Final Reflection 1000 words

21883-04-Re-RadicalisingDIPt.11.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Final Reflection 1000 words

L E C T U R E S L I D E S A R E N O T N O T E S

Lecture slides are designed to be visual aids for the live presentation. Reading them cannot substitute for attending the lecture or listening to recordings. Sometimes concepts and ideas presented are then critiqued

and challenged during lectures.

D I V E R S I T Y A N D

I N C L U S I O N

Dr Helena Liu

2 1 8 8 3

Week 4 — Re-Radicalising Diversity and Inclusion

Photograph of the Civil Rights March on Washington, 28th August, 1963 courtesy of the National Archives.

Last week in this subject, we explored the

interlocking systems of power that structure

our society and organisations. From a

sociological perspective, we examined how

organisations are gendered,

heteronormative and racialised.

REVIEW

REVIEW IDENTITY Dominant assumptions about ‘natural’ gender and

racial differences can belie the ways identities are

socially constructed and politically contested.

INDIVIDUALIST AND SYSTEMIC APPROACHES (Neo)liberal interventions targeting individuals

treat inequality as an anomaly rather than a

deliberate function of power structures.

D E C O L O N I S I N G D I V E R S I T Y

S E C T I O N

DECOLONISING DIVERSITY For whom do we do diversity and for what purpose?

Is it only to increase organisational and performance

efficiencies? Is it to increase the career mobility of

professionals (or of academics)? Or is it to maintain

the socio-political status quo?

By critically asking and answering these questions,

we may begin to identify and challenge the

interlocking systems of power in our society.

PATRIARCHY Key Components Patriarchy comprises a complex and shifting set of power dynamics that

intersects multiple sites in culture and moves through us. It cannot be

reduced to a universalist binary between oppressors and the oppressed.

Rather, patriarchal ideology captures our imaginations and enlists all of us

as its agents (Foucault, 1980).

“Wind Chill Effect” The discrepancy between the amount of power held by men collectively

and the amount felt by individual men (Kimmel, 2006).

Patriarchy in Organisations Gender pay gap; gendered division of labour; ‘think manager think male’;

gendered violence; good old regular sexism as well as benevolent sexism;

hegemonic masculinity; and on and on.

One practice of patriarchy is the inscription

of a hegemonic masculine ideal that is then

transposed onto work and organisations as

the ideal worker and manager.

HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY

HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY Hegemonic masculinity is what sociologist Raewyn Connell

(1987, 1995) defines as the currently most honoured way of

being a man. What constitutes hegemonic masculinity varies

across context. Within contemporary Western societies, the

practice of hegemonic masculinities is often described as

‘macho’, in other words, tough, competitive, assertive,

unemotional, self-reliant and heterosexual (Connell, 2014;

Donaldson and Tomsen, 2003; Gorman-Murray, 2013).

Masculinities in Sydney

Australian masculinities

DOING MASCULINITY Masculinity is not necessarily associated with those who

identify as men as gender is a social performance. Hegemonic

masculinity at work means that all professionals, regardless of

their gender identification, are compelled to perform their

identities in line with this ideal (Liu, 2017).

Although white, cis-gender, heterosexual, middle/upper class,

able-bodied men may more closely embody hegemonic

masculinity, their achievement of an elite status can never be

guaranteed and requires continual, careful regulation.

HETERO- NORMATIVITY Heteronormativity can be seen as an extension of patriarchal

gendered division of labour (Rich, 1980). Under these

circumstances, heterosexuality is socially constructed as a

neutral, ‘natural’ category of sexuality against which others,

most notably LGBTQ+ sexualities, are cast as ‘abnormal’,

‘unhealthy’ and ‘deviant’ (Warner, 1999).

A related concept is cisnormativity, which similarly marginalises

subjects who identify as gender diverse (Bauer et al., 2009).

Cisnormativity “describes the expectation that all people are cissexual, that those assigned male at birth always grow up to be men and those assigned female at birth always grow up to be women” (Bauer et al., 2009, p. 356). This assumption is so pervasive that it otherwise has not yet been named. See ‘Hetero-romantic love and heterosexiness in children’s G- rated films’ (Martin and Kazyak, 2009).

HETERONORMATIVITY HETEROSEXUAL PRIVILEGE

The concept is widely used “as shorthand for the numerous

ways in which heterosexual privilege is woven into the fabric

of social life, pervasively and insidiously ordering everyday

existence” (Jackson, 2006, p. 108). However, heterosexuality

regulates those kept within its boundaries as well as

marginalising those outside them (Jackson, 2006).

SOCIAL CONTROL

Heteronormativity “not only establishes a

heterosexual/homosexual hierarchy but also creates

hierarchies among heterosexualities”, resulting in

“hegemonic and subordinate forms of heterosexuality”

(Seidman, 2005, pp. 40).

Peter Cvjetanovic chants with fellow neo-Nazis and white nationalists in Charlottesville,

NC (from The Independent)

White supremacy is the centuries-old

racialised social system comprising the

“totality of the social relations and practices

that reinforce white privilege” (Bonilla-Silva,

2006, p. 9).

WHITE SUPREMACY

WHITE SUPREMACY White supremacy operates in and through everyday racism to

maintain a strong positive orientation to “white superiority,

virtue, moral goodness, and action” (Feagin, 2013, p. 10; see also

Deitch et al., 2003; Essed, 1991; Hill, 2009; Nkomo and Al Ariss,

2014). It is not some aberrant and deviant attitude, but a

ubiquitous and integral part of work and social life.

An advertisement for Pears' Soap, from the 1890s, instructing whites to promote cleanliness

among other races.

INTERSECTIONALITY Before our class next week, an activity will be made available on Canvas

that allows you to apply intersectionality theory to analyse your own standpoint. This activity will help you to complete your final Reflexive

Journal Task.

WEEK 5 Re-Radicalising Diversity and Inclusion

On decolonising diversity, queering

organisations and other forms of radical

love

Read the required readings, work on your

reflexive journal, download the lecture slides

and attend class.

NEXT CLASS

Demonstrators march through the streets during the Gay Liberation Day parade in New York in 1971.

REFERENCES Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158.

Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Alvesson, M., Ashcraft, K.L. & Thomas, R. (2008). Identity matters: Reflections on the construction of identity scholarship in organization studies. Organization, 15(1), 5–28.

Ashforth, B.E., Harrison, S.H. & Corley, K.G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325–374.

Bauer, G.R., Hammond, R., Travers, R., Kaay, M., Hohenadel, K.M. & Boyce, M. (2009). “I don’t think this is theoretical; this is our lives”: How erasure impacts health care for transgender people. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, 20(5), 348–361.

Benschop, Y. (2001). Pride, prejudice and performance: Relations between HRM, diversity and performance. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 12(7), 1166–1181.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Bracey, C.A. (2008). Saviors or Sellouts: The Promise and Peril of Black Conservatism, from Booker T. Washington to Condoleezza Rice. Boston: Beacon Press.

* = the required readings of the topic

REFERENCES Brown, A.D. (2015). Identities and identity work in organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews,

17(1), 20–40.

Calás, M.B., & Smircich, L. (2006). From the “woman’s point of view” ten years later: Towards a feminist organization studies. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies (2nd ed., pp. 284–346). London: Sage.

Caza, B.B., Vough, H., & Puranik, H. (2018). Identity work in organizations and occupations: Definitions, theories, and pathways forward. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(7), 889–910.

* Clare, E. (2001). Stolen bodies, reclaimed bodies: Disability and queerness. Public Culture, 13(3), 359–365.

Connell, R.W. (1987). Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Connell, R.W. (2002). Gender. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Connell, R.W. (2014). Margin becoming centre: For a world-centred rethinking of masculinities. NORMA: International Journal for Masculinity Studies, 9(4), 217–231.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.

REFERENCES Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color.

Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.

Deitch, E.A., Barsky, A., Butz, R.M., Chan, S., Brief, A.P. & Bradley, J. (2003). Subtle yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56(11), 1299–1324.

Donaldson, M. & Tomsen, S.A. (2003). Male Trouble: Looking at Australian Masculinities. Sydney: Pluto Press.

DuBois, W.E.B. (2005). The Souls of Black Folk. New York: Pocket Books.

Essed, P. (1991). Understanding Everyday Racism: An Interdisciplinary Theory. Newbury Park: Sage.

Feagin, J.R. (2013). The White Racial Frame: Centuries of Racial Framing and Counter-Framing. New York, NY: Routledge.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books.

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies In Ethnomethodology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Giroux, H.A. (2003). Spectacles of race and pedagogies of denial: Anti-Black racist pedagogy under the reign of neoliberalism. Communication Education, 52(3/4), 191–211.

Gorman-Murray, A. (2013). Urban homebodies: Embodiment, masculinity, and domesticity in inner Sydney. Geographical Research, 51(2), 137–144.

REFERENCES Hill, J.H. (2009). The Everyday Language of White Racism. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Ignatiev, N. (1995). How the Irish Became White. New York: Routledge.

Ishizuka, K.L. (2016). Serve the People: Making Asian America in the Long Sixties. Brooklyn: Verso.

Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.

Jackson, S. (2006). Gender, sexuality and heterosexuality: The complexity (and limits) of heteronormativity. Feminist Theory, 7(1), 105–121.

Kimmel, M. (2006). Manhood in America (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Kirton, G., Greene, A. & Dean, D. (2007). British diversity professionals as change agents: Radicals, tempered radicals or liberal reformers? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(11), 1979–1994.

Lewis, P., Benschop, Y., & Simpson, R. (2017). Postfeminism, gender and organization. Gender, Work and Organization, 24(3), 213–225.

Liu, H. (2017). Sensuality as subversion: Doing masculinity with Chinese Australian professionals. Gender, Work and Organization, 24(2), 194–212.

* Liu, H. (2020). Destruction. In H. Liu, Redeeming Leadership: An Anti-Racist Feminist Intervention (pp. 63–79). Bristol: Bristol University Press.

REFERENCES MacKinnon, C.A. (2013). Intersectionality as method: A note. Signs, 38(4), 1019–1030.

Martin, K. & Kazyak, E. (2009). Hetero-romantic love and heterosexiness in children’s G-rated films. Gender & Society, 23(3), 315–336.

Nagoshi, J.L., Nagoshi, C.T. & Brzuzy, S. (2014). Gender and Sexual Identity: Transcending Feminist and Queer Theory. New York: Springer.

Nkomo, S.M. & Al Ariss, A. (2014). The historical origins of ethnic (white) privilege in US organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(4), 389–404.

* Noon, M. (2018). Pointless diversity training: Unconscious bias, new racism and agency. Work, Employment and Society, 32(1), 198–209.

Overmyer-Velázquez, M. (2013). Good neighbors and White Mexicans: Constructing race and nation on the Mexico- U.S. border. Journal of American Ethnic History, 33(1), 5–34.

Puar, J. (2011). “I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess”: Intersectionality, assemblage, and affective politics. Transversal. Retrieved from http://eipcp.net/transversal/0811/puar/en

Rottenberg, C. (2014). The rise of neoliberal feminism. Cultural Studies, 28(3), 418–437.

Rich, A. (1980). Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs, 5(4), 631–660.

REFERENCES * Rumens, N. (2017). Queering lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender identities in human resource development

and management education contexts. Management Learning, 48(2), 227–242.

Seidman, S. (2005). From polluted homosexual to the normal gay: Changing patterns of sexual regulation in America. In C. Ingraham (Ed.), Thinking Straight: New Work in Critical Heterosexuality Studies (pp. 39–62). New York: Routledge.

Warner, M. (1999). The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics, and the Ethics of Queer Life. New York: The Free Press.

West, C. & Zimmerman, D.H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), 125–151.

provided to you at UTS are protected by copyright.

You are not permitted to re-use those for commercial purposes

(including in kind benefit or gain) without permission of the

Improper or illegal use of teaching materials may lead to

prosecution for copyright infringement.

For further information on UTS copyright for students and

researchers see http://www.lib.uts.edu.au/about-us/policies-

guidelines/copyright-and-uts/copyright-students-and-

researchers