Co-written by Jim Morris and Richard Schaeff
As a group, white men are not only unsupportive of DEI; they are at the vanguard of its most vocal and angry opponents.
We and a small cadre of other white male colleagues have been working on engaging white men in DEI for years, even decades.[1] But based on the results, we have to face the brutal truth: Our work didn’t “work” when measured against the mindsets of a majority of white men in the U.S. today.
This is painful stuff to discuss. Over the years, both of us have received a lot of support from clients and colleagues—people who aren’t white guys—who have reassured us that our work trying to engage white men has been necessary, even essential, to the direction and success of their companies.
[1] When we say “we” referring to white men, we know we are not speaking for ALL white men, but we are definitely speaking for ourselves and – based on our experience – many (but not all) other white male DEI consultants and facilitators.
If you are a white guy reading this and are saying to yourself, “You’re wrong; I’m a white guy, and I support DEI,” understand that the group/individual paradox applies here.
Despite our work and the work of other white male colleagues, the majority of white men in the U.S. feel left out, overlooked, or threatened by organizational DEI efforts. In contrast, a minority of white men are outspoken, passionate advocates for the tenants DEI represents.
Now, fueled in part by a blatantly racist, sexist, phobic-against-everyone-except-white straight Christian’s regime that knowingly mischaracterizes DEI to distract us from real threats to society, many white men have shifted from quiet complacency to angry antagonists.
White men have reasons to feel angry. Changes in the labor market have disproportionately affected men, especially those without college degrees. The decline of traditional manufacturing jobs and the rise of service-oriented sectors have created challenges for many men who may not have the skills or education needed for these new opportunities.
Also, men are increasingly facing mental health challenges, evidenced by higher rates of suicide and depression. Couple these trends with the piece of U.S. culture that tells men strength and control through violence is acceptable, even needed.
We believe – and the research supports – that the class divides that afflict our society are at play. As one white male leader said, the men in my company compare their lot in life to others, and a lot of them feel like they aren’t keeping up. Messages about how the U.S. economy is so solid make them feel even worse.”
In the past, the need for greater economic opportunity may have been more confined to people from under-represented groups, but now, many working-class white men are experiencing the same inequities, and the regime is quick to tell them who to blame: everyone else.
The Supreme Court’s decision to eliminate Affirmative Action in college admissions has set a precedent. Though the ruling was supposed to apply only to affirmative action efforts in the public and private sectors, many white men view affirmative action’s demise as a rebalancing of the fairness scales that acknowledges their hardships.
White men’s lack of engagement in DEI wasn’t only about world events, the economy, or class. We need to own our failures to gain their allyship and support:
- We acknowledged the plight of men in the U.S., but we didn’t help them learn to advocate for others and themselves in the emerging DEI landscape of U.S. society. Our focus was on the plight of people in underrepresented groups, to the exclusion of men, mainly white men.
- We thought the moral argument for embracing DEI stood alone, but it didn’t. This reality was most recently illustrated by the 2024 election, when a vast swath of the electorate overlooked the overtly cruel and biased attitudes of popular candidates who promised to improve the lot of working—and middle-class Americans by dismantling DEI.
- We didn’t address the plight of white men through a social justice lens, instead only examining the need for across-the-board inclusion. Social justice focuses on social change, examining impacts and reparations. We rarely taught or discussed reparations, rationalizing the omission because “social justice” was not palatable for our corporate audiences. This miss on our part is critical for how we address the impacts of systemic discrimination—and its victims—in the future.
- We underestimated the current discomfort surrounding DEI for many men, who feel like a preference to hire women and racial/ethnic minorities impacted their job prospects. In one study, 46% of men felt like they will be looked over for promotion as a result of DEI goals.
How Our Approach Has Changed:
- We are working to invite and encourage more participation with younger white men in the client systems we work in. It’s appalling how few younger white men we see leading inclusion efforts. Boomers like us grew up aware of the cultural revolution of the 60s that included the enactment of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. By contrast, younger white men have had different life experiences and perspectives and a much more rapid learning curve than we did. Because of the flood of issues they are exposed to growing up, including “non-DEI or DEI adjacent” issues like climate change and wage disparity, they tend to think more naturally about DEI issues as intersectional and fluid.
- Speaking of young men, we need to listen to their experiences and perspectives if we want to attract them to the work of DEI. While we’re at it, we need to work on our age bias, which compels us to try to correct, inform, or modify their thinking.
- Refine our language devoid of trigger words. We’ve created a list of words synonymous with but different than words that have been weaponized (reach out to us, and we’ll share our list). Take the time to discuss how some phrases aren’t wrong but might be incomplete.
- Prioritize talking about intersectionality. While it’s true that many white men have good reasons to be upset with the disadvantages they unfairly have to confront, it’s also true that members of other underrepresented groups are more likely to experience the compounding (intersectional) effect of having to navigate multiple disadvantages. Doing this helps to illustrate the reality that white men regularly experience fewer intersectional disadvantages than members of historically underrepresented groups.
- Widen the DEI lens to routinely include other dimensions. For example, physical ability requires a place at the mainstream DEI table as access continues to be one of the most challenging dimensions to address fully. It is also (still) one of the most prevalent. Given the many dimensions of diversity, we need to use language that includes all dimensions under the same tent, constantly asking ourselves, “Which dimensions are critical to include to create the culture of belonging?”
- Create and preserve a shame-free learning and work environment. Most of us (white men) have some shame scar tissue, either because we were attacked for not being a good ally or because we feel guilt for not having responded courageously in the face of discrimination or aggression. When working with groups, we adopt a default mindset that “shame is in the room” whenever we talk about systemic discrimination or oppression, and we work to avoid language, exercises, or content that provokes shame as a first response.
- Focus on equity as a force that lifts all boats. Equity and equality are not the same thing; both are needed, but equity is more complex and more impactful when addressed. We are learning to simply and clearly explain how equality differs from equity and why it can be a more helpful action than equality. As a CFO for a big company, as stated in one of our workshops. “Equity defies a spreadsheet solution because it requires us to look at issues on a case-by-case basis.”
DEI practitioners across the land have done a critical service of increasing awareness and empathy for what non-white, non-male, and non-heterosexual groups (among others) face and have to live with daily. However, DEI has typically limited itself to these few marginalized groups. This view of inclusion is self-limiting. For DEI to fulfill its potential, we must expand our definition of inclusion to include everyone. Let’s allow ourselves to be changed in the process and to be open to other viewpoints and lived experiences without invalidating or sublimating our own.
We are slowly but inexorably moving closer and closer to societies that will be composed of “minority/majority” demographics, meaning people from historically marginalized groups will make up the numerical majority. The question isn’t if it’s going to happen but how much human suffering we will make each other endure as a result of the forces who are working to forestall the process. In either case, the group that has the most work to do when it comes to sharing power and managing change is white men, and it’s incumbent on all of us – especially other white men – to help us get there.
Notes:
Labor Market Changes:
– Autor, D. H., & Dorn, D. (2013). The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the U.S. labor market. *American Economic Review*, 103(5), 1553-1597.
Manufacturing Decline:
– Kahn-Lang, A., & Lang, K. (2019). The effect of declining manufacturing employment on the labor market outcomes of non-college-educated men and women in rural areas. *Industrial Relations Research Association*.
Men’s attitudes about DEI at work:
– The Hobbs Consultancy and The Token Man Project: Masculinity in the Workplace study (2023)
Mental Health Trends:
– National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). (2020). Men and mental health: Using data to understand trends.
Suicide Rates:
– Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2022). QuickStats: Age-Adjusted Suicide Rates by Sex—United States, 1999–2020.