But What If Your ‘Whole Self’ Is, Frankly, Aggravating?
And back in the world of contrived racial grievance,
Job postings and corporate ‘About Us’ pages often include a statement about the company fostering an environment where employees can bring their ‘whole selves’ to work. But how often do these claims reflect reality?
At risk of being difficult, I have questions about the premise. For one, why on God’s Fragrant Earth would an employer, or indeed their customers, want employees to drag every last piece of their personal baggage into the workplace and then inflict that inexhaustible tedium on everyone else? If, say, I’m buying groceries, I am as a rule friendly towards the person at the checkout. There’s always eye contact, a smile, and a word of appreciation. However, I rarely have the time or inclination to hear about the cashier’s extensive list of ailments or her difficulties finding a babysitter, or a lover, or a suitable shampoo. Nor do I wish to hear her views on politics. It’s not why I’m there. And ditto her.
Bringing your whole self to your job can be challenging at best and career limiting at worst, specifically for marginalized and racialized peoples.
There we go. At this point, we could, I think, just paraphrase and save a lot of time:
Self-Involvement Not Entirely Practical In The Workplace. Magic Brown People Hardest Hit.
But no. We must push on.
Tanya Sinclair is the founder of Black Human Resources Professionals of Canada, a not-for-profit founded in 2020… Ms Sinclair says bringing your whole self to work is a great goal, “if you can,” but that “there is inherent risk that comes with bringing your full self to work for Black people.”
Those alleged risks, supposedly unique to black people, will, I’m sure, be made both clear and convincing at some point; though, alas, not in the article. However, the author of the piece, Ms Shellene Drakes-Tull, is determined to wring from her readers some pretentious sympathy:
In the face of precarious work situations, the idea of being vulnerable and sharing all parts of your identity can compound the difficulties of finding and keeping sustained, stable employment – even when employers encourage it.
Again, I’m still not clear on why “sharing all parts of your identity” is what a workplace should be for. It seems to me that a key part of being professional is not allowing a necessary task to be derailed by personal irritation, or a frustrating commute, or a bad hair day, or just habitual self-preoccupation.
“I was taught that there are certain things that you don’t say or certain things that you keep your mouth shut about,” says Julisha Roache, a recent graduate of the University of Lethbridge who is entering the work force. “You just don’t disrupt the peace, because at that point, you’re disposable,” she says.
Shocking revelations from a recent graduate. Positively bulging with worldly knowledge.
Ms Sinclair believes that employers need to be aware that Black employees may navigate the workplace differently than other employees.
Again, magic brown people. Not like thee and me. Bring the offerings.
“Chances are your Black employees may not be bringing their full selves to work for many reasons that are linked to systemic barriers, that are linked to intersectionalities, but that are also linked to your own workplace culture,” she says. “I think [employers] have to own and acknowledge that if you have provided some training and you did a series of events for Black History Month, it’s not just checked and done.”
Ah. Systemic barriers. Systemic barriers that are linked to intersectionalities. Again, details are somewhat sketchy here, as is so often the way, but it all sounds terribly serious. A toe-hold for outrage, albeit performative. And despite the lack of particulars, it seems that employers must, as a bare minimum, submit to some racial grifting. Before their education, and their confessions of inadequacy, can begin in earnest.
Excuse me a minute. The High-Maintenance Nightmare light seems to be flashing.
There follows some obligatory rumbling about the “freedom” to have ostentatious hairstyles “without negative repercussions,” before we are informed of black employees’ entitlement to speak and behave in ways that are likely to be “interpreted as violent or aggressive.” No, really.
Ms Sinclair mentions tone policing, which means dismissing or misinterpreting what someone is saying because of how they are saying it.
You see, if an employee is surly, or starts cursing and shouting, while invading your personal space and flailing their arms about – such that these things can be “interpreted as violent or aggressive” – this is something that employers must tolerate, and of course defer to. Because of those intersectionalities, presumably. Ms Sinclair shares other thoughts on the matter. We’re told, for instance, that a dislike of being shouted at or bullied by the emotionally incontinent can only be evidence of “deep, inherent bias and deeply inherent systemic racism.”
Sorry, just a sec. The High-Maintenance Nightmare light is flashing again.
And yes, we’ve been here before. Different gown, same dance.
As the thrust of the article appears to be the scolding and correction of pale-skinned employers – who must disavow their wicked, oppressive habit of holding all employees to the same standards of behaviour – we turn again to our recent graduate, Ms Roache, whose thesis is an exercise in racial self-absorption, and whose favourite class was, shockingly, “Decolonising Ethnography.”
Ms Roache, who is in her early 20s, says she reads on Twitter what people in her community are discussing, like being Black at work. She says there’s “way more pushback” these days from young Black people who want employers to redefine what “professional” means. “Professionalism is in your conduct, not necessarily what you’re wearing or what you look like,” she says.
Well, the doing of the job is the most important thing. Though one wonders how much of it will get done by employees who want to “disrupt the peace,” and whose default setting is to wield unconvincing accusations of “privilege” and “deeply inherent systemic racism,” in between fits of shouting and behaviour that can be “interpreted as violent or aggressive.”
Still, could be worse. 
Excuse me a minute. The High-Maintenance Nightmare light seems to be flashing.
You’re gonna need some spare bulbs. 🙂
cashier’s extensive list of ailments or her difficulties
[SHRIEK MODE ON]
YOU ASSUMED THE CASHIER’S GENDER BECAUSE OF COURSE YOU DID BECAUSE YOU’RE A MISOGYNIST AND PROBABLY ALSO RACIST AND HOMOPHOBIC!!!
(Throws entire contents of store where the cashier is on the floor and glues self to ceiling)
[SHRIEK MODE ON]
I went with the numbers. I regret nothing.
Different gown, same dance.
Seems so.
IOW, change the world to accommodate me.
Just don’t want to act like it, unless, of course, you change the world to accommodate me.
We’ll ignore that she just did speak for everyone, and dragging Canada into that whole 1619 freight train of crap is a mighty leap indeed.
I know it is.
“Chances are your Black employees may not be bringing their full selves to work for many reasons.”
Good. It looks like we’re done here.
Seems so.
Why, it’s almost as if there were a psychological pattern. An arrestedness.
why on God’s Fragrant Earth would an employer, or indeed their customers, want employees to drag every last piece of their personal baggage into the workplace and then inflict that inexhaustible tedium on everyone else?
Two examples: A few years out of university, a coworker informed me, out of the blue, that he really liked anal sex. Better that he had confined his remarks to IT technology and the weather.
Years later, another coworker informed me, again out of the blue, that Hinduism was not a real religion. I refrained from asking him if he heard that bollocks at the mosque. (Which was probably fortunate, since a year later a manager remarked that if he had heard a complaint about that sort of exchange he would have fired both individuals.)
None of these instances of “sharing the whole self” increased my opinion of the sharers.
The High-Maintenance Nightmare Light
[ Adds to list of memorable and vivid expressions. ]
Two examples:
I once worked with someone who occasionally employed local students to do basic clerical work. One young woman arrived and on her very first day, almost immediately, she set about airing her politics, which were exactly what you’d imagine, and starting lively arguments. She – being perhaps twenty – seemed to imagine that she was there to educate the rest of us, as if such presumption would be welcome, and while not actually doing the filing, photocopying and assorted errands for which she was being paid.
There’s definitely a type, and employing them, even for simple tasks, would be unwise.
I went to a Burger King drive thru some years ago. By some verbal clues, I guessed that the order taker was high on the melanin scale. I was ordering off the menu (not item 1, not item 6). While trying to explain what I wanted, the server started macking a female worker. When I remarked that he should be taking my order he flew into a tirade and told me that he was not going to take my order because he was tired of dealing with demanding white assholes.
Per his suggestion, I drove thru with no food. I entered the restaurant and approached the manager to complain. The order taker heard my complaint and came around the wall, continuing his tirade of abuse and profanity. The manager just shrugged with a look of resigned disgust. He took my order, gave me my food, and told me that I did not have to pay.
Well, I know about servers spitting on food, so I trashed the order and went to the local Schlotzky’s to have a hot sandwich and chips. I wrote to the Burger King corporate folks and did not receive even an acknowledgement that they had received or read my complaint. I have never purchased another Burger King product since, and it has been more than a decade ago.
Job postings and corporate ‘About Us’ pages often include a statement about the company fostering an environment where employees can bring their ‘whole selves’ to work.
Astonishing. Is this true? If so, what can it possibly mean? The people quoted in the article keep talking about dress and hair, but both Ms Blackman-Gushway and all the team at the Black Human Resources Professionals of Canada are dressed perfectly conventionally even by my fuddy-duddy standards.
non-Black senior leaders can show empathy for Black employees by doing some introspection about whether they themselves are being authentic at work
Another headscratcher! What on earth does ‘doing some introspection’ mean?
“I was taught that there are certain things that you don’t say or certain things that you keep your mouth shut about,” says Julisha Roache
Me too. Almost like it’s not a racial thing. I wager that a lack of interest in one’s colleague’s opinions about – say – Hinduism and bumsex is pretty much universal.
demanding white assholes
You could use our newfound time travel ability, go back in time and introduce him to pst’s first coworker example.
“Take your whole self” to work? Bugger that. That’s what the pub is for.
She – being perhaps twenty – seemed to imagine that she was there to educate the rest of us, as if such presumption would be welcome, and while not actually doing the filing, photocopying and assorted errands for which she was being paid.
Seen it many times.
Burger King
Heh. These people ?
Seen it many times.
It was quite a thing. I remember being a little non-plussed by the presumption and incongruity. Sort of, “Why is this conversation happening, here and now, and quite loudly, and where are the bloody folders you were asked to fetch?” I think she lasted two days. It’s one of the experiences that prompted me to write this post, The Blurting, but, for reasons that now escape me, I didn’t include it.
Yes, because bringing your authentic selves, no matter how disruptive, worked so well in the public schools.
It seems like this is trying to be the next “we’re all family here” model to appeal to employees to work more for less. Brought in by management who don’t have to face the consequences of their actions.
From the Blurting comments, this comment by Sam…
When I remarked that he should be taking my order he flew into a tirade and told me that he was not going to take my order because he was tired of dealing with demanding white assholes.
It’s depressing to think about, but nearly all the truly obnoxious retail employees I have encountered have been young blacks: Resentful, angry, hateful, and incompetent. My liberal friends and relatives must have seen this pattern of behavior, but refuse to admit its reality.
Me too. Almost like it’s not a racial thing. I wager that a lack of interest in one’s colleague’s opinions about – say – Hinduism and bumsex is pretty much universal.
Heh. That reminded me of a colleague in my first workplace, back when I was a callow youth. He was apparently determined to remove any doubt as to the fact that he was immensely homosexual. Almost any conversation, any humdrum exchange about stock or invoices, could be derailed by sexual innuendo and incongruous, camp squealing. It was every bit as wearying as you might imagine. All day, every day, everyone within earshot had to be reminded of what would now be called his identity. His “whole self.” At least three other people in the building were gay, albeit unobtrusively, and no-one cared. There was no-one to scandalise. And so, the reason for this unending display, complete with showbiz gestures, was a bit of mystery. And yet the pantomime went on with exhausting shrillness.
immensely homosexual
Band name.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
where employees can bring their ‘whole selves’ to work
“Great, I’m a conservative Christian who’s married with three kids and is active in the pro-life move-”
“You’re fired. Leave immediately.”
My liberal friends and relatives must have seen this pattern of behavior, but refuse to admit its reality.
A few years ago I realized I was on occasion passing by the barber shop owned by a former coworker. Jamaican guy, shop was on the edge of black neighborhoods. Not having seen him in quite a few years, I popped in for a haircut. We had a good time catching up, though I feared we were somewhat monopolizing the barbershop conversation thing. But hey, it was his shop and were he a white guy I would have thought nothing of it. When I left, I noticed that my new-ish truck, one that I had just stopped to have it washed by some high schoolers raising money, one I had just been looking very closely at, had been keyed. When I later related this to other people, be they liberal or conservative…”conservative”, those people who know nothing about that shop, it’s clientele, or anything except for the word “black”, shake their heads and insist that I must be wrong. That it must have happened elsewhere. Even though I drove directly from the car wash to the barber shop.
shake their heads and insist that I must be wrong. That it must have happened elsewhere.
The dishonesty gets wearying. A recurring reaction: “Why even bother to talk to these fools and polyroons?”
Maybe they shouldn’t “racialise” themselves and maybe they won’t feel so marginalized.
If we roll the time machine back to the 1950s, a terribly oppressive time, and look at the white workforce, we see almost everyone wearing some sort of uniform: Black suit, white shirt for IBM, blue for tradesmen, white for dairy workers and house painters, etc. The purpose of course was to MINIMIZE personality and signify (and remind you) that you were there to do the job. Being professional means not staying out all night on work nights or arriving with a hangover, getting the job done even if you had a fight with your wife or have a headache, not insulting your co-workers. Remember, I am talking about an all-white workforce here. Staying focused is critical to the success of any business. Get woke go broke isn’t just a cute expression, it is true because staying profitable is a delicate balancing act. Take your eye off the ball or insult your customers, and go down like Disney or Ulta.
In the short run, employers might put up with all sorts of nonsense for all sorts of faddish reasons.
But in the long run they have to make money, and those employees who detract from that objective tend to get sloughed off.
Maybe they shouldn’t “racialise” themselves and maybe they won’t feel so marginalized.
That.
employees who detract from that objective tend to get sloughed off
Unless companies are receiving government grants/subsidies and risk losing them unless they comply with DIE/ESG regulations.
Regardless of your color or sex, I do not want to know that you are on your period, I do not want to be told we must have a fragrance-free workplace, I do not want angry people in clown clothes interacting with customers, I do not want to know about your sex life. Just keep all that to yourself. thx
This “asking vs telling” thing. Sure, some bosses are jerks and yell, but at any job they give you things to do because they pay you. Weird, I know.
While it all sounds mildly quaint listening to the self-indulgent hector and lecture us from the Book of Woke™ and having employers bow down to it all. Here in Canuckistan there can be very real and lasting consequences for not bowing down to passive-aggressive and just plain aggressive workplace marxists.
Some of us have mentioned in previous posts that Canadian provinces have something call Human Rights Commissions. They are semi-judicial bodies that are accountable to no one but themselves. Workplace grievances often make their way to these tribunals and people have lost their jobs over incidents barely worthy of a five minute discussion with a supervisor. My brother lost his job after a female co-worker of colour accused him of making her feel unsafe (which in itself was hilarious as she had 2 inches and 30 pounds on my diminutive sibling). She threatened the company with a “Human Rights” complaint and they fired my brother. So here in Canada we have an entire enabled infrastructure that increasingly supports this nonsense.
Well, there’s the problem right there. She’s a “HR Professional”. Everything she says right after that announcement is to be regarded with extreme prejudice and/or dismissed out-of-hand.
By the time I retired, I had been supervising a staff of 41 (I had two assistant sups who were great, but it was always my responsibility to deal with the ‘problem children’) and while I sometimes miss the work and some of the people, I’m so grateful not having to deal with HR and my assigned rep who was a complete nincompoop who felt the best decision to make when dealing with problems is to keep meeting about them without ever solving them. He had the same Professor Irwin Corey-style writings as this idiot.
NO NO NO, I don’t want your “complete authentic self” at work. You have friends and family to help you deal with whatever is going on in your life. You’re here to do “X”, to do it competently and on time and not overtly try to annoy your coworkers in the process.
The workplace is not, should not, be your *life*. Attend church, volunteer to feed the homeless, take a pottery class … your life is OUTSIDE of work.
Now, get out of my office. ARGHHH!
Now, get out of my office. ARGHHH!
Caution: Defenestration is illegal, even if your office is on the first floor. 😉
For the benefit of our American friends:
Canada qua Canada never had slavery. It was abolished throughout the British Empire thirty years before Confederation. As a result, there are virtually no black people in Canada; they make up slightly less than 4% of the population, are concentrated almost entirely in Canada’s three largest cities (none of which are located in Alberta) and most importantly, almost entirely immigrated to Canada after 1990.
Literally everything that comes out of this bint’s mouth has nothing to do with her, or the experiences of black people in Canada. She’s just parroting crap from Black Twitter, which is exclusively American grievance-mongering.
why on God’s Fragrant Earth would an employer, or indeed their customers, want employees to drag every last piece of their personal baggage into the workplace
Because while men generally maintain a psychological and physical separation between their work and home life, women try to make everywhere the home.
On a related note, the level of disconnect of these kinds of people from any history prior to their adolescence is frightening. I opined in a social setting that I didn’t think Black Panther was a very good movie on its technical merits due to problems with casting, pacing, CGI and so on and got rounded on by a young black woman insisting the Black Panther was a very important movie because
Her: “It was the first superhero movie with a black hero!”
Me: “No, it wasn’t. [ names three ]”
Her: “Well, it was the first superhero movie with an all-black cast!”
Me: “No, it wasn’t. [ names three ]”
Her: “Well, it was the first superhero movie to present Pan-Africanism!”
Me: “Pan-Africanism didn’t exist until five minutes ago, and wasn’t the assumption that all black people were somehow the same because of their skin colour considered raaacist ten minutes before that?”
Like I said: artificial cluster B personality disorder.
the idea of being vulnerable
I have had co-workers who brought their ‘whole selves’ to work, and with the exception of one (white) guy who confessed to me that he was an alcoholic (thankfully, I was able to talk him into rehab), not one of them was being ‘vulnerable.’
DIE/ESG regulations
There’s a story arc about that over at Dilbert.
Me: “Pan-Africanism didn’t exist until five minutes ago….”
Longer than that. I heard of it while I was still in high school. Would have been 1968 or ’69. It was very bien-pensant and hopeful — a way of dodging or finessing the difficulties of post-colonial nation-building. Many who became adherents fell away soon after when they saw it breaking on the same shoals as world-government globalism. “Continentalism” is still too overscaled to achieve consensus, or foster human bonds.
Pan-africanism is built on the conceit that all africans are one big group–they do NOT view themselves that way.
Her: “Well, it was the first superhero movie to present Pan-Africanism!”
Except, as noted earlier, the Wackandans did bupkis for the rest of Africa.
Instalanch!
Better put down more sawdust, David. And hide the good glassware just in case.
Instalanch!
The folks over there use Disqus as the comment engine. David might consider using it himself.
I seem to recall seeing some complaints about Disqus, although I am not certain of their nature.
I do seem to recall that when one does a google search of a specific site that uses Disqus, the comments are not (and cannot) be found and returned by that search. (Can anybody confirm/refute that with certainty?) That would be a significant downside, given that so much of the value of this blog is in the comment threads.
David might consider using it himself.
Consider it and reject the idea with extreme prejudice.
It is unalloyed buggy POS spyware that is little more than Farcebook Lite.
Why the hell anyone with a conscience, other than sheer laziness, can use the fetid piece of troll bait is beyond me.
pst: correct, because unlike with Typepad, Disqus comments are hosted on their server, and (to judge by a cursory search) aren’t accessible via Google or other search engines. So yeah, moving the comments here to that platform would be a terrible idea.
Ironically, my comment about the comment software got posted twice. But at least it was not posted from the future.
Jokes aside, I am okay with the blog as it exists.
Re: Farnsworth M Muldoon | October 20, 2022 at 01:29
You seem to have quoted a source, but you failed to cite it.
“Comment below or sign in with Typepad, Facebook, Twitter and more…” appears above the “Post a comment” box. I wonder if Disqus could be added to the options.
I vote NO on Disqus. This is a democracy, right? It’s not?
“So just what is the governance philosophy here? ” he asked with some trepidation, having suddenly remembered the Henchlesbians, the Corrections Booth, and the coats burning in the alley.