The Need for Conversation Not Conflict

How should I introduce Plan4D to USW?

I set up Plan4D in January 2020. The name [Plan4D] is based on the idea of accepting and therefore planning for diversity as an inevitable aspect of groups and organisations. This changes the focus from delivering equality training [only] as a reactive response to inequalities and under-representation. My aspiration for Plan4D is to create and/or participate in ways that open spaces for evolving, inclusive dialogue.  These spaces will seek to enable individuals and groups to better develop inclusive approaches by developing an enhanced understanding and tools to address prejudicial, discriminatory, and exclusionary discourse and practices. The intention for this approach is to proactively explore our understanding of prejudice and discrimination, inclusion and empowerment in contemporary environments. By contemporary I mean taking on board the recent and current political and social contexts and being mindful of our varied and intersectional lived experiences, where honesty in search of understanding is valued.

What led you to becoming involved in USW’s All-Wales Ethnic Minority Research Advisory Group (EMRAG)?

I have worked in the equalities and community development sectors for 20+ years. I was initially contacted by Edward Oloidi, Research Assistant at the School of Life Sciences. Edward was pulling together people from within USW and others such as myself who have experience of working within the field of ‘race’ equality. We were able to meet [online] and discuss the plan for EMRAG. From this discussion I felt that this initiative would be something I could and would be willing to contribute to.

Why is conversing meaningfully as important as it is difficult?

Whether it be national, regional and local debates on identity, housing, education, crime, immigration and access to local services/provision; whatever the debate people [in my lifetime] have never seemed more divided. I am not suggesting that, dis-agreement and divisions haven’t existed throughout our collective lifetimes, but the tone of the debate seems to be increasingly angrier and louder, with opinions more static and polemic.

This idea translates to any number of [topical] situations. Too often it seems, discourse is forced through a narrow prism of right and wrong, for or against, left or right. In reality, issues are often complex, and even seemingly similar experiences can vary in important and significant ways.

The use of language and terminology can often be a cause for anxiety. Perceptions of ‘political correctness’ and more recently discussions on ‘woke’ often overtake and deflect from understanding issues such as prejudice, discrimination, institutional advantage and disadvantage and ‘privilege’.   

Our discussions are based within a western geo-political context and will acknowledge relevant, contemporary political paradigms, opportunities and institutional barriers faced by our diverse populations such as privilege/disadvantage, racism/white supremacy, sexism/paternalism, homophobia/hetero-sexism and xenophobia/far-right nationalism. However, there is a missing layer. Often missing from such discussions is consideration of the insecurities of majority populations that are too often played on by media and governments to create and/or exacerbate acrimony and division between various population groups.

How can we avoid getting caught up on debates about appropriate and inappropriate language and conflicting ‘truths’?

It can be argued that political and mass and social media discourse increasingly enables misleading use of language and a dismissive relationship with other peoples ‘truth’. An impact of this is the laying of fertile ground with opposing voices and divisive rhetoric to split opinion, leading to polarisation, vilification, and [seemingly] unresolvable argument. What happens is that we seem to lose the ability to listen and reflect on what we think and what others are saying.

I am interested in exploring how anti-racism and other anti-discrimination/pro inclusivity practitioners provide opportunities for people to explore methods in which they (and others) can come together to discuss challenging issues in a constructive, non-combative and generative fashion creating a vehicle to enable understanding and compassion for the ‘other’.  It is a skill and takes intention to genuinely and actively listen and seek to understand another viewpoint from one’s own; this is especially so where perspectives are perceived to be not only contrary to our own experience or beliefs but especially where it is deemed threatening to our sense of self, including or personal and/or social identity and emotional safety. Acknowledging this can be a way for pushing through our hang-ups and maintaining our focus on the bigger issue(s).

How do we create space so that there can be agreement on the rules of engagement when generating conversation and debate on a broad range of issues? 

While not advocating for a “one-size-fits-all” approach, my experience tells me that methods used will [first] focus on our own opinions and thought patterns.

• What and who has influenced us (as individuals and in groups) to listen and respond the way we do? 
• Are we aware or mindful of the impact our thoughts and actions have on those around us and ourselves, both positive and negative?
• Can I/we change to make ourselves better understood?
• Can I/we change to help us better understand others?
• What is real compromise and when is compromise beneficial or when can it leave issues unresolved?
• How can we identify, manage and respond to discomfort pro-actively?

This framework can be used in this context to discuss prejudice/discrimination, racism, xenophobia, religious intolerance, migration the media, etc. The desired outcome is to explore ways in which these topics can be discussed holistically. Underpinning this framework is the desire to encourage a more considered and compassionate view of difference that supports people’s personal engagement in a diverse society. Diversity in its myriad forms is inevitable so going forward how do we (can we) accept this as a starting point and then acknowledge the beneftits and address the challenges this may present.

USW is on its own journey of re-working how it relates and intervenes in its everyday practices and processes. Key to this is acknowledging and addressing where race inequities are present within USW policies, practices and culture.  What reflection points would you share with institutions like USW about how we communicate and find better more meaningful ways of engaging and listening?

I would say [based on my experience] that it is fundamentally important to create a listening and learning environment. Often it is assumed because people are signed up to a manifesto that there is a shared understanding and interpretation of it. Differing philosophies will impact on the direction of travel. That is why it is important to provide opportunities to check-in and evaluate progress on a regular basis.

• Identify where and how USW reflect the positions of contemporary society while still keeping a focus on the changes it seeks to engender;
• Do not dismiss out of hand the experiences (including fears) of the those who feel excluded or oppressed but use that as a way of framing the subject while identifying solutions and building consensus;
• Do not dismiss out of hand the experiences of those who feel judged for not being inclusive - acknowledge and identify solutions;
• Recognise the evolving contexts in which difference and similarities are highlighted and when this can be beneficial or problematic (recognise the dynamic nature of identity, ingroups and out-groups). This includes unpacking the complexities inherent in minoritised communities and challenge oversimplified definitions of identity;
• Reflect on how do/can we speak about each other? Why and when does terminology matter?

Finally, I would suggest that it is important to not be afraid of the complexities. This is where the learning happens. In the words of Brene Brown “stick with the trouble.”