Conference turris::womannotes-v3

   This is long, but I've been percolating toward writing this for some
   time...

                                    * * *
   
   Feminism and treating others fairly has always been important to me.
   I've changed my thinking on HOW to do it over the last 15-20 years...and
   I'm aware now that I will probably be changing my thinking on how to do
   it for the rest of my life.

   When I first started thinking about feminist issues in the early 1970s,
   in my early teens, I thought men and women were EXACTLY THE SAME.  I
   thought society made a mistake and hampered women by not realizing that
   we were EXACTLY THE SAME AS MEN and could do EXACTLY THE SAME things
   they could in EXACTLY THE SAME way, if only both sexes weren't
   socialized differently.

   I have gradually changed my thinking on this.  I continue to believe
   that men and women are EQUALLY VALUABLE, but I now feel that the
   differences run deeper than I ever thought before.  Both nature and
   environment.  Physically (in terms of different hormones rampaging
   through bloodstreams, different body parts), mentally (women may find
   cycles and evolutions a natural way to think of events because we
   experience our bodies as cycles and pregnancies as evolutions; men may
   find it easy to think of events as being separate instances because
   their sexuality is not cyclic in the same way), and socially (men and
   women are trained differently).  In my opinion, gender identity has a
   profound effect on how you feel about yourself and on how you approach
   challenges and feelings and thoughts and other people.  And -- this is
   key -- I DON'T believe that feeling kinship with a gender group is an
   inherently bad thing; nor do I think that recognizing general style
   differences of different gender groups is a bad thing, providing (of
   course) that everyone is ALWAYS conscious that individual variations are
   everywhere and can cross gender group identities at any time, any place,
   for anyone. I explicitly no longer believe that it is evil to recognize
   and acknowledge that men and women are different in how they approach
   problems; I now feel that instead of insisting that we be THE SAME, that
   we EQUALLY VALUE different approaches.  And that we allow people to
   cross boundaries where they wish ...

   Valuing Differences (male/female) and Valuing Diversity (race/culture)
   workshops have been helpful to me in hearing other perspectives and
   experiences and coming to understand that other people have different
   priorities than I do.  I found it particularly helpful for me to attend
   one workshop as the "subordinate culture" (women) and one workshop as
   the "dominant culture" (whites).  I can see as a subordinate how easy it
   is for the dominant group "not to see" a problem that is a problem for
   me but not for them ... and I can see as a dominant how hard it is to
   accept that although I am not necessarily *individually* responsible for
   creating individual problems for individual people, I *am* a member of a
   dominant culture and am therefore responsible as a member of that
   culture for the domination it practices.  Taking responsibility is NOT
   "feeling guilty"; it is accepting facts and moving on from there.

   One insight that hit home in the male/female workshop for me was that
   I've always approached feminism thinking that I am the all-knowing
   expert and that men have to "give up" being so obsessed by power.  The
   counter-insight is that men can GAIN emotional connectedness and I can
   GAIN a sense of importance and power.  This can be win-win if we
   approach it right.

   One insight that hit home in the race/culture workshop for me was that I
   don't think enough about being "white" and how American culture is a
   predominantly European white culture.  My heritage and my culture are
   the same -- white. Other groups have to juggle their heritage and the
   prevailing culture. Furthermore,  as a woman, I find it VERY EASY to
   identify with feelings of oppression ("gee, I know what you mean, yes,
   isn't it terrible when this kind of thing happens, how can THEY do this
   to US"), which is all very nice but which is in some ways a method of
   denying the reality that I AM A MEMBER of the group that is dominant; a
   method of pretending that I'm still a responsibility-free subordinant.


                                * * *

                          A personal vision

   Music to me provides an analogy that I find helpful in thinking about
   what I want to see in a society that values people equally but
   acknowledges that we are not all the same and should not all be the
   same; and that the existence of subgroups can add to the richness of the
   overall society.

   In most singing groups, there are four voice parts (Soprano, Alto,
   Tenor, Bass).  I sing the Soprano melody part, the top part.  The melody
   is beautiful; I am vaguely conscious that I am the "star" and that most
   people hear me and that the other harmony parts support my melody line.

   However, I have also sung other voice parts that are NOT the melody. My
   mother sang the melody all her life and when she got older, she moved
   to the Alto harmony part.  She was *stunned* to realize that Altos DON'T
   think of their part as "harmony supporting the sopranos"; they think of
   their part as a DIFFERENT MELODY.  Altos can be as oblivious to the
   Sopranos as Sopranos are to them...

   A Soprano does not usually sing notes in the Alto range, although they
   overlap.  An Alto does not usually sing notes in the Bass range,
   although they may sing in parallel.  A Bass harmony part must be sung in
   a different way than a Soprano melody part.  Altos, Tenors, and Basses
   are not expected to sing their parts in the exact same way as the
   Sopranos sing their part. Individual people have different talents and
   different voice ranges; by grouping them into distinct subgroups,
   beautiful sounds can happen.

   A melody line is beautiful.  Gregorian chant and plainsong are
   beautiful.  But the addition of harmony makes for a richer sound that
   combines in unexpected ways.  It is more than just "one part melody plus
   three parts harmony" -- each part sings its own melody in its own way IN
   COOPERATION with the other parts, co-creating an integrated experience.
   
   That's what I want out of our society:  acknowledgement of differences,
   and working with differences to create a richer and fuller experience
   than a single melody line can achieve alone.  

> I don't think enough about being "white" and how American culture is a
>   predominantly European white culture.  

This rang bells with me. I often (always?) mind-f**k myself (see the Illuminati
triology) along diversity lines, but I don't think I've gotten to the white
European part of me. I've been working on the religion-as-culture lines. It's
an easy one to do; it comes up every December :-). It actually occurs much more
often, but sensitizing myself is so hard. But, since I have exposure to folks
who practice/don't practice various religions, it's a _lot_ easier than working
on the European white. Sometimes WITCH lectures help there; there was a great
one around Columbus Day last year.
	Mez

    
    Though I found answer .1 absolutely beautiful, I am a bit puzzled by
    the allusion to "European-white" culture in America (replies .1 & .2). 
    
    To me, being conscious of my "European-white-judeo-christian" heritage
    makes sense BECAUSE I live in Europe, and as such belong to the "powers
    that be". I don't really understand the point of coming from a European 
    culture when in America - after all, a European is just one kind of
    immigrant, and as such does not belong to the power system. And I am a
    bit doubtful that a 3rd, 4th or Xth generation American is still bathed
    in European culture...
    
    Would somebody care to expand? Should that be a separate topic? I
    realize I havent't given any useful input on the basenote, but that is
    something I need to think through before I can say something relevant.
    
    Joana

    Joana, 
    
    Here's my cut.  The US is not truly a melting pot and never really has
    been -- a stew maybe, but not a melting pot.  The country was settled
    in waves of immigration.  Each wave met with resistance and bigotry
    from the population which was established at the time it arrived.
    Eventually it assimilated to some degree or other and became a part
    of the bigotry against the next wave.  
    
    "To some degree or other" has historically depended on a several 
    factors:
    a) how long it has been since your wave arrived (all things settle in
       eventually, one hopes)
    b) how many came in the next wave (immigrants historically have put up
       with lower wages and worse working conditions than established
       citizens, hence are seen as an economic threat.  And nothing gets
       you "in" as fast as having a new common enemy.)
    c) how similar your wave was to the entrenched powers-that-be in the
       settled population (white Protestant Western Europeans have the
       longest history of empowered status in this country)
    d) whether your wave arrived here of their own volition as free
       immigrants searching equal citizenship, or whether they were
       "recruited"/coerced/kidnapped into coming here as slaves, servants, 
       or cheap manual labor.  (In addition to the national disgrace of
       what white America did to African people, many Asians, Irish and 
       Eastern European immigrants fell into this category.)
    
    The *power* structure of this country is still in the hands of the
    descendents of white judeo-Christian Europeans -- and Northern
    Europeans at that.  So is most of the wealth and most of "high
    society".  It's changing, but it's LONG overdue.
    
    Beth

    I think "Judeo-Christian" is a term invented strictly by Christians! 
    I'm not sure why, either.  Those of us who are Jewish certainly don't
    feel like part of the majority most of the time most places in the US.
    Like, grumbling about using up precious vacation days for religious
    holidays that we spend sitting in the synogogue, or fighting "blue
    laws" so we can shop on weekends without shopping on our sabbath, or
    trying to explain to people that we can't attend their luncheon
    because they scheduled it during Passover.  Diversity encompasses more
    than skin color: not everyone who looks like a WASP is one.
    
    /Charlotte

>    I think "Judeo-Christian" is a term invented strictly by Christians! 
>    I'm not sure why, either.  
                  ^^^
I think it perhaps was invented by Christians, but I don't know for sure.
It refers, though, first to Jesus being a Jew, our (being a WASP) link to 
Judaism.

The Laws of Judaism were set into principles by Christ, which represented
a departure from the Jewish tradition.  (Since then, Christians have
failed by developing traditions they hold as tenaciously as laws, which is 
very unfortunate.)  Not to leave a dangling thread, the principles I speak of
had Christ relate hatred to murder, lust to adultery, coveting and envy
to stealing - what "comes out of the heart" - the attitude instead of the 
act.

As for minority status, any group can become a minority in today's American
society (though admittedly there are propensities), provided other 
minority groups band together under some umbrella.  For example, Jews are
in the minority to the Christian religions in this country, but single
out a brand of Protestantism, or better Christian versus non-Christian,
the demigraphics can change dramtically.

Disclaimer:  I do not know the ratio of those who claim to be in the
Christian or non-Christian categories, nor the breakdown of Protestant
denominations in America as it relates to the population.  I feel I am
safe to say that there are fewer Jews than [professing] Christians in 
America and that the Catholic church is perhaps the largest [single] religious 
organization in America (but that collectively, Protestants outnumber Catholics
in America).

Enough rambling. 

Mark

    About the "European-white" thing, .4 put it perfectly!  There's a
    concept of "Northern-European-white == default" in our overall culture. 
    For instance, my last name is Smith -- I've never had to wonder if the
    reason for not getting a callback on my resume was because my name was
    Garcia or Liu.  (I've had to worry if being female has "cost" me
    opportunities or changed how someone interacted with me, though.)
    
    I'd like to encourage people to use this topic creatively -- feel free
    to talk about insights you've had, or personal experiences, or
    workshops, or how it's hard to be one person at home and another person
    at work... 
    
    
    BTW, the group that has run the two valuing differences workshop I've
    participated in is called New Dynamics, Inc.  They are a cooperatively
    run partnership with branches in NYC, New Hampshire, and Portland, OR.  
    We are supposed to maintain confidentiality, so I can't talk about any
    events or other people's personal experiences, but I think it would be
    OK to talk about insights and techniques gained from the experience...
    
    One concept they present is that the goal is to work away from a
    dominant/subordinant way of interacting that forces people to act out
    roles society forces us to use.  Dominants and subordinants collude
    with each other, in different ways (men/women, white/color, etc.).  
    New Dynamics doesn't focus on how this all started, but rather on
    showing possible paths toward working together well.
    
    o  The thing that's the same in different kinds of discrimination is
       that it usually involves a power differential, and that it involves
       stereotyping one group negatively and stereotyping one group 
       positively.  Techniques to maintain the power differential are 
       usually based on the power differential, and therefore are similar
       across groups.  
    
    o  The thing that's different is WHAT is discriminated about, and the
       nature of the relationship between the dominants and subordinants.
       (Men and women must interact more closely than whites and people 
       of color are forced to; men/women issues are therefore easier to
       grapple with because we all know at least one man and at least one
       woman, whereas there are many whites in America who have never
       talked for longer than 5 minutes with someone who is not white.)
    
    To change this, we have to have a GOAL:  learning how to negotiate as
    equals and colleagues.  Learning to see that others are different in
    ways you never dreamed.  Learning to listen.  Learning to learn.
    
    The hard thing is that you can't wake up one day and be perfect. 
    (Rats!!)  You have to slowly evolve; and during that process you deal
    with people who are farther behind than you and people who are ahead of
    you.  And you can't ever really say that you are always perfect --
    something may happen to toss you way back into the worst part of the
    old way of interacting...
    
    The Valuing Differences seminars have been really helpful to me in
    terms of a) spending real time at work thinking about how to work
    toward colleagueship, and b) coming up with different frameworks for
    deciding what the problems are and ways to deal with them, and c)
    seeing other people (on the _opposite_ sides of the power equations)
    who are also interested in learning and sharing and changing.
    
    I've found it inspiring and fun at times and frustrating and hard 
    at times.
    
    Has anyone else been to any Valuing Differences or Valuing Diversity
    workshops?  What did you think?  (If it was negative, you probably
    should NOT identify the outside organization that ran the workshop...)
    What did you learn?  Did you think people were really participating, or
    did you think they were looking for a "vacation from real work"?
    
    Are men afraid they'll get "beat up" for being male?
    Are whites afraid they'll get "beat up" for being white?
    
    Pam

    re .7

    Pam,

    I attended a cultural diversity workshop a few months ago. It was led
    by the New Dynamics team.   Two things things struck me during and even
    after the workshop.  

    I've always known that I'm black.  I don't wake up in the morning and
    think "black."  Yet by the time I make it to the end of any given day
    of interaction with people (interaction does not have to be in person
    either, often it is through the media, etc.) I realize I'm black.  So,
    I had (and still have) a very difficult time fathoming the "phenomena"
    of whites not realizing or owning up to being white.  My reaction was
    obvious disbelief and shock.  "How can you sit there and tell me that
    you aren't really white??!!"  

    I was also amazed at the propensity toward groupings such as Italian,
    German, Irish, to avoid acknowledging whiteness.  

    Based on the feedback I had from many of the other minorities at the
    workshop, my shock and disbelief seem rather common.  My opinion is, if
    there is any first step whites must make before difference can really
    be valued is to own up to being white.  White, white, white. Not
    "Northern-European" or other buzzwords.
    
    The other thing which struck me was the difference between the way
    minorities communicated with each other in the presence of whites and
    in absence of whites.  (By minorities I mean non-whites.)  It was like
    day and night.  I was literally brought to tears when the vast
    difference was pointed out.  I can only imagine with sadness how much
    business affected on a day to day basic by the communication problem.

    Since attending the workshop I have made a special attempt to "be
    myself" here at work.  So far the attempt hasn't been met with oh too
    much success though.  I try.  But sometimes the urge to conform to the
    dominants' rules is so strong.  Conforming is so much easier for both
    involved parties, least of all me. 
    
    _karen

    re: .8  Karen,
    
    It's hard for me to realize that it's hard for me to realize, if you know
    what I mean!  Being "the default" means that you are not faced with
    having to WORK at conforming to the default.  And, to tie this into
    this conference a bit, it makes it easier for me to see where it might
    be hard for men to realize they are the default in relation to women.
    
    An analogy might help.  I'm born and bred in the U.S., where the driver
    sits in the left seat.  I drive a car from the left-hand seat.  I do
    not think about it, ever!  Not when I walk to my car, not while I'm
    driving, not when I get out of the car.  It's Reality to me, that cars
    are all driven from the left side.
    
    Someone who was born and bred in England, where everything's opposite
    and drivers sit on the right, might have a hard time adjusting --
    really adjusting -- to driving in the U.S.  They might occasionally 
    head automatically for the right-side car door.  While making a right
    turn, they might instinctively check both directions.  In any case,
    they would always be conscious at some level that they were really a
    right-side driver who has to adjust to drive on the left side.
    
    So that's one reason why it's easy, really easy, for whites in a
    predominantly white society NOT TO SEE or be conscious of BEING WHITE. 
    We don't have to.   Similarly, it's easy, really easy, for men in a
    predominantly male-oriented society NOT TO SEE or be conscious of BEING
    MEN.
    
    The key, I guess, is cross-cultural shock.  Have a left-side driver
    visit the U.K. and try driving on the right side...
    
    About your other point, yes...  It's hard to know what to do.  I was
    flipping channels last week and I caught part of a standup comedy show
    on BET (Black Entertainment Television).  I love standup comedy.  I
    watched for a while, and something about it was really pulling at me. 
    I couldn't think what it was.  Then I realized that I was watching a
    completely black audience who were enjoying black standup comedians. 
    Part of me felt like a voyeur, but I saw a side of black culture I am
    rarely able to glimpse -- relaxed, free, trusting, trading subtle
    in-jokes, open.  It made me realize how much just my presence in a room
    can change what happens in that room.
    
    It also made me remember how trusting and open all-women groups can be. 
    One comment made at the men/woman workshop I attended was made by a
    man, after watching the women talking in the center of the circle.  He
    said, "I'd never seen that side of women before -- the ENERGY you all
    have together!"
    
    If only we could all -- men, women, blacks, whites, asians, etc. --
    come up with ways to unleash the energy that is locked away by the
    pressures of society!  I think the Valuing Diversity workshops are a
    step in the right direction.  At least one becomes aware that the
    energy exists, and one becomes absorbed with the process of finding the
    keys.
    
    Pam  

>    Based on the feedback I had from many of the other minorities at the
>    workshop, my shock and disbelief seem rather common.  My opinion is, if
>    there is any first step whites must make before difference can really
>    be valued is to own up to being white.  White, white, white. Not
>    "Northern-European" or other buzzwords.
 
	Why? Why must I be white rather than Northern-European or just plain
	mixed bag American? Black and white are macro differences. Beyond that
	there are micro differences. There appear to be as many differences
	between blacks from West Indian families and blacks from families that
	have been in the US for 100s of years are there are between whites
	from the same situations. The color of my skin and your skin are only
	one part of who and what we are. I have more in common with some
	black people then I do many (perhaps most) white people.

				Alfred

    Okay.  So I'm white.  Does it make a difference in how I treat others? 
    Yes.
    
    I think I err on the side of overconcern.  I'm so careful when speaking
    to "people of difference" (cultural, racial, sexual) sometimes that I
    feel like I'm being hyper-aware and oversensitive to them.  I go
    overboard the wrong way sometimes, in trying to make up for my lack of
    difference I probably come across as a total twit.  I'm trying to
    chill out though.
    
    -Jody
    

    re .8
    
    Karen, I think you're right.  This feels silly to say, but I never
    realized how much my life has been affected by the fact that I'm white
    until I spent a couple of days in a place where being white is not an
    asset -- where, in fact, it can be a limitation. I think I never really
    knew I was "white" before; until then I was just "normal people".
    
    It took something under 48 hours to make a difference.  There were
    things missing I had never realized were there before.  Like being
    confident that I'd be welcome in any business establishment I cared
    to step into.  Like expecting that people would behave as though I had
    just as much right to be there as anyone else -- even if some of them
    might be rude to me.  Surely these are things that *just people* all
    have, right?
    
    It made me *angry* to be missing these things that I honestly thought
    all people have.  I hated having to admit that they may very well be
    life attributes of being a WHITE person, not just A person, even in
    this day, in this country.  It brought home the ugliness of racism in
    a way that had never been real before.
    
    It also made me ashamed, for in the midst of my reaction was an element
    of my own racism I DID NOT want to face.  Part of my anger was not
    simply "how dare they treat a person this way?"  Part of it was "How
    dare they not treat white as naturally on or with the top of the heap?"
    God, I wish I'd never had to acknowledge that thought as my own.
    
    All I can say is, I'm sorry.  I never knew this was there, honest.  I'm
    glad I had the experience.  I know it doesn't tell me what it's like
    to live as a non-white person in this society day by day, but it's 
    enough of a taste to at least make me question how much of my reality
    is not reality for all people.  
    
    Maybe it's a step in the right direction, anyway.  
    Beth

    It is definitely strange to find yourself somewhere where people like
    you are not present in the numbers you are used to - like suddenly
    being the majority when you aren't used to that, or not seeing anyone
    else who looks remotely like you when your normal life has you in the
    majority.
    
    I found it very disconcerting, and very odd.  Late last fall, I was on
    vacation in a very remote area: the island of Yap (yes, as in "stone
    money") in western Micronesia (going there had been a longtime dream of
    mine, and I finally managed to get there!!).  One afternoon, Paul and I
    hired a car and driver/translator, and made our way to the northern end
    of Ma'ap island, where we walked in and visited some of the villages,
    to take photographs and to see the local culture (Yap is the most
    culturally "pure" of the easily-accessible Micronesian islands; sailing
    off to a *really* remote island wasn't in the budget).  Very few
    visitors visit these people, and only a really tiny number of
    Americans.  Now, there is no way that I could pass for Micronesia: I am
    just under six feet tall, with long straight blond hair, and since I
    sunburn easily I am real careful to never tan.  Most Yapese people do
    not like to have their pictures taken, but one older woman, who was
    wearing traditional dress (grass skirt only) allowed us to take her
    picture with her face averted, and greeted us very politely in a
    language other than Yapese - Japanese!  Since the Japanese had held
    these islands when she was a child, she had learned that language, and
    assumed that since we were obviously not local people, why, we *must*
    be Japanese....  That *really* felt strange!   I suppose I look
    somewhat closer to Japanese than to Micronesian, maybe, but this
    incident certainly gave me an odd feeling!
    
    /Charlotte

    
    It is not too difficult for "whites" to experience being
    the minority if there is a good-size chineatown near you. Just spend
    half a day there and you'll get this strange uncomfortable feeling 
    of being different. It is worth the experience, it may not be pleasant
    though.
    
    
    Eva.

    I am white and my wife is Burmese and I met her many years ago when in
    Burma on business.
    
    We would occasionally go out together to a movie.  It was an eye
    opening experience to be in the minority and to be the object of 
    prejudice.  A situation that I had not known before, nor generally
    since.  It was also scary.  Needless to say we tended to visit
    friends rather than go out in public. 
    
    Bob

    
    I'd never really considered myself different and thus haven't
    paid much attention to racial prejudice (against me) until
    I have a family. I am Oriental, but because of my westernized upbringing
    I don't fit the stereotype. My husband is white, so my kid is 
    mixed. It is amazing how strangers will stare at us in public.
    It is also amazing how some people think I am Cambodian or
    Vietnamese (read refugee and poor). It shocked them to find out that
    I came from an upper class Chinese family, who actually "married
    down" to a middle class white male. 
    
    I started to feel like I am the ambassador of my race - my job
    is to break the stereotype, to teach the public that not all
    Asian immigrants are on welfare and that a lot of them were
    aristocrats in their native lands. It is a burden, a self-inflicted
    burden, maybe. 
    
    One way I think that will improve people's understanding on
    different culture is to incorporate the material in school,
    teach that as part of  geography. Geography is being taught in all grades
    all over the world, except in the United States. It is a shame. 
    It is much easier to "convert" a kid than an adult.
    A better understanding of foreign culture will definitely help
    us with international trade and foreign policies.
    
    Eva.

>    I started to feel like I am the ambassador of my race - my job
>    is to break the stereotype, to teach the public that not all
>    Asian immigrants are on welfare and that a lot of them were
>    aristocrats in their native lands. It is a burden, a self-inflicted
>    burden, maybe. 

Eva, you really hit on something here.  I, too, feel like an ambassador
when attempting to enlighten my "difference" to someone who has little,
if any, experience encountering my difference.  Oftentimes I exert a lot 
of energy in explaining certain fundamentals and/or why's and wherefore's 
to the people who haven't had the opportunity to expand their awareness
that not everything is as everything seems and that to conveniently use
stereotypes and assumptions is wrong.

Self-inflicted, yes, but I know I derive great satisfaction when I *do*
manage to provide some truthful information where none had been before.

Carla

    That's odd, but I never feel "unusual" in Chinatown - even when I was
    in Hong Kong.  I guess I am used to that situation - especially since
    both of us love Chinese food.

    I admit that I have never had to undergo the extreme prejudices that
    minorities have had to face. I do try to think of myself as Human as
    opposed to white or Irish/English/Scotch-French Canadian/Indian. My
    problem, and it is MY problem, is in trying to be sensitive to problems
    faced by other races, sexual preferences, (I'm hetero) or any other
    "difference". Over the past 30 years or so, antiprejudice has almost
    been beaten into whites by the media and laws. So much so that in my
    case I think I lean to much the other way in trying to be sensitive to
    the issues in my day to day dealings with minorities in the work place.
    I'm almost afraid to say anything beyond what is needed to get the job
    done for fear of offending someone. I realize the laws were needed to
    get things to the point that they are now, which I think is much better
    then they were 25-30 years ago. I just wonder how many more of us are
    overly sensitized about treatment of minorities when we knew all of the
    prejudices were inherently wrong to begin with. 
    
    
                                 Phil

    I remember in the 70's when I was a kid (Yes, I know I'm old.) watching
    60 minutes and seeing white, adult Bostonians yelling at 2nd grade 
    black students on the bus,"Nigger go home". This was national T.V. I
    was a white Bostonian. I was so embarassed and ashamed that I cried.
    How could I allow this to happen? I carried that guilt inside of me 
    for years.
    
    I remember being in high school in the mid 70's when a German woman
    came in to talk to us about what it was like to be raised in post
    WWII Germany. She spoke of the same shame, the same guilt but for the
    Jews.
    
    I have since learned to feel empathy as opposed to sympathy. I see
    things more clearly and don't take things personally. But, it now
    bothers me when people try to force upon me the sins of my for-
    fathers who really weren't of  my lineage at all because my Grand-
    parents were all from Europe and came here and suffered prejudice 
    as well.
    
    Kate

    From the time I can remember my parents told me that racial prejudice
    is one of the greatest evils in the world, and that I should never
    pre-judge anyone because of their skin color, national origin or
    religion, and that I should always remember that everyone is an
    individual.  I just accepted it as being the right way to view things.
    But, in reality, I grew up in a small, rural, Massachusetts town
    where everyone was white and either protestant or Catholic, so although
    I was raised to hold these views I never had occasion to practice
    them.  
    
    In 1968, at the age of 18, I enlisted in the Women's Army Corps,
    and in basic training, for the first time in my life, I had the
    opportunity to interact with "girls" (we did call ourselves girls,
    not women, so I still think of us, back then, in the WACS, as being
    girls) of different backgrounds.  In my first platoon alone there
    were a lot of black girls, a Jewish girl from New Jersey (there
    were no Jewish people in my hometown that I knew of), a Chinese
    girl, and a Native American girl who had grown up on a reservation.
     I found it fascinating to meet people of different backgrounds,
    but I can remember asking myself, How should I act so these people
    will know that I'm not a racist and that I know they're equal? 
    Well, when I was a little kid I was afraid of boys, and when I got
    older I decided I wanted to become friends with boys, and had also
    wondered how to treat boys!  So, I decided to treat them just like
    I treated girls, as though I had never noticed there was a difference,
    and it seemed to work because since then I have always had a lot
    of male friends.  (although I admit at some point I do treat attractive
    males differently)  So, I decided, in the Army, that the only thing
    I could figure out to do, was to act like I hadn't noticed there
    were any differences between any of us.  Since I didn't know how
    to treat men or how to treat black people or any other group different
    from me, I decided to treat everyone as though they were white women,
    or girls, or the way I had always treated other white women and
    girls.  For the most part it *seems* to have worked.  Of course,
    I have never held a management position so I haven't had to deal
    with that angle, but it seems to have worked in my personal life
    and at work.
    
    I remember one instance back in the Wacs, in 1968, that made me
    feel really good at the time.  As background, I hated the Wacs and
    wanted to get out so I tried to deliberately do things wrong so
    that I would get thrown-out.  (Eventually I succeeded)  Anyway,
    one day I didn't "fall in" to go to the mess hall, hoping that I
    would be considered AWOL, and two other white girls decided that
    they didn't want me to do that because it would make the platoon
    look bad.  So, they picked me up and began dragging me down the
    stairs.  I was struggling and yelling but they were both a lot bigger
    than me.  A sergeant broke it up and told me to get in line.  Anyway,
    the point is that a black friend, Viola, told me to get in line
    in front of her.  I did and then started to cry.  Viola said, "Don't
    let those honkies see you cry!"  I said, "Honkies?  Viola, I'm white,
    too!"  And she said, "Yeah?  Well, you ain't like them!  I know
    that!  You're like me!  You know it's whats inside a person that
    counts, not the color of their skin."  It made me feel really good
    when she said that because she and I had never discussed the subject
    of racism and I felt I must've been doing something right if she
    felt that way about me.  Also, it was back in 1968 and we were only
    18.
    
    Lorna
     

    
    I think what "most" minorities want is to be treated like a human.
    They don't want favors, they don't want special privileges or
    attention. What they don't want is people making judgement based 
    on their appearance or their last names. 
    
    Some people are shocked to see an Oriental
    with a Scottish last name - they thought someone made a mistake
    somewhere. (This happened to me at numerous places, like take-out
    restaurants, dry cleaners, even at DEC when I was looking for a
    printout in the lab).  
    
    Some guy asked me in the grocery store if I was making chop-suey
    that night. I wasn't sure if he was trying to be friendly or
    what, I almost felt embrassed. I didn't know what to say. 
    I didn't ask for that attention! Just leave me alone, Bob.
    
    I think this is a difficult situation, it is hard for everyone
    to know what the right thing is. 
    
    
    Eva. 

    
    re. 21
    
    I use the same approach!
    
    I went to a Catholic all girl school for 12 years. When I got to
    college, I didn't know how to treat guys. So, I just treated them
    the way I treated girls. Some guys were taken back initially,
    they didn't expect a girl to be so "open" and "equal". But, that
    strategy worked for me all these years. Some of my best friends are
    guys. Now, I am one of the few female engineers in the group, I
    have to enjoy working with guys, for my own sanity sake!
    As far as dealing with people of other race, well, I don't even
    see them as "different" - they are just people from different backgrounds
    and with different experiences. How can I put my husband in the
    "white" batch and my child in the "mixed" batch??!!
    
    
    Eva.

    I really liked the comment of the first black astronaught (his name
    escpes me at the moment).  There was quite a media hubub when he was
    to be the first black man to go into space.  Someone asked him how 
    he felt about being the first black astronaught to go up in the 
    space shuttle. His answer was that the day he was looking forward to 
    was the day when a black, a jew, an hispanic, a woman, an oriental, 
    and a white man all went up in the same shuttle--and nobody gave a *&^t.
    
    fred();

re -1

First black astronaut was Col. Guion (sp?) Bluford.

-Hamp

    re .10

    Alfred,

    The way the cookie crumbles makes much of color.  I would be naive at
    best to pretend otherwise. 

    You must be white because you *are* white and have benefited over the
    years from being white. It would be part of the healing process, if
    there is such a thing, for you to acknowledge the part you and your
    whiteness plays in the scheme of things.  You can not begin to value me
    when you can't recognize that you are white and the ramifications that
    may have.

    You may have many things in common with blacks.   What are some of the
    things you do not have in common with blacks, Alfred?  

    _karen

re.8 & 26

Well, I certainly know I'm white.  I know I went to private schools.  I know
that, for most of my life, being born of a certain class gave me enormous
advantages.  I know that for all of my life I have been and will be white
and that gives me advantages as well.

There was a time when my family was the only white family on their street. I
knew that 'the white girl' was me, although I truly preferred to be called
Annie.  While no one treated be shabbily, I had to pay extra close attention
in order to keep up and I often said or asked dumb stuff because of my 
difference.  Sometimes the other kids very kindly made allowances for me.
I didn't like that _a_lot!_ because I've always prided myself on being able
to compete without a 'handicap' as it were.  I make no claim to a complete
understanding, but it was educational.

I'm not ashamed to be white, but I find more value in being Irish.  I don't
see it as a form of denial, because being Irish generally is an indication that
a person is white.  It's not a buzzword to me.  It's a reminder of some of the
differences that I have from the great amorphous 'white' and these differences
are precious to me.

And beyond being white, upper-class, and Irish there are the differences that
make me Annie.  These are more important still.

I can value persons because I value myself.

  Ann 

    I saw a really good film at lunch yesterday onsite.  It was "A Class
    Divided."  See it !!!!!  
    
    A third-grade teacher in Iowa in 1968 was filmed putting her kids (from
    a small all-white community) through a two-day exercise in experiencing
    prejudice first-hand.  (Don't try this at home!)  
    
    The kids knew all the right things to *say* about racism being bad, but
    they didn't understand what it was about.  So she divided them up into
    blue-eyes and brown-eyes.  One day blue-eyes were on top, one day
    brown-eyes were on top.  She commented how horrifyingly easy it was to
    turn a nice cooperative group of 3rd graders into little bigots ... in
    15 minutes.  And over something so obviously stupid.
    
    They brought the class together 15 years later to see how the exercise
    had affected them in the next segment of the film, and the final
    segment showed a similar exercise used on prison staff to sensitise
    them to discrimination and the internal pressures it creates.
    
    One of the key things I got out of it was seeing how discrimination is
    like an invisible drag on you.  It's not only the obvious, visible
    blocks (things like preferential treatment, sexual harassment, pay
    inequity, <top-group-only> jobs or seating or clubs) that are the
    problem -- a lot is how you start to doubt yourself, and how you have
    to fight to keep self-respect when everyone around you doubts you.  It
    takes a lot of effort.
    
    The film is mostly geared toward racial prejudice, but I saw lots of
    parallels with sexism.
    
    Pam

    Pam -
    
    Do you remember (and can you post) any of what the long-term effects
    had been?  I'd really like to know and probably won't have a chance
    to see the film.
    
    Thanks.
    
    Alison

    Hi Alison,
    
    One bit of data was that in following years they tested the kids two
    weeks before, the two days of, and two weeks after the exercise on
    spelling, grammar, etc.  The first two weeks established a baseline. 
    During "bottom dog" day, children scored lowest; during "top dog" day,
    children scored highest.  The two weeks after the exercise, though,
    children scored a statistically significant amount higher than the
    baseline.  The results were analyzed (at Cornell, I think), and the
    psychologists there said it was a totally inexplicable 24-hour
    turnaround in measurable intelligence.
    
    My theory would be that they suddenly had it demonstrated for them that
    outside messages about worth aren't always true -- that you have to
    listen to your own inside messages.
    
    Fifteen years later, the former 3rd graders remembered what it had felt
    like.  They commented that they felt like the class was an extended
    family, partly due to this experience.  (The teacher hypothesized that
    they had learned how to hurt each other, and had learned that it felt
    better *not* to hurt each other, fwiw.)  It affected their choice of
    spouses, friends, and affected how they raised their children.  One
    husband said he KNEW how strongly his wife felt about racism and that
    if he wanted to marry her he would have to be the same way.  Another
    husband said he was in the army, and had worried about whether his wife
    would be able to "handle having to interact" with people of other races
    and cultures -- he found out she had gone through this exercise and
    realized she had had strong innoculation against tendencies to
    discriminate and stereotype.
    
    For me, that part of the film didn't have the same impact as the 3rd
    graders and the prison wardens, because it was a discussion *about* the
    experience, rather than watching people *going through* the actual
    experience.
    
    It should be available through site libraries, btw...hope you do get to
    see it!
    
    Pam

    One kid in particular had been "a little Nazi" when he was top dog, and
    the teacher commented that she had gone home that night hating him and
    his attitude.  She asked him why he had acted like that.
    
    He said that he had really enjoyed the feeling of freedom to do what he
    wanted, and it was a way to get back at "life".  He could say mean
    things and get away with it because the bottom dog group was less
    important.  
    
    Pam

    Pam -
    
    Thank you.  Interesting stuff.
    
    Alison

    
    That program has been shown on public teevee; I believe it's an NPR
    product.  (It may have been originally broadcast as one of the
    Frontline reports.)  Perhaps it can be found at video rental places?
    It _is_ an excellent documentary.  (The teacher was wonderful with
    the adult class, too.)
    
    Cq

    I also *heard* that it was re-created on Oprah; i.e., that an expert
    was giving "evidence" as to why blue-eyed people were smarter, etc.,
    than brown-eyed people.  Result:  callers (and some brown-eyed people
    in the audience) began to *believe* the "expert."  Even some who stuck
    with it till the end of the show and learned that it was all a
    hoax/demonstration/whatever found it hard to shake their newly-acquired
    prejudice.
    
    Now, I did not personally see the show, so I cannot substantiate
    whether Oprah did have such a show; but if she did, I have a problem
    with that -- what about folks who *didn't* stay tuned for the whole
    thing and who *believed* the "evidence?"
    
    Nancy

    Oprah did recreate the scenerio - the tape is used in the Valuing
    Differences workshop in Merrimack and therefore may be available in
    the library.  The experience was eye-opening.
    
    Ro
    

Though it's been a while since the last posting, I though this memo would be of
interest - especially under current conditions.

Barb

From:	ISLNDS::COLLINS_M "04-Apr-1991 1352"  4-APR-1991 13:59:46.45
To:	@FYI.;@LDR.TEAM;@VOD.COMMITTEE;
CC:	COLLINS_M
Subj:	FYI:  OLD, BUT TOO IMPORTANT TO NOT RESEND: COMPELING REASONS FOR VD

(forwards deleted)

Subject: COMPELLING BUSINESS REASONS FOR VALUING DIFFERENCE
Subject:  Compelling Business Reasons for Valuing Differences

+---------------------------+ TM
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| d | i | g | i | t | a | l |      I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
+---------------------------+

TO:  TaN Advisory Board		   DATE:    28 August 1990
                                   FROM:    Peter Hurley
                                   DEPT:    Distributed Processing Eng.
                                   DTN:     226-5273
                                   LOC/MS:  LKG2-2/Z07
                                   NODE:    DELNI::HURLEY

SUBJECT: Compelling Business Reasons for Valuing Differences


Introduction

The future success and growth of our business depends on increased
productivity. To achieve higher productivity, we need to encourage and 
reward teamwork and collaborative efforts. The Valuing Differences 
program expands your repertoire of management skills to improve 
productivity and teamwork in a diverse and complex working environment.  
	
It's become clear that

  o The old model for managing projects doesn't work anymore.  

    - Projects have become extremely complex.  
    - Everyone has complex interdependencies.  
    - Productivity is actually declining.

  o Budgets are being reduced, yet productivity expectations are higher.

  o We have a diverse and complex work force composed of more than 50 
    percent women and minorities.
	 
  o Employees of the 1990s have different expectations about

    - Their work and the workplace
    - Dependent care responsibilities
    - Cultural behaviors
    - Patterns of communications 

This paper describes a number of recurring business situations in which
Valuing Differences can help to unleash the talents and contributions of
people attuned to different work styles, patterns of communications, and
approaches to problem solving.  






           COMPELLING BUSINESS REASONS FOR VALUING DIFFERENCES


Digital's engineering organization faces its greatest challenge since 
the company was founded.  The engineering style that has served us well 
for thirty years, and is at the heart of the Digital culture, is 
starting to fail at producing timely, competitive products. Three 
significant shifts in the work environment have rendered our engineering 
style inadequate to meet the needs of the 1990s. These shifts are:

  o A significant increase in product complexity
  o Budget reductions accompanied by increasing workloads
  o A shift in the demographics of available work-force candidates

The business problems resulting from these environmental shifts are what 
the Valuing Differences program is aimed at solving.


I. Significant Increase in Product Complexity

Nearly all of our projects are an order-of-magnitude more complex now
than they were ten years ago.  Some examples of this are DECnet/OSI,  
DECmcc, Alpha, DCE, NAS, ALL-IN-1 Phase 2, TP, and FDDI.  Large, complex 
projects are a result of the maturing of the industry. Today's customers 
demand complete and well-integrated solutions to real problems.


   Solution:  Collaborative Development

A. Teamwork  

Most of our key projects are too complex for the old style of development, 
where one or two individual contributors working independently could 
complete an entire project. Our current projects frequently have dozens 
of participants working in multiple groups, often in different 
organizations at different sites. For such projects to be completed 
successfully, the following must occur:

  o Work and responsibilities must be delegated to the various teams.

  o Good communications must be established between individual team 
    members and between the teams themselves.

  o Collaborative work styles must be developed across the project. As 
    managers, we must learn to recognize and reward good collaborative 
    behaviors when they happen, in order to reinforce this work style.


B. Everyone is successful or no one is  

In a complex project, if one group fails, the whole project fails. 
However, some managers prefer to blame a group for any problems
encountered during a project instead of trying to help the group solve 
the problems. This counterproductive management style often causes the 
group to hold back bad news out of fear of being blamed or punished.  
Even if the bad news does get expressed, managers often don't provide 
help or support, which reinforces the behavior of not reporting bad news.  
Such a work environment hides any remaining problems, leaving them to be 
discovered, one by one, after all chances for providing help are lost.  
Changing to a management style that promotes collaborative thinking and 
that values and rewards the identification and resolution of problems  
will improve the work environment.





C. Learn to listen  

The key to collaborative development is learning to listen.  In our 
traditional engineering culture, if engineers believed that they had a 
good idea for a new product or feature, they just implemented it. We must 
move away from this hit-or-miss approach by listening better:

  o First, to our customers, to determine what is needed.

  o Next, to the sales and marketing people, to determine what they need 
    to sell or market the products. 

  o Next, to the other people and groups involved in the development 
    process, to understand their capabilities and limitations. This is 
    especially important during periods of limited staffing. Many projects 
    have failed because we didn't listen to the developers when they said 
    that there was too much work to be done in the time allotted.

  o Finally, we must learn to listen to ALL of the people on the project. 
    Too often, we hear only the loud or aggressive people (this includes 
    the power-hungry managers who like to dominate the discussions). By 
    doing this, we exclude people who have just as much (or more) 
    knowledge of the project and who can offer new perspectives and ideas.  


D. The "hero" model no longer works  

The increasing complexity of our projects forces us to recognize that it 
is no longer possible for one person to design, architect, or understand 
every aspect of a project. To cope with this complexity, the following 
must occur:

  o Projects must be divided into components.

  o Responsibility must be truly delegated.

  o Good communications, cooperation, and coordination must occur within 
    and between the component teams.  

An article in the May-June 1987 issue of the Harvard Business Review, 
"Entrepreneurship reconsidered: the team as hero," by Robert B. Reich, 
summarizes a different reason why the hero model no longer works: 

The "Big Ideas" created by American entrepreneurs are quickly borrowed by 
other countries, where collaborative teams make a series of incremental 
improvements faster than the original entrepreneur can respond, thereby 
taking over the bulk of the volume revenues. Since we frequently don't 
compete at producing the lowest-cost products, we must learn to play to 
our creative and innovative strengths. By developing "collective 
entrepreneurship" within our development teams, we can remain ahead.

Complex projects require a shift to a collaborative working style. We
must move away from the competitive, intergroup "win-lose" mentality
that, by definition, requires some number of losers for every winner. 
We must strive for and reward "win-win" attitudes that maximize our
productivity. A major goal of the Valuing Differences program is to 
teach and implement these positive collaborative development techniques.





II. Budget Reductions Accompanied by Increasing Workloads

We are entering a period of limited budget growth. It is likely that
our engineering headcount will remain flat for several years. However, 
workloads are increasing, our products are becoming more sophisticated 
and complex, and more skills are required to build these new products.


   Solution: Value our employees and maximize their productivity

A. Achieve higher productivity by keeping employees longer

The increasing complexity of our projects extends the training and 
start-up time for new employees. It is clear that productivity will 
improve if our committed employees stay longer. Both the group and the 
employees can thereby benefit and grow from the employees' accrual of 
valuable knowledge and expertise.


B. Long-term employees achieve higher potential  

A recent study revealed that a high percentage of our consulting 
engineers came to Digital as first-level engineers directly from college. 
By making Digital a place where people want to stay and build a long-term 
career, we can reap the benefits of their skills at the peak of their 
careers. In other words, we don't spend the effort and money training and 
developing engineers just to have them leave when they become valuable
contributors.


C. Avoid the hiring costs and hassles  

It is hard enough (and it is getting harder) to hire people to meet our 
growth goals. If this is accompanied by a high turnover rate among our
employees, meeting hiring plans often becomes impossible. By creating an 
environment where employees choose to stay for the long term, we can
minimize the hiring costs and the disruptions of introducing new people
into development teams.


D. Fill the "hard-to-fill" positions  

The best way to fill such "hard-to-fill" positions as project leaders, 
supervisors, or architects is to develop and promote people from within 
the organization. The longer people want to stay in an organization, the 
easier it will be to fill these important positions.


E. Valuing Differences attracts good people  

It has been demonstrated that groups with a good reputation for
Valuing Differences attract more and better-qualified candidates. There
are a number of cases where senior talented people, especially women and
minority candidates, have actively sought employment with groups that 
have good Valuing Differences attitudes and behaviors and, conversely, 
have left groups that have poor Valuing Differences attitudes and 
behaviors.





F. Make it possible for our employees to stay and work  

At certain times during a person's career, it may become desirable or 
necessary to work fewer hours per week or to work at shifted hours. This 
may occur because of events such as maternity or paternity leaves; caring 
of children or infirmed elders, or both; or personal illness. It is 
important to support our employees through such times by offering 

  o Flex time 
  o Part time 
  o Core time 
  o Personal leaves of absence 
  o Day-care facilities
  o Benefits packages that are available to part-time workers  

The time that employees need to work through their personal events is 
actually a small fraction of their careers. In addition, experienced 
employees who decide to work part time for a year or two are frequently 
more productive than new hires who must be trained and must accrue 
experience before becoming fully productive. It makes excellent business 
sense to support our employees through their difficult personal times,
because it makes excellent business sense to keep our valuable, 
well-trained, productive employees with us for the long term.

     
III. Shift in Demographics of Available Work-Force Candidates

Current studies indicate that over 70 percent of the external candidates
applying for jobs with us in the year 2000 will be women or minorities. 
However, Digital's traditional management styles and success metrics are 
not optimal to deal with the changing demographics of the work force.


   Solution:  Expand our management skills to include multiple
              successful styles.

A. Greater diversity means more inventiveness and robustness

Heterogeneous work groups have proved to be three times more inventive
than homogeneous work groups. By achieving and maintaining diversity in 
our work groups, we will produce products that are more robust, more 
differentiated, and more successful than those of our competitors.


B. Supporting a diverse work force makes it easier to hire good people

If job candidates see that they can fit in comfortably and that their
culture and work styles are valued and supported, they will be more
likely to accept our job offers.


C. Gain higher productivity by supporting multiple successful styles

Not everyone works well in the individualistic, competitive, and 
confrontational style that is frequently associated with white males. To
force everyone to conform to such a style as the only way to advance 
their careers actually lowers productivity. There are other successful 
work styles, such as collaborative development, that are more comfortable 
for certain people. Managers can increase productivity by learning to 
support and value these other successful work styles.




Currently, the Digital culture supports only one model for success. In 
this model, it is the loud, aggressive, interruptive, and frequently
obnoxious individuals who get heard. This model is reinforced by the
reward system. First, there is no penalty for such behavior. Second, to 
get promoted, one must be heard or "visible," which encourages the loud, 
aggressive, interruptive style. If we are to maximize our productivity, 
we must learn to reward other models for success, such as collaborative 
development.


D. Reward all successes

As the demographics of the work force change, the methods of developing 
and delivering successful products will also change. Managers must
recognize and reward all successes, especially by including the new
models for success. The current reward and promotion system still favors
the old "hero" model. We must move to a system where people are measured 
on, and rewarded for, their individual contributions and their ability to 
work collaboratively with the rest of the project team in a way that 
increases the synergy within the group.


E.  Eliminate outdated management behaviors

There are a number of management styles that used to be acceptable but are 
now limiting our movement toward a collaborative environment. For example,
limiting hiring searches to old friends or to people in one's immediate 
purview excludes potentially better candidates from the wider community. 
Frequently, managers only hire people who have similar styles, share 
similar viewpoints, or have similar job histories. The danger with this 
behavior is that it may insulate the group from learning new concepts and 
devising better ways to work. To broaden their groups, managers should 
post job openings widely and actively seek diversity and people who can 
bring new ideas and viewpoints.  

Next, we must go beyond just having "token" minorities or women in 
positions of leadership. Having one or two persons of difference on a 
staff or a project usually does not bring about the desired positive 
changes that come from having diversity. There must be enough people of 
difference on a staff or project to provide each other with the necessary 
support and credibility to make substantive changes and contributions.
 
Another outdated behavior is to raise issues to a manager higher up in 
the organization before trying to resolve them directly with the people 
doing the work. This behavior puts up walls between groups, lowers the 
effectiveness and timeliness of communications, and inhibits the 
organization's ability to react quickly when problems arise. As the work 
force shifts toward diversity and collaboration, our management styles 
must also shift to support the change. Otherwise, our productivity and 
organizational stability will diminish.






[The following article appeared in a recent issue of DIGITAL REVIEW. It 
clearly shows that our Valuing Differences initiative is being recognized 
as valuable and good business sense.]


			PLACING A VALUE ON DIFFERENCES
                         
                          Lois Slavin, Senior Editor
                        DIGITAL REVIEW - July 9, 1990
                        ------------------------------
			 

DEC's slogan for DECworld '90 is "Innovation That Works." But this 
slogan doesn't apply only to DECworld. The concept applies to many
different aspects of DEC.  Innovation comes into play when connecting
computers to computers, linking human beings to each other and
interacting with customers. Other companies would do well to follow
DEC's example. In fact, books such as Peters and Waterman's "In Search
of Excellence" and Kanter's "The Changemasters" use DEC as an example of
an enlightened corporation.

DEC's laudable strategy for managing personnel and conducting business 
is called Valuing Differences. According to this philosophy it is
imperative that managers realize people are different and manage them
because of - not in spite of - their differences. Managers are trained
to direct heterogeneous employee environments and are measured by how
well they do so. DEC's multivendor computing strategy - helping 
dissimilar computing systems work together - bears a strong resemblance
to Valuing Differences.

During the Valuing Differences training program, managers learn to
understand people from all walks of life. They become sensitized to
people who are ethnically diverse, come from different work backgrounds
and cultures, are physically handicapped, practice alternative 
lifestyles and so forth.

Managers are taught to look at their own view of the world, enlarge it,
and see the power that their words and actions have in motivating and
managing employees. In doing so, they can adjust their behavior to
maximize the effectiveness of the whole department - whether it be
product design and development, manufacturing, marketing or sales.

It's probably no coincidence that DEC developed its networking strategy
and its Valuing Differences philosophy at about the same time in the
mid-1980s. It's probably also no coincidence that, at the time, both
DEC's internal corporate slogan and its DECworld '85 slogan was "Making
It All Work Together."

Today, Valuing Difference is in evidence both within DEC and in the
manner in which the company conducts business with its customers. Of
course, we don't live in an ideal world and everyone isn't always
satisfied. But DEC does have a corporate charter to accept customers -
and employees - the way they are.

Valuing Differences means integrating all kinds of environments so that
people and computers work together effectively. This is truly 
"Innovation That Works."

    If anyone has knowledge of the whereabouts of the Valuing
    Differences banner "Digital values all its employees"
    please send me mail to this account.  We're trying to
    get a contingent for the Pride March, and would like
    the banner by Saturday.
    
    Thanks in advance,
    
    Richard
    dtn 289-1609

          Synopsis from a journal available in the MLO library:

          _Put Diversity in Context_   by Anna Everest and Jim Kennedy
          Personnel Journal  v.70, n.9  Sept 1991   pp. 50-54

          To remain competitive, it will be necessary for employers not
          only to embrace diversity, but to seek out all available
          strategies that will bring them the talent they need in the
          coming years.  One such strategy is to understand our own
          cultural filters and to accept differences in people, so that
          each person is valued as a unique individual during the
          recruitment process.  Edward T. Hall, a cultural anthropologist,
          has studied cultures around the world and has developed a concept
          that may be very helpful in communicating with employees from
          diverse backgrounds.

          This is the concept of high- and low- context cultures.  High-
          context cultures are more sensitive to the surrounding
          circumstances or context of an event.  Although no culture exists
          exclusively at either end of the context scale, some cultures,
          such as the Asian, Hispanic, and African-American, are high-
          context; others, such as Northern European, are low context
          cultures.

          The significance of this model is that most of the new people
          coming into our work force are high-context, yet most members of
          management are medium/low-context."

    The Greater Marlboro Area Valuing Diversity Committee is looking for
    ideas on a "Winter Celebration"....a couple of suggestions are:
    
    	1. Culturally....what are your traditions and would you be willing
    	   to share those traditions with others....
    
    	2. Another idea is that of sharing desserts.....these would be
           ethnic desserts...
    
    I am very interested in any other ideas that anyone would have....
    
    Please contact me....
    
    thanks,
    
    denise