SCA signal boost

 Signal boost, from public Facebook post: 

For the last 3-ish years, I have been the corporate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer of the SCA. Now, there is no official SCA DEI officer at all. I think it’s important that I share why. This will be long, but if you are involved with the SCA, I urge you to read it.

As a note: the Board of Directors in the SCA is ever-changing. Members come and go every six months, and there are only 7 (the Board does not include the President or any other Officer). There have been Board members in my time I was proud to work alongside. I have enjoyed my work with all the Officers I have worked with. Society and Corporate offices are some of the most thankless jobs you can imagine, and I cannot say enough about the fabulous work I have seen. Any references to the Board are references to a collective institution.

A year before the end of my warrant approached, I put forward my suggestions for what I believed needed to happen to move DEI forward in the SCA. I believed that a Society DEI officer should be made in addition to the Corporate, that the DEI office should be made a greater office, and that training should be created and provided to all those serving in high level positions in the SCA.

My proposal was not implemented, with what I felt was general dismissal. The following year felt like a series of artificial roadblocks and microaggressions. I was miserable and disheartened, but DEI is dear to me, and I stayed the course, despite feeling increasingly excluded and disrespected. I was concerned about succession planning. More generally, I did not feel that communication was adequate - I felt constantly out of the loop.

My warrant expired. I offered to extend my term (a practice I had seen multiple times in my years volunteering in the DEI office), and the President and I eagerly began to make plans to ensure that the office continued to thrive. At what turned out to be my last meeting, my entreaty to the Board was to pinpoint what they wanted from the DEI office so that true progress could be made.

On Monday, November 29th, I was informed that the Board of Directors would not be extending my warrant, which had, at this point, ended two months prior.

The speed with which I was removed afterward was startling. Though I had requested a week, my email and share point access was immediately removed, preventing me from accessing my own documents and work. I had no time to reach out to those who I worked with, and no time to note their emails for future collaboration or share my own personal email to stay in contact. The disdain with which I was treated by the Board after three years of faithful service was hurtful.

I have had no negative feedback from the Board. I have had next-to-no direction. I have, in fact, been commended by a previous iteration of same, and performed consistently - despite feeling constant pushback on almost all of my suggestions, ideas, and questions.

I was not afforded the dignity of a last meeting, a goodbye, or a thank you, though other outgoing Officers during my time generally were to the best of my knowledge. I was not even afforded the true reason why I was removed, though it’s not hard to guess.

If I wrote this last month, my pain would have penned a different missive. But I will not allow the problematic and narrow minded viewpoints of some to inhibit my pride in the very real progress we have made. The introduction of DEI in the Society was necessary and good, and I’m proud of all who have contributed to it. But in my mind, there are two very serious issues to address here.

The first is this: We have an issue with our corporate infrastructure. We have outgrown the framework that supported us for so long.

A system through which -

1. people are nominated to the Board,

2. the existing Board then selects who they will go on to interview, and then,

3. must unanimously agree on

-is rife with bias and abuse. I believe that a robust Board is one that will encompass a variety of personalities, opinions, and schools of thought, and the very process we use is in opposition to this.

I am certain there was a time in which this process (which feels so much like our peerage circles in practice) was effective. I believe this time has firmly passed.

We must push for better. We deserve a Board that will give due consideration to all. There are many different strategies we could use to select Board members that would serve us better.

The second is this: we have a very serious issue with DEI when the DEI Officer is begging to be included.

There are many misconceptions about the DEI Office. A popular one: it was not a society office, which meant I had no power or even necessarily knowledge of kingdom, regional, and baronial DEI officers unless they chose to engage with me. Many did, and we happily collaborated. Many did not, and their work and teachings may not have been consistent with the corporate level DEI vision.

Another: I was not allowed into the session of each meeting where sanctions are discussed. I wanted to be available to give information to help identify when or if something may have been influenced by the principles of DEI. It is important that DEI is integrated into all parts and levels in an organization - without a knowledgeable entity in the room to determine when DEI is relevant, opportunities may be missed.

I have experienced problematic behavior throughout the length of my term. Not just from the public, from whom I received everything from derision to anonymous death threats, but from the people I had hoped would be the most supportive.

It has been pointed out to me that it is an almost textbook example of what happens to POC working in DEI in problematic corporate spaces: an excruciating amount of (often invisible) labor until the changes suggested are unwelcome or optics are potentially poor, and then gaslighting and a sharp dismissal.

The sad reality that I have come to is that the corporate DEI position in its current iteration is becoming superficial and performative. Change is still happening - but not from the top, and it is because many of those at the top choose not to recognize the need for it.

The way that the DEI Office has been treated, and indeed, the entire concept of DEI, is a problem.

DEI work is about addressing disparities in race, gender, and sexual preference, yes, but DEI is also about endeavoring to keep our site accessible. DEI is about making sure folks in rural communities are not forgotten. DEI is about creating an environment that is safe and welcoming to families with children. The list continues, but the heart is the same.

DEI is about everyone, and if we wish to grow, survive, and thrive as an organization, we cannot allow it to fall by the wayside.

I am only one SCAdian who loves what we do a bit too well. Please use your voices to advocate for the change we need.