegroup's most likely to be
affected by it. But so what I'msaying is just that it's a lack
of acknowledgement of presentinequities that mean policies
(08:03):
are going to impact certaingroups more heavily, right, or
more negatively. Student loans.If you look at the data of like,
who takes out loans, who has thehighest debt burden, oftentimes,
you'll see it's, it'shistorically excluded groups,
groups that don't have thesafety, net and wealth to pay
for their own education andthings like that. So I'm
thinking legislatively, butthere's a lot of ways in which
(08:28):
things are written in a way thatseems neutral or just general.
And that makes, the argument isthat it's the idea that it won't
impact groups differently. But Ithink the hidden subtext or
context of like the history ofthis country is what would
explain why it would have adisparate impact. And so part of
(08:48):
the thing is, then what's theimpact versus intent just
because you didn't mean for itto have an impact on certain
groups? Or you wrote it in a waythat it's not calling that out?
Doesn't mean it won't. And Ithink that's part of the the
resistance against critical racetheory for people to know what
actually happened and whypolicies reinforce inequities,
(09:11):
even if they're not naminggroups by name,
Kim Clark (09:12):
I think it's a really important point, and how it's
baked in to policies and systemsinfrastructure, in such a way
that it's creating barriers forcertain demographics and
communities. However, you know,to your point around voter
suppression, for example, it'sintended to to disenfranchise in
(09:34):
control more of the blackcommunity's vote. It is also
harming people with disabilitiesand other white people, frankly,
who have a harder time withtransportation, for example. So
it actually is still hurting,dominant cultures, but they
don't see it that way. And sothe way the language is
(09:58):
positioned and who it's comingfrom To what audience for what
impact. It's actually there's aself sabotage that happens. It's
like where Heather McGee talksabout the draining of the pool,
you know, so you know, back inthe day, everyone, yeah,
everyone loses out. And I'veseen more and more examples
(10:18):
lately have of, well, you know,if this person wants to do this,
and we don't want this person todo this, so then we're going to
make up a new rule, we're goingto come up with a new policy,
and or we're going to amend thecurrent one to make it mean that
nobody can do this thing.Because this one person wants to
do this. And we don't want thatperson to do that. So we're just
going to change the rules. Sonobody does it. So there's
(10:41):
different versions of drainingthe pool that are alive and well
today. So one of the things thatI think people really don't
really understand, like, when Istarted a job, and I'm reading
the code of conduct, maybe in myfirst couple of days at the job,
and then I never look at itagain, you know, the employee
(11:03):
handbook, or the code ofconduct, etc. There's things in
there, and I don't even knowanything about the company yet I
haven't started up, you know,I'm just ramping. And there's
all the pressure of you know,you know, whatever, that whole
time period when you'reonboarding into a company, but
one of the things that some ofus, not all of us will do, but
(11:24):
we'll sign the form to say thatwe read the employee handbook or
the code of conduct, but if wedid, we don't look at it. Again,
we just kind of operationallyoperationalize ourselves within
the unwritten rules of theculture, the workplace culture,
so and then if we do something,and somebody actually wants to
(11:45):
create a situation to retaliateor punish or fire us, or
whatever it is, they will,that's when the employee
handbook comes back into motionand like, well, you signed the
document. So language becomes aweapon in those scenarios, and
also is a way to control cultureon a subjective basis. And
(12:14):
there's things within ouremployee handbook and our code
of conduct that I'm reminded ofa work done, I don't know if
you've read it by the Stanfordinnovation review, where it's
titled the bias ofprofessionalism. And it talks
about the policies andpractices, the employee
handbook, what this subjectiveterm professionalism is, and how
(12:38):
it shows up. My point inbringing all this up is that
when language is used as aweapon basically refer to in a
way that could be vague, justenough to let a lot of people
interpret it in different ways.So there's kind of a wild wild
west that you know, is is atplay here. And this is happening
(12:59):
in Florida around the book bandsand how DeSantis is is defending
saying I never said that. Butit's written in such a vague way
that one person can complainabout a book or a documentary on
Ruby Bridges, and then it'spulled. So the ambiguity of
language, but also utilizing thecode of conduct or whatever, in
(13:22):
a way, when you know that theemployees aren't really looking
at it, but then you can use itas a weapon. There's a real
world and a real life impact towhat is baked into these things.
Can you speak to that a littlebit or have some more examples?
Unknown (13:38):
Yeah, you mentioned the book band, I'm just trying to
think how else this shows up. Imean, part of it. To me, what it
brings to mind is just that whenthings are vague like that, it
would be helpful in theorganizations that we work with,
if you actually have a sharedmeaning across the organization
of what you're talking about.When you say professionalism.
(14:00):
When you say equity, when yousay inclusion, when you say
like, what does it look like?What does it feel like? What's
an example? But I mean, justwhat it's bringing to mind too,
is that you do when you join anorganization follow or follow,
you know, follow along with theway the behaviors that are
modeled by the leaders, by thesupervisors by those in power.
(14:22):
So depending on who those peopleare, in their belief systems is,
is can create exclusion for tothose who think differently, who
have who operate differently,who have a different background,
who even have differentopinions. So I'm just wondering
if there's anything morespecific you have in mind?
Kim Clark (14:44):
No, I think that that's great. I mean, we're
gonna be talking to somebody inanother episode talking about
the impact of stereotypes fromthe media, for example, where
we've had CEOs make comments ofthat there is no connection this
is just entertaining. And theseare just stories, there's no
real world impact to thestories, you know that we tell
(15:05):
these fictional characters. Andthere's there's no bigger BS
than that. So what we'll talk alittle bit more about how how
language and visuals have beenactually use, that has actually
had real world impact as well.So many of the folks that are
listening are professionalcommunicators. And they are
(15:28):
setting the tone and thepersonality of what the language
is within the organizations fromwhich we serve. So can you talk
about some examples that youhave found in the work of when
you're looking for inequitiesand equities, within the
policies and any any other kindof content that you review and
(15:50):
you're looking for, thatcommunicators can have an
influence and start to havethese conversations of being
able to have a dei lens on whatthey what they are putting out
as communicators, but also whatthey're supporting? When it
comes to code of conduct oremployee handbooks, policies,
other practices, processes, etc?How can how can What is that dei
(16:14):
lens look like? What do we needto be looking out for inequities
within language?
Unknown (16:19):
I think it's a long process. So there's the
education piece. I mean, I wouldlisten with education, empathy,
and humility. But you have tobuild that in right, not just
write it down. So education, I'mthinking, you have to be curious
and open, learn and read. So wetalked a little I mean, I've
(16:42):
come across, come across thisright, the controversy on we
were talking about Latin X orpregnant person, it's kind of a
privilege to not have tounderstand those terms, or to
just disagree with terms. And Ithink a good communicator would
is someone who's curious andopen to learn and read something
(17:02):
that might not affect themdirectly. But that affects
people in general. And empathyis learning what's actually at
stake, right, I think you werementioning like how language has
an impact on people's lives.With the term pregnant person,
or Latinx, right? Learningwhat's actually at stake. So
even with pronouns, people havepushed back or what the term
(17:26):
Latinx thinking, it's vanity orpeople are trying or people are
being, you know, not gettingwhat's the point, and it's much
deeper, right? We're talkingabout safety. We're talking
about inclusion and belonging,so people can focus on what
they're there to do, so thatthey can work in peace so that
they feel safe to go to work, sothat they feel safe to use your
(17:48):
services. They feel welcome atyour institution. And what's
behind it is the danger andrisk, people's sense of safety,
their ability to concentrate,the reality, right, that certain
groups face violence,harassment, physical danger, but
also mental, you know, that allthis contributes to like, making
(18:11):
it harder for them to just focusbecause they're feeling
aggression. And so thinkingabout, I just think a lot about
education, right? Like there'sexperts on this stuff. We're not
all experts, but we can tap intothose resources. And then the
empathy, thinking about what'smore important, right, my
(18:33):
convenience or your safety?
Kim Clark (18:35):
Oh, just pause right there. Say that again, and break
that down.
Unknown (18:39):
I was saying it's a privilege to not know or care
about things that don't affectyou, right? Because you're not
in danger. And if you don't haveto learn the terms, or if you
don't have to learn what itmeans, or why it's important to
use a term that includes peoplethat acknowledges the humanity
of people are excluded. Right?What the importance, the power
of that, versus you're too lazyto get it. Right. Right. And I
(19:05):
think part of that is that we'reall imperfect, we all make
mistakes, we all mess up. So ahumility is involved too, right?
That you're probably gonna messup. But your embarrassment can't
be bigger. Right then like to.So if you're so embarrassed, you
(19:25):
can be like, Oh, it neverhappened. I can keep messing up
because it's more embarrassingto admit. When you mess up for
me, or I feel nauseous when Ilet people down.
Kim Clark (19:36):
But shame Yeah, I experienced that.
Unknown (19:39):
But imagine what the other person feels that felt
harmed, that's even worse. Soand it's not their job to
educate us. That's the problem,right? Because imagine like
feeling harmed and then beinglike, actually, this is why it
matters. Like that's horrible.So it's kind of on us to Yeah,
(20:00):
apologize, do better learn andchange, right. And so it's okay
to mess up. But don't let yourego like take over the impact,
right. And so just a lot of alot of advice, you know, for
people with privilege to usetheir privilege as allies. So if
(20:20):
someone says something that isexclusionary, discriminatory,
don't wait for a person fromthat group to bring it up. Like,
that's a lot of weight to carrystep in. And yeah, I just have
more examples. I think we weretalking about our kids. And
there's, we're all imperfect. SoI'll just say like, I mess up a
(20:41):
lot to communicators or peopleto write. So don't expect
perfection.
Kim Clark (20:45):
People First. Yeah, absolutely.
Unknown (20:48):
So it's kind of like you have to be open to
continuous improvement, and nottake it personally if you get it
wrong. But take responsibilityto do better. And I think, I
mean, I don't know if this fits,but don't just think about the
money. Because I think somecampaigns think about, oh,
you're inclusive to reach moremarkets, and blah, blah, blah.
(21:13):
That may not be true for youknow, this beer controversy. But
but but just the, you know, it'smore about, it's more at stake
back to the point about empathy,like, what's the significance,
right? If you reproduce languagethat puts people at risk or
questions people's humanity orexcludes people, that's going to
have an impact and doesn't, youknow, even if you can improve
(21:35):
and get it, right, but if youchoose not to get it, right,
that doesn't look so good foryour company, and the harm that
you can be causinginadvertently.
Kim Clark (21:45):
And it's not up to the other person to get over it,
or take a joke, when we can do awhole episode on all of this. I
just really loved how you laidit down with your inconvenience
is not more important than mysafety. And I just I really love
that point. And thank you fordeconstructing it out and, and
(22:06):
helping people hear that, yeah,we were talking about our kids
offline. Before we wererecording and how you were, I
won't tell your side of thestory. But my side of the story
is that I have a 12 year olddaughter, who, although she is
adopted, she's she, her birthfamily comes from Eastern
(22:28):
European Europe, Europe, she haswhite skin and brown hair, etc.
And so we actually haveconversations around diversity,
equity inclusion, believe it ornot, I mean, I bought her, you
know, the youth version of, youknow, how to be a young, anti
racist, for example, she loveslearning about history and
(22:49):
presidents. And so I utilizethat to talk about colonization
and the Holocaust and all kindsof things. So because she's
interested in it, and when Imiss gender, or I assign a
gender, like if we're drivingand somebody cuts me off, and I
say, I can't believe he didthat. I you know, my default is
(23:12):
key. When I can't identify agender I just go to heat, right?
And wonderful kid will say youdon't know if it's a you know,
you're right, you're absolutelyright. And there's things that
don't come to her attention.Like, she'll say, she'll talk
about the word normal. And thenyou know, I choose the time, but
(23:36):
that's one of those flag words,I'm sure you have flag words
that kind of make your ears perka little bit, that and like,
let's pow, you know, those arekind of like those might, those
are my kind of, you know, kindof words, and I have many of
them, but whenever I hear theword normal, and so I've had
that conversation a couple oftimes with her. And if I say it,
(23:57):
she will bring it to myattention, like so sheets. Oh,
wow. She's getting that thisword normal doesn't really
exist. And it's it's existing toprotect a certain structure. And
it's not making room for people.For to be who they are, you
know, that there's some sort ofstandard that people are failing
(24:20):
to meet if they are not normaland what normal is and we're
we're all supposed to justunderstand what that definition
of normal is. So it's been aninteresting conversation. What
about you?
Unknown (24:31):
Oh, my God, I love this because first of all kids hear
everything you say. My kid isthree. Okay. There's things I
forgot. We said that she waswhen she was younger than that.
So I think for me, what happenedis, she has not internalized
stereotypes, but she's gettingthere. Right. And so it's a long
(24:53):
story, but basically we were inMexico and my mom, my mom lives
in Mexico. She doesn't havescreens on our Windows and So
the mosquitoes you know, when westayed with her, we got bit by
mosquitoes. And then from there,it got summarized into there's
mosquitoes in Mexico. Right? AndMexico is weird because they
have mosquitoes, right. And soshe was telling me the other day
(25:14):
that at school because she knowsshe's Mexican, but she's not
sure how much or what, or whereMexico is. I had to buy her
globe. But um, she made thepoint like, I'm, I'm Max, I'm,
what'd she say? I'm Mexican. I'mnormal. And I'm Mexican, or
something like that. SometimesI'm normal. Sometimes I'm
Mexican. That's like, actuallyMexican is normal. Everything's
(25:39):
normal, right? white, brown,black, Asian, every Mexican is
normal. And she said, Yeah, Ilove Mexico. Grandma lives
there. But they're mosquitoes.It's weird, right? It's a little
weird. Like, no, there'smosquitoes here. We just have
screens, you know? Yeah, yeah.And then I told her, I'm
Mexican. So it's, it's kind oflike, not nice to say that
(26:01):
anyone's weird, right. But thatwas a lot for her to handle. She
started crying because shethought she had offended me. You
know, and I'm so it's like,deep, this is deep stuff. And I
told her you didn't know you'rejust trying to figure out how
this all works, where theseplaces even are. So I mean, the
lesson there is just like, begentle. But um, kids are
(26:22):
curious. And so we know, we needto educate ourselves, to be able
to translate to them like whatthat means. But I do think it's
good to talk about race and inan informed way. And there's a
book that I read before I hadkids called nurture shock. I
think that's what it's called,that talks about you talk to
(26:42):
kids about everything, right?Disability, everything, right?
So that everything's normal?Actually, yes. And they don't
embarrass you in public, whenthey seem like they're so you
know, like asking you, and ifthey do ask you, you respond
naturally, you don't tell them?You know, don't say that. So,
I'm still learning. I'm justsaying, because sometimes, I
(27:03):
know how to respond to adults,but not children. I mean, what
do you do when a kid is racist?And their parents not there? You
know, I'm still learning how tofigure that out. Because my
initial reaction is like, get mykid away from that kid, right?
Like, you don't need to bearound specialty around it a
lot, actually, on her own. SoI'm not there yet. But yeah, I
mean, part of it is normalizingeverything, and then being age
(27:24):
appropriate, right, and thatthey don't mean harm. They're
curious. But if you say stuffthat's problematic, they're
gonna repeat it. So
Kim Clark (27:32):
now, we've heard more often, especially since the
summer of 2020, about the Blackand African American community
having the talk, the raceconversation, I was raised in a
very white household, eventhough I have Native American
heritage, that wasn't broughtinto the conversation, it was
just kind of we didn't reallytalk about race and ethnicity,
(27:52):
right? Because we're normal,like we were just talking about,
right. So we never had thoseconversations. So we don't have
I don't have I didn't grow upwith the skills to name myself
identify myself see my place inthe world. That's part of the
the mentality of theobliviousness, that's part of
part of why it works, etc. In,in the community from which you
(28:17):
were raised? Are those thosekinds of conversations while
you're a kid, I think
Unknown (28:22):
that it's different. Just on two dimensions. So what
I hear about the talk is aboutsafety. Right? What do you do
when you encounter a policeofficer to stay alive? Right,
because it might go wrong. Andso I can see that happening if
you're an immigrant, right, howto navigate encounters with
(28:46):
immigration. Yeah. I mean, Ithink a lot of it is unspoken,
you just know, don't mess up, ordon't call talk to yourself or
don't, you know, I was luckyenough to have legal status, but
even you, you're verydeferential, you know, to
immigration, stuff like that, orto services that can report you
(29:08):
to immigration and likejeopardize your family. I mean,
I think it just shows updifferently. If if there's an
acknowledgement ofdiscrimination, or once placed
on the economic ladder that youdon't talk back, you know, or
speak up. So it just shows up inother ways, I think like in in
the workforce, and especially Isee that as a problem for first
(29:29):
generation professionals whodon't know how to advocate for
themselves, manage up ordisagree. That's how it shows up
for me. And then I'll just saythe problem is that within the
Latino community, there's a lotof racism towards blacks and
towards indigenous people. So Ican't guarantee that there's so
(29:52):
I'll just say there's that thirdelement and classism, right
where in Mexico I'll tell you,the police is not held in high
regard, even the militarybecause it seemed like a working
class occupation. And so Idon't, I don't want to say that
it's whiteness, but it's that ifyou have enough money, you can
do whatever you want. And sothere's not this fear of, you're
(30:16):
going to lose your life. Justbecause there's so much
privilege, you know, amongmiddle class Latinos, and then
there's just a lot of racismtowards to distinguish
themselves from people who areseeing tab a worse situation. So
it just shows up, like, in a lotof different ways.
Kim Clark (30:36):
And I can attest that when I came out, then the
conversations with my parentswas about safety. And my mom
even asked me like, okay, okay,can you tell nobody, because I'm
really worried about yoursafety, like, you know, so she
wanted to take advantage of myability to pass, if you will.
(30:56):
And that was really, reallyinteresting. And I saw the love
that she was trying to sharewith me on that. And unlike my
color of my skin that is seen,however, the world sees it, and
it's not my choice, it's out ofmy hands. As if I were, you
know, I had more melanin in myskin than I do. I had a choice
(31:20):
around, being out, if you will,there are certain situations
where I do use that privilege.But in most situations, I do
not, I don't take advantage ofthat privilege. But however, I
also have height privilege, Ihave deep voice privilege. I
have athletic shape, privilege,you know, so I take advantage of
(31:43):
that, it's like, it's not smartto try to do anything to me,
right? Or say anything to me,and, but I also, that's also
white woman privilege that I amleveraging as well. So if I was
a transgender person of color,who was shorter, for example, or
a different body shape, etc, Iwould not have these kinds of
(32:05):
privileges, and it would beless, less of it would be more
out of my hands. But I did havethat safety conversation with my
parents when it came to mysexual orientation. So I
appreciate you bringing up thatpoint. And because there's
certain work environments, orclient environments, where I
still to this day, at this age,I still don't come out,
(32:29):
everywhere I go. Because ofsafety, I will be traveling to
Florida soon. Equality, Floridahas issued a travel advisory for
the entire state of Florida foranyone who is LGBTQ plus, saying
it is not safe to travel here.Certainly in certain pockets of
Florida, a travel advisory hasbeen issued, and I'm going to
(32:53):
Florida and I will be I have theoption, you know, to be out or
not, or wear the T shirts that Ihave or not with the pride flag.
And I it's an it's a safetysituation. But there's also a
sense of pride and solidarityand Ally ship and, and wanting
people to know that I am hereand I see them. But there are
(33:18):
people that don't have thechoices and the privilege and
the options like I do. And Irecognize that which motivates
me more to be out to help withthe stereotypes that can be more
disproportionately harmful topeople who can't necessarily
hide as well as I can. So justin our last couple of minutes
(33:39):
here, Maria, what does come youknow, tying everything that we
talked about the intrapersonal,the you know, the intra personal
communication, as well as thereviewing of our language that
builds the nuts and bolts andfunctions and infrastructures of
our businesses in our policiesor practices or processes, etc.
(33:59):
What does it look like, in youropinion, to communicate like,
give a damn,
Unknown (34:05):
part of me wants to say you can't have assumptions about
what's normal. Right? And whichitself requires a growth
mindset, right? Because how doyou get it right, you might you
won't get it right the firsttime. So I think partly is
continuing being open tocontinuous improvement, being
open to feedback, and tellingpeople what you're doing with
(34:28):
that feedback. I don't know painpeople, you know, if you do
focus groups, or if people havea role in making your materials
more inclusive, paying for thatknowledge, right, but also
building the capacity. So notrelying on certain groups to
point out the flaws andrecognizing the power dynamics
inherent in that if you'reasking someone for feedback,
(34:48):
where you have more power andthey don't feel comfortable
actually telling you what theythink to improve the language.
So and I think when I saynormative don't don't ask So
many things normative. I mean,even the one thing I left out
the question yesterday about thethe talk, I mean, if you just
look at the data, right,acknowledging the reality is
(35:10):
acknowledging the relativeinequities. And so that's why
certain language is not going toland for some people. Something
we didn't talk about isexclusion of people who are
formerly incarcerated, right? Isee a lot of advances in
programs to address that.Discrimination. But in popular
(35:31):
culture, there's still jokes,right about what it is to be a
prisoner, even my three yearold, right? Like, oh, a band, it
has stripes. So very young, thattwo years old, people are
learning like what's going on?They try kids try to like,
simplify, good, bad is that goodor bad person. And that's not
how it is. Some people aredenied opportunities, right? And
(35:52):
just about the talk, like Latinomen, right, face enormous
scrutiny, and they have tocontrol their emotions. And so
like the point of how itprivilege that you were
speaking, being able to raise usto make a scene to advocate for
yourself to defend yourselfrequires privilege that you
(36:12):
won't be, you won't faceretribution for that. Right. So
anyway, just in terms of what'snormative, expanding what we
think is normative and trying togo back to things that are still
that are stereotypes. When youthink about Disney movies that
now have the disclaimer, thiswas offensive, then it's
defensive now, okay, like,relook at things that for a long
(36:36):
time have seemed okay, becausethings change, and and just in
terms of history, you know, hardwon rights can be lost. Right?
And so, look at the ways inwhich people are trying to
create new exclusion. Really?How do you say, very creatively,
(37:00):
so that you can't tell? Right,so So, and there's a book by Ian
Haney Lopez called dog whistlepolitics. I don't have the whole
title. But you know, things likemake America great again, what
does that mean? Right? You don'tsay anything, but you say a lot,
you're saying go back to a timewhen people didn't have rights
when people couldn't vote can goto school. So just sometimes
(37:25):
when we use language that seemsjust general, the people
enforcing it, show you who'sincluded in that normal, right.
Kim Clark (37:36):
I used to teach in person I still teach online at
San Jose State University inCalifornia. And one of the
classes I used to teach is mediatheory and research, one of the
things that we would do as aclass is that we would watch
news stories, for example, andwe went, there's a lot to, and
(37:57):
I'm only going to mention oneslice of what we would pay
attention to to deconstruct it.But one of the things I would
point the students attention toand it's something I test
myself, in my own mediacriticism, you know, critical
thinking of media, etc. is tolook at, okay, and I've made my
own documentaries. So I know theconventions I you know, this is
(38:17):
this is what one does, as adirector, as a writer, you're
telling the the audience whereto look where what you want
emphasized, write everything inthe frame as a character to
support the story that has acertain theme to it, sometimes
(38:40):
life lessons, etc, mirroringlife, and sometimes not, etc.
But it's very intentional todraw the eye and lead the
audience in a certain direction.We're showing you what we want
you to see. So there's there'selements that are emphasized.
But there's also elements thatare de emphasized, what is being
(39:04):
left out? Who is being left out?Why which circling back to what
you said at the beginning, as asfar as the programs that you
evaluate, like, why are we doingthis program? And what is the
effect of it, they may have anintention, but it may have a
different impact. So this ideaof looking at our language and
(39:26):
seeing what we are emphasizingwho we are emphasizing and then
weigh whether it's intentionalor not, what are we
deemphasizing? Who are wesilencing Who are we? Who are we
leaving out? Right, and that'spart of having that dei lens on
our work on a regular basis.Maria, thank you so much for
(39:49):
bringing your expertise, yourresearch and dissertation work
to end your personal life andtalking about your kid. You
know, I just love the range ofthe conversation We just had,
how can people stay in touchwith you?
Unknown (40:02):
I have a blog, Maria gamble.com, and I'm on LinkedIn
and Instagram. So yeah, add mefeel free to read what I write.
It's a bunch of random stuff butall with this lens, you know,
because I deconstruct PBS shows,I deconstruct, you know, higher
ed programs. So it's justwhatever I see with that lens.
Kim Clark (40:26):
Excellent, excellent. So people can, can learn and
kind of learn off of yourexample of what you're seeing
that's emphasized and what'sbeing left out and de
emphasized. That's awesome.Thank you. I look forward to
subscribing myself. Thank youfor being here. Maria. It was so
great to have you here. Thanksfor the conversation. Thank you.
Hello, welcome back. Thank you for being here. Maria,
(00:04):
I am so excited to have aconversation with you, you and I
have been on in a couple oftrainings together, you helped
me out and put together aYouTube video that talks about
how not to be performativeduring Hispanic Heritage Month,
we're going to talk about theterminal lateen, Latinx, etc. So
(00:27):
that's why I hesitated stuff. SoI, I am so fascinated by your
background, and I really enjoyour conversations. And I know
that you're going to be bring avery unique angle to this
conversation around diversity,equity and inclusion,
communications, and inclusivelanguage as it relates to
policies. This is gonna be areally interesting conversation.
So please introduce yourself,and we'll get into it.
Maria Gamboa (00:51):
Thanks. My name is Maria Gamboa. I'm a consultant
and my prior life was asacademic trained as a historian.
And so that's what I that's whatI did, I studied the history of
a lot of policies to understandthem. Yeah, and I think what I
do, too, is help improveprograms and understand the
(01:11):
purpose of programs and howthey're written and who they're
actually for. And if they'reachieving their goals. So no, we
do Yeah, now we do. Now I dostrategy consulting for
nonprofits and foundations, anda lot in health care and
education. But, you know, that'smy day job. And so I'm always
(01:32):
asking hard questions aboutprograms, what their goal is,
and also resistance toimplementation, because that's
one of the things right thatit's one thing to write
something down, it's anotherthing to implement it and
enforce it and fund it. So thoseare some of the questions How
does it work in practice?
Kim Clark (01:54):
Well, you have your PhD, which is so impressive. And
I would like to learn about whatgot you to do the topic that you
did on your dissertation? Andwhat were some of the key things
that kind of you they weretakeaways from surprise you
within the work that you now doin your consulting?
Unknown (02:15):
Yeah, so my research was actually on the history of
comprehensive immigrationreform. So the 1986 Act that
many remember is amnesty, butwhich actually started as an
employer sanctions bill. So howdid that happen? I study that,
and I study how Latinos werebeing recognized as a domestic
(02:38):
minority group that neededprotection, and resources, at
the same time that undocumentedimmigration was growing. And so
the problems that that createdfor these advocacy groups that
were trying to increaseprotections for Latinos in
education and employment andvoting and housing, you know,
all the areas where it shows up.And people were testing the
(03:03):
limits of that inclusion, backthen in the 60s and 70s 70s,
especially, to see if itincluded immigrants. And
sometimes people hadn't thoughtthat it could include immigrants
or that immigrants would everaccess rights and resources. And
so once that started happening,they started to write exclusions
to make sure that immigrants didnot, were not included. And so
(03:26):
now we're in a moment wherestates are rewriting policies to
be inclusionary or exclusionary.And that's important when we
talk about inclusion justbecause inclusion makes some
people very uncomfortable,because it requires a shift in
mindset. And sometimes peoplethink, have very definitions
(03:48):
just of what it means somepeople think that means
inclusion at the bottom. Andthat that people will be
satisfied with that. And otherpeople think it means inclusion
at all levels, even at the top,even in leadership. So that's
some of what I examined. And forexample, just real quick, this
is when they were debating ifundocumented kids should have
(04:09):
the right to go to publicschool. And when it went to the
Supreme Court, the justices wereasking, Okay, what are the
implications? If if undocumentedkids are given the right to go
to public school? Do they get togo to college to what if they
ever want to go to college? Andthe lawyers for the kids were
saying, well, we're not talkingabout college, we that's not
included. We're only talkingabout K through 12. So even
(04:32):
then, there are limits on howmuch inclusion we're talking
about. And so that's alwayssomething to keep in mind.
Kim Clark (04:38):
You had mentioned inclusion can be uncomfortable.
And, you know, if we were justlike, look at that sentence, it
it seems like inclusion would beuncomfortable. Doesn't everyone
want inclusion, however, thework that you do in looking at
programs policy policiesspecifically because policies
(05:02):
are where theinstitutionalization of racism,
sexism, sexism, homophobia, etcexists, but it's what we talked
about here is language leads tobehavior. So there is
intentional language writteninto these policies to your
point that is exclusionary.However, on the surface, we may
(05:24):
not necessarily see it. We maynot notice it, are there some
common phrases, or some examplesthat you can share where you've
come across language thatactually seems like it's a good
thing, a positive thing? Butactually, it's quite
exclusionary in practice? Yeah,I
Unknown (05:45):
mean, I'm thinking of examples from the present and
the past. So sometimes, it's thegroup's omitted. So sometimes
when you have a policy, it'llsay things like for, and I'm
thinking like, then the NationalLabor Relations Act, for
example, that included newprotections for workers, right.
The fine print said thisexcluded farm workers and
(06:08):
domestic workers, which wereracialized categories. So
sometimes the fine prints likethis, this policy is for
everyone, except this group,which is a group that is not
called to a no, you're notsaying black and Latino, but
you're saying by some othername. And so I'm just thinking,
so many examples. Anotherexample, in history is just are
(06:32):
you able to enforce the thing?So things that sound good, but
so I had written down like theGI Bill, you know, which had
given people the opportunity togo to college and buy a home.
But the reality was, likesegregated schools, segregated
neighborhoods, and so how do youenforce it? But when you talk
about language, I think there'ssome of the things are ignoring
(06:58):
present inequities. So I couldsee policies were voting rights,
for example, there's bills,right now to say that we don't
need protections anymore forvoting, you know, for voting
because we've reached equalityor parity. And so it means
getting rid of kind of oversightto ensure that the process is
(07:21):
being carried out in a way thatpeople have access to voting.
But if you think historically,right, in 1965, when the Voting
Rights Act passed, you know,just because you're given
something doesn't mean you cando it. So now, I think there's
bills to require ID or to makeit harder to vote by mail. Even
(07:41):
things like in reproductivehealth care, which we do a lot
of work, sometimes the group'smost affected by policies are
not named. Right. So withrestrictions on abortion, for
example, they don't say thegroup's most likely to be
affected by it. But so what I'msaying is just that it's a lack
of acknowledgement of presentinequities that mean policies
(08:03):
are going to impact certaingroups more heavily, right, or
more negatively. Student loans.If you look at the data of like,
who takes out loans, who has thehighest debt burden, oftentimes,
you'll see it's, it'shistorically excluded groups,
groups that don't have thesafety, net and wealth to pay
for their own education andthings like that. So I'm
thinking legislatively, butthere's a lot of ways in which
(08:28):
things are written in a way thatseems neutral or just general.
And that makes, the argument isthat it's the idea that it won't
impact groups differently. But Ithink the hidden subtext or
context of like the history ofthis country is what would
explain why it would have adisparate impact. And so part of
(08:48):
the thing is, then what's theimpact versus intent just
because you didn't mean for itto have an impact on certain
groups? Or you wrote it in a waythat it's not calling that out?
Doesn't mean it won't. And Ithink that's part of the the
resistance against critical racetheory for people to know what
actually happened and whypolicies reinforce inequities,
(09:11):
even if they're not naminggroups by name,
Kim Clark (09:12):
I think it's a really important point, and how it's
baked in to policies and systemsinfrastructure, in such a way
that it's creating barriers forcertain demographics and
communities. However, you know,to your point around voter
suppression, for example, it'sintended to to disenfranchise in
(09:34):
control more of the blackcommunity's vote. It is also
harming people with disabilitiesand other white people, frankly,
who have a harder time withtransportation, for example. So
it actually is still hurting,dominant cultures, but they
don't see it that way. And sothe way the language is
(09:58):
positioned and who it's comingfrom To what audience for what
impact. It's actually there's aself sabotage that happens. It's
like where Heather McGee talksabout the draining of the pool,
you know, so you know, back inthe day, everyone, yeah,
everyone loses out. And I'veseen more and more examples
(10:18):
lately have of, well, you know,if this person wants to do this,
and we don't want this person todo this, so then we're going to
make up a new rule, we're goingto come up with a new policy,
and or we're going to amend thecurrent one to make it mean that
nobody can do this thing.Because this one person wants to
do this. And we don't want thatperson to do that. So we're just
going to change the rules. Sonobody does it. So there's
(10:41):
different versions of drainingthe pool that are alive and well
today. So one of the things thatI think people really don't
really understand, like, when Istarted a job, and I'm reading
the code of conduct, maybe in myfirst couple of days at the job,
and then I never look at itagain, you know, the employee
(11:03):
handbook, or the code ofconduct, etc. There's things in
there, and I don't even knowanything about the company yet I
haven't started up, you know,I'm just ramping. And there's
all the pressure of you know,you know, whatever, that whole
time period when you'reonboarding into a company, but
one of the things that some ofus, not all of us will do, but
(11:24):
we'll sign the form to say thatwe read the employee handbook or
the code of conduct, but if wedid, we don't look at it. Again,
we just kind of operationallyoperationalize ourselves within
the unwritten rules of theculture, the workplace culture,
so and then if we do something,and somebody actually wants to
(11:45):
create a situation to retaliateor punish or fire us, or
whatever it is, they will,that's when the employee
handbook comes back into motionand like, well, you signed the
document. So language becomes aweapon in those scenarios, and
also is a way to control cultureon a subjective basis. And
(12:14):
there's things within ouremployee handbook and our code
of conduct that I'm reminded ofa work done, I don't know if
you've read it by the Stanfordinnovation review, where it's
titled the bias ofprofessionalism. And it talks
about the policies andpractices, the employee
handbook, what this subjectiveterm professionalism is, and how
(12:38):
it shows up. My point inbringing all this up is that
when language is used as aweapon basically refer to in a
way that could be vague, justenough to let a lot of people
interpret it in different ways.So there's kind of a wild wild
west that you know, is is atplay here. And this is happening
(12:59):
in Florida around the book bandsand how DeSantis is is defending
saying I never said that. Butit's written in such a vague way
that one person can complainabout a book or a documentary on
Ruby Bridges, and then it'spulled. So the ambiguity of
language, but also utilizing thecode of conduct or whatever, in
(13:22):
a way, when you know that theemployees aren't really looking
at it, but then you can use itas a weapon. There's a real
world and a real life impact towhat is baked into these things.
Can you speak to that a littlebit or have some more examples?
Unknown (13:38):
Yeah, you mentioned the book band, I'm just trying to
think how else this shows up. Imean, part of it. To me, what it
brings to mind is just that whenthings are vague like that, it
would be helpful in theorganizations that we work with,
if you actually have a sharedmeaning across the organization
of what you're talking about.When you say professionalism.
(14:00):
When you say equity, when yousay inclusion, when you say
like, what does it look like?What does it feel like? What's
an example? But I mean, justwhat it's bringing to mind too,
is that you do when you join anorganization follow or follow,
you know, follow along with theway the behaviors that are
modeled by the leaders, by thesupervisors by those in power.
(14:22):
So depending on who those peopleare, in their belief systems is,
is can create exclusion for tothose who think differently, who
have who operate differently,who have a different background,
who even have differentopinions. So I'm just wondering
if there's anything morespecific you have in mind?
Kim Clark (14:44):
No, I think that that's great. I mean, we're
gonna be talking to somebody inanother episode talking about
the impact of stereotypes fromthe media, for example, where
we've had CEOs make comments ofthat there is no connection this
is just entertaining. And theseare just stories, there's no
real world impact to thestories, you know that we tell
(15:05):
these fictional characters. Andthere's there's no bigger BS
than that. So what we'll talk alittle bit more about how how
language and visuals have beenactually use, that has actually
had real world impact as well.So many of the folks that are
listening are professionalcommunicators. And they are
(15:28):
setting the tone and thepersonality of what the language
is within the organizations fromwhich we serve. So can you talk
about some examples that youhave found in the work of when
you're looking for inequitiesand equities, within the
policies and any any other kindof content that you review and
(15:50):
you're looking for, thatcommunicators can have an
influence and start to havethese conversations of being
able to have a dei lens on whatthey what they are putting out
as communicators, but also whatthey're supporting? When it
comes to code of conduct oremployee handbooks, policies,
other practices, processes, etc?How can how can What is that dei
(16:14):
lens look like? What do we needto be looking out for inequities
within language?
Unknown (16:19):
I think it's a long process. So there's the
education piece. I mean, I wouldlisten with education, empathy,
and humility. But you have tobuild that in right, not just
write it down. So education, I'mthinking, you have to be curious
and open, learn and read. So wetalked a little I mean, I've
(16:42):
come across, come across thisright, the controversy on we
were talking about Latin X orpregnant person, it's kind of a
privilege to not have tounderstand those terms, or to
just disagree with terms. And Ithink a good communicator would
is someone who's curious andopen to learn and read something
(17:02):
that might not affect themdirectly. But that affects
people in general. And empathyis learning what's actually at
stake, right, I think you werementioning like how language has
an impact on people's lives.With the term pregnant person,
or Latinx, right? Learningwhat's actually at stake. So
even with pronouns, people havepushed back or what the term
(17:26):
Latinx thinking, it's vanity orpeople are trying or people are
being, you know, not gettingwhat's the point, and it's much
deeper, right? We're talkingabout safety. We're talking
about inclusion and belonging,so people can focus on what
they're there to do, so thatthey can work in peace so that
they feel safe to go to work, sothat they feel safe to use your
(17:48):
services. They feel welcome atyour institution. And what's
behind it is the danger andrisk, people's sense of safety,
their ability to concentrate,the reality, right, that certain
groups face violence,harassment, physical danger, but
also mental, you know, that allthis contributes to like, making
(18:11):
it harder for them to just focusbecause they're feeling
aggression. And so thinkingabout, I just think a lot about
education, right? Like there'sexperts on this stuff. We're not
all experts, but we can tap intothose resources. And then the
empathy, thinking about what'smore important, right, my
(18:33):
convenience or your safety?
Kim Clark (18:35):
Oh, just pause right there. Say that again, and break
that down.
Unknown (18:39):
I was saying it's a privilege to not know or care
about things that don't affectyou, right? Because you're not
in danger. And if you don't haveto learn the terms, or if you
don't have to learn what itmeans, or why it's important to
use a term that includes peoplethat acknowledges the humanity
of people are excluded. Right?What the importance, the power
of that, versus you're too lazyto get it. Right. Right. And I
(19:05):
think part of that is that we'reall imperfect, we all make
mistakes, we all mess up. So ahumility is involved too, right?
That you're probably gonna messup. But your embarrassment can't
be bigger. Right then like to.So if you're so embarrassed, you
(19:25):
can be like, Oh, it neverhappened. I can keep messing up
because it's more embarrassingto admit. When you mess up for
me, or I feel nauseous when Ilet people down.
Kim Clark (19:36):
But shame Yeah, I experienced that.
Unknown (19:39):
But imagine what the other person feels that felt
harmed, that's even worse. Soand it's not their job to
educate us. That's the problem,right? Because imagine like
feeling harmed and then beinglike, actually, this is why it
matters. Like that's horrible.So it's kind of on us to Yeah,
(20:00):
apologize, do better learn andchange, right. And so it's okay
to mess up. But don't let yourego like take over the impact,
right. And so just a lot of alot of advice, you know, for
people with privilege to usetheir privilege as allies. So if
(20:20):
someone says something that isexclusionary, discriminatory,
don't wait for a person fromthat group to bring it up. Like,
that's a lot of weight to carrystep in. And yeah, I just have
more examples. I think we weretalking about our kids. And
there's, we're all imperfect. SoI'll just say like, I mess up a
(20:41):
lot to communicators or peopleto write. So don't expect
perfection.
Kim Clark (20:45):
People First. Yeah, absolutely.
Unknown (20:48):
So it's kind of like you have to be open to
continuous improvement, and nottake it personally if you get it
wrong. But take responsibilityto do better. And I think, I
mean, I don't know if this fits,but don't just think about the
money. Because I think somecampaigns think about, oh,
you're inclusive to reach moremarkets, and blah, blah, blah.
(21:13):
That may not be true for youknow, this beer controversy. But
but but just the, you know, it'smore about, it's more at stake
back to the point about empathy,like, what's the significance,
right? If you reproduce languagethat puts people at risk or
questions people's humanity orexcludes people, that's going to
have an impact and doesn't, youknow, even if you can improve
(21:35):
and get it, right, but if youchoose not to get it, right,
that doesn't look so good foryour company, and the harm that
you can be causinginadvertently.
Kim Clark (21:45):
And it's not up to the other person to get over it,
or take a joke, when we can do awhole episode on all of this. I
just really loved how you laidit down with your inconvenience
is not more important than mysafety. And I just I really love
that point. And thank you fordeconstructing it out and, and
(22:06):
helping people hear that, yeah,we were talking about our kids
offline. Before we wererecording and how you were, I
won't tell your side of thestory. But my side of the story
is that I have a 12 year olddaughter, who, although she is
adopted, she's she, her birthfamily comes from Eastern
(22:28):
European Europe, Europe, she haswhite skin and brown hair, etc.
And so we actually haveconversations around diversity,
equity inclusion, believe it ornot, I mean, I bought her, you
know, the youth version of, youknow, how to be a young, anti
racist, for example, she loveslearning about history and
(22:49):
presidents. And so I utilizethat to talk about colonization
and the Holocaust and all kindsof things. So because she's
interested in it, and when Imiss gender, or I assign a
gender, like if we're drivingand somebody cuts me off, and I
say, I can't believe he didthat. I you know, my default is
(23:12):
key. When I can't identify agender I just go to heat, right?
And wonderful kid will say youdon't know if it's a you know,
you're right, you're absolutelyright. And there's things that
don't come to her attention.Like, she'll say, she'll talk
about the word normal. And thenyou know, I choose the time, but
(23:36):
that's one of those flag words,I'm sure you have flag words
that kind of make your ears perka little bit, that and like,
let's pow, you know, those arekind of like those might, those
are my kind of, you know, kindof words, and I have many of
them, but whenever I hear theword normal, and so I've had
that conversation a couple oftimes with her. And if I say it,
(23:57):
she will bring it to myattention, like so sheets. Oh,
wow. She's getting that thisword normal doesn't really
exist. And it's it's existing toprotect a certain structure. And
it's not making room for people.For to be who they are, you
know, that there's some sort ofstandard that people are failing
(24:20):
to meet if they are not normaland what normal is and we're
we're all supposed to justunderstand what that definition
of normal is. So it's been aninteresting conversation. What
about you?
Unknown (24:31):
Oh, my God, I love this because first of all kids hear
everything you say. My kid isthree. Okay. There's things I
forgot. We said that she waswhen she was younger than that.
So I think for me, what happenedis, she has not internalized
stereotypes, but she's gettingthere. Right. And so it's a long
(24:53):
story, but basically we were inMexico and my mom, my mom lives
in Mexico. She doesn't havescreens on our Windows and So
the mosquitoes you know, when westayed with her, we got bit by
mosquitoes. And then from there,it got summarized into there's
mosquitoes in Mexico. Right? AndMexico is weird because they
have mosquitoes, right. And soshe was telling me the other day
(25:14):
that at school because she knowsshe's Mexican, but she's not
sure how much or what, or whereMexico is. I had to buy her
globe. But um, she made thepoint like, I'm, I'm Max, I'm,
what'd she say? I'm Mexican. I'mnormal. And I'm Mexican, or
something like that. SometimesI'm normal. Sometimes I'm
Mexican. That's like, actuallyMexican is normal. Everything's
(25:39):
normal, right? white, brown,black, Asian, every Mexican is
normal. And she said, Yeah, Ilove Mexico. Grandma lives
there. But they're mosquitoes.It's weird, right? It's a little
weird. Like, no, there'smosquitoes here. We just have
screens, you know? Yeah, yeah.And then I told her, I'm
Mexican. So it's, it's kind oflike, not nice to say that
(26:01):
anyone's weird, right. But thatwas a lot for her to handle. She
started crying because shethought she had offended me. You
know, and I'm so it's like,deep, this is deep stuff. And I
told her you didn't know you'rejust trying to figure out how
this all works, where theseplaces even are. So I mean, the
lesson there is just like, begentle. But um, kids are
(26:22):
curious. And so we know, we needto educate ourselves, to be able
to translate to them like whatthat means. But I do think it's
good to talk about race and inan informed way. And there's a
book that I read before I hadkids called nurture shock. I
think that's what it's called,that talks about you talk to
(26:42):
kids about everything, right?Disability, everything, right?
So that everything's normal?Actually, yes. And they don't
embarrass you in public, whenthey seem like they're so you
know, like asking you, and ifthey do ask you, you respond
naturally, you don't tell them?You know, don't say that. So,
I'm still learning. I'm justsaying, because sometimes, I
(27:03):
know how to respond to adults,but not children. I mean, what
do you do when a kid is racist?And their parents not there? You
know, I'm still learning how tofigure that out. Because my
initial reaction is like, get mykid away from that kid, right?
Like, you don't need to bearound specialty around it a
lot, actually, on her own. SoI'm not there yet. But yeah, I
mean, part of it is normalizingeverything, and then being age
(27:24):
appropriate, right, and thatthey don't mean harm. They're
curious. But if you say stuffthat's problematic, they're
gonna repeat it. So
Kim Clark (27:32):
now, we've heard more often, especially since the
summer of 2020, about the Blackand African American community
having the talk, the raceconversation, I was raised in a
very white household, eventhough I have Native American
heritage, that wasn't broughtinto the conversation, it was
just kind of we didn't reallytalk about race and ethnicity,
(27:52):
right? Because we're normal,like we were just talking about,
right. So we never had thoseconversations. So we don't have
I don't have I didn't grow upwith the skills to name myself
identify myself see my place inthe world. That's part of the
the mentality of theobliviousness, that's part of
part of why it works, etc. In,in the community from which you
(28:17):
were raised? Are those thosekinds of conversations while
you're a kid, I think
Unknown (28:22):
that it's different. Just on two dimensions. So what
I hear about the talk is aboutsafety. Right? What do you do
when you encounter a policeofficer to stay alive? Right,
because it might go wrong. Andso I can see that happening if
you're an immigrant, right, howto navigate encounters with
(28:46):
immigration. Yeah. I mean, Ithink a lot of it is unspoken,
you just know, don't mess up, ordon't call talk to yourself or
don't, you know, I was luckyenough to have legal status, but
even you, you're verydeferential, you know, to
immigration, stuff like that, orto services that can report you
(29:08):
to immigration and likejeopardize your family. I mean,
I think it just shows updifferently. If if there's an
acknowledgement ofdiscrimination, or once placed
on the economic ladder that youdon't talk back, you know, or
speak up. So it just shows up inother ways, I think like in in
the workforce, and especially Isee that as a problem for first
(29:29):
generation professionals whodon't know how to advocate for
themselves, manage up ordisagree. That's how it shows up
for me. And then I'll just saythe problem is that within the
Latino community, there's a lotof racism towards blacks and
towards indigenous people. So Ican't guarantee that there's so
(29:52):
I'll just say there's that thirdelement and classism, right
where in Mexico I'll tell you,the police is not held in high
regard, even the militarybecause it seemed like a working
class occupation. And so Idon't, I don't want to say that
it's whiteness, but it's that ifyou have enough money, you can
do whatever you want. And sothere's not this fear of, you're
(30:16):
going to lose your life. Justbecause there's so much
privilege, you know, amongmiddle class Latinos, and then
there's just a lot of racismtowards to distinguish
themselves from people who areseeing tab a worse situation. So
it just shows up, like, in a lotof different ways.
Kim Clark (30:36):
And I can attest that when I came out, then the
conversations with my parentswas about safety. And my mom
even asked me like, okay, okay,can you tell nobody, because I'm
really worried about yoursafety, like, you know, so she
wanted to take advantage of myability to pass, if you will.
(30:56):
And that was really, reallyinteresting. And I saw the love
that she was trying to sharewith me on that. And unlike my
color of my skin that is seen,however, the world sees it, and
it's not my choice, it's out ofmy hands. As if I were, you
know, I had more melanin in myskin than I do. I had a choice
(31:20):
around, being out, if you will,there are certain situations
where I do use that privilege.But in most situations, I do
not, I don't take advantage ofthat privilege. But however, I
also have height privilege, Ihave deep voice privilege. I
have athletic shape, privilege,you know, so I take advantage of
(31:43):
that, it's like, it's not smartto try to do anything to me,
right? Or say anything to me,and, but I also, that's also
white woman privilege that I amleveraging as well. So if I was
a transgender person of color,who was shorter, for example, or
a different body shape, etc, Iwould not have these kinds of
(32:05):
privileges, and it would beless, less of it would be more
out of my hands. But I did havethat safety conversation with my
parents when it came to mysexual orientation. So I
appreciate you bringing up thatpoint. And because there's
certain work environments, orclient environments, where I
still to this day, at this age,I still don't come out,
(32:29):
everywhere I go. Because ofsafety, I will be traveling to
Florida soon. Equality, Floridahas issued a travel advisory for
the entire state of Florida foranyone who is LGBTQ plus, saying
it is not safe to travel here.Certainly in certain pockets of
Florida, a travel advisory hasbeen issued, and I'm going to
(32:53):
Florida and I will be I have theoption, you know, to be out or
not, or wear the T shirts that Ihave or not with the pride flag.
And I it's an it's a safetysituation. But there's also a
sense of pride and solidarityand Ally ship and, and wanting
people to know that I am hereand I see them. But there are
(33:18):
people that don't have thechoices and the privilege and
the options like I do. And Irecognize that which motivates
me more to be out to help withthe stereotypes that can be more
disproportionately harmful topeople who can't necessarily
hide as well as I can. So justin our last couple of minutes
(33:39):
here, Maria, what does come youknow, tying everything that we
talked about the intrapersonal,the you know, the intra personal
communication, as well as thereviewing of our language that
builds the nuts and bolts andfunctions and infrastructures of
our businesses in our policiesor practices or processes, etc.
(33:59):
What does it look like, in youropinion, to communicate like,
give a damn,
Unknown (34:05):
part of me wants to say you can't have assumptions about
what's normal. Right? And whichitself requires a growth
mindset, right? Because how doyou get it right, you might you
won't get it right the firsttime. So I think partly is
continuing being open tocontinuous improvement, being
open to feedback, and tellingpeople what you're doing with
(34:28):
that feedback. I don't know painpeople, you know, if you do
focus groups, or if people havea role in making your materials
more inclusive, paying for thatknowledge, right, but also
building the capacity. So notrelying on certain groups to
point out the flaws andrecognizing the power dynamics
inherent in that if you'reasking someone for feedback,
(34:48):
where you have more power andthey don't feel comfortable
actually telling you what theythink to improve the language.
So and I think when I saynormative don't don't ask So
many things normative. I mean,even the one thing I left out
the question yesterday about thethe talk, I mean, if you just
look at the data, right,acknowledging the reality is
(35:10):
acknowledging the relativeinequities. And so that's why
certain language is not going toland for some people. Something
we didn't talk about isexclusion of people who are
formerly incarcerated, right? Isee a lot of advances in
programs to address that.Discrimination. But in popular
(35:31):
culture, there's still jokes,right about what it is to be a
prisoner, even my three yearold, right? Like, oh, a band, it
has stripes. So very young, thattwo years old, people are
learning like what's going on?They try kids try to like,
simplify, good, bad is that goodor bad person. And that's not
how it is. Some people aredenied opportunities, right? And
(35:52):
just about the talk, like Latinomen, right, face enormous
scrutiny, and they have tocontrol their emotions. And so
like the point of how itprivilege that you were
speaking, being able to raise usto make a scene to advocate for
yourself to defend yourselfrequires privilege that you
(36:12):
won't be, you won't faceretribution for that. Right. So
anyway, just in terms of what'snormative, expanding what we
think is normative and trying togo back to things that are still
that are stereotypes. When youthink about Disney movies that
now have the disclaimer, thiswas offensive, then it's
defensive now, okay, like,relook at things that for a long
(36:36):
time have seemed okay, becausethings change, and and just in
terms of history, you know, hardwon rights can be lost. Right?
And so, look at the ways inwhich people are trying to
create new exclusion. Really?How do you say, very creatively,
(37:00):
so that you can't tell? Right,so So, and there's a book by Ian
Haney Lopez called dog whistlepolitics. I don't have the whole
title. But you know, things likemake America great again, what
does that mean? Right? You don'tsay anything, but you say a lot,
you're saying go back to a timewhen people didn't have rights
when people couldn't vote can goto school. So just sometimes
(37:25):
when we use language that seemsjust general, the people
enforcing it, show you who'sincluded in that normal, right.
Kim Clark (37:36):
I used to teach in person I still teach online at
San Jose State University inCalifornia. And one of the
classes I used to teach is mediatheory and research, one of the
things that we would do as aclass is that we would watch
news stories, for example, andwe went, there's a lot to, and
(37:57):
I'm only going to mention oneslice of what we would pay
attention to to deconstruct it.But one of the things I would
point the students attention toand it's something I test
myself, in my own mediacriticism, you know, critical
thinking of media, etc. is tolook at, okay, and I've made my
own documentaries. So I know theconventions I you know, this is
(38:17):
this is what one does, as adirector, as a writer, you're
telling the the audience whereto look where what you want
emphasized, write everything inthe frame as a character to
support the story that has acertain theme to it, sometimes
(38:40):
life lessons, etc, mirroringlife, and sometimes not, etc.
But it's very intentional todraw the eye and lead the
audience in a certain direction.We're showing you what we want
you to see. So there's there'selements that are emphasized.
But there's also elements thatare de emphasized, what is being
(39:04):
left out? Who is being left out?Why which circling back to what
you said at the beginning, as asfar as the programs that you
evaluate, like, why are we doingthis program? And what is the
effect of it, they may have anintention, but it may have a
different impact. So this ideaof looking at our language and
(39:26):
seeing what we are emphasizingwho we are emphasizing and then
weigh whether it's intentionalor not, what are we
deemphasizing? Who are wesilencing Who are we? Who are we
leaving out? Right, and that'spart of having that dei lens on
our work on a regular basis.Maria, thank you so much for
(39:49):
bringing your expertise, yourresearch and dissertation work
to end your personal life andtalking about your kid. You
know, I just love the range ofthe conversation We just had,
how can people stay in touchwith you?
Unknown (40:02):
I have a blog, Maria gamble.com, and I'm on LinkedIn
and Instagram. So yeah, add mefeel free to read what I write.
It's a bunch of random stuff butall with this lens, you know,
because I deconstruct PBS shows,I deconstruct, you know, higher
ed programs. So it's justwhatever I see with that lens.
Kim Clark (40:26):
Excellent, excellent. So people can, can learn and
kind of learn off of yourexample of what you're seeing
that's emphasized and what'sbeing left out and de
emphasized. That's awesome.Thank you. I look forward to
subscribing myself. Thank youfor being here. Maria. It was so
great to have you here. Thanksfor the conversation. Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.