If changing your clothes makes you feel different, imagine the power of changing your mind: the potential power of conversation

 

With YouTube in the background I became aware of a cheery ‘style coach’ onscreen with a TED talk about how dressing ‘for confidence’ would make one confident. As someone with no eye for clothing, I was struck that what was transfixing was the potential to use the analogy of changing attitudes rather than outfits – if we are not prepared to change our mind, what is the point of having one.

Conversation is a way of getting to know other people and for them to get to know us. In this way it has the potential to be enormously rewarding when positive and mutual. But, there are also conversations that will have a confrontational tone – and discussions about race are the epitome of such potentially difficult topics. A key aim here is to preserve a constructive attitude and to avoid losing control and creating a negative interaction. Body language, facial appearance, vocal tone are as important as the actual words said. Even the position in a sentence of certain ‘negative’ words (such as death, poverty, inequality) can influence how the listening brain processes the message.

In recognition of the vital need to support frank discussion towards the development of an antiracist NHS the national Equality, Diversity an Inclusion (EDI) team of the People Directorate in NHS England are conducting a month-long conversation about racial justice in the NHS, entitled Race Ahead. It is co-produced with regional EDI leads and intended to draw in workforce in all NHS organisations, at all levels, to help them be able to have such conversations with staff.

The seminal 2020 interview with Jamaican cricketer, Michael Holding, highlighted the importance of education and conversation if we want to change the centuries long mindset that results in systemic racism. The power of that interview was in part that the other contributors to that discussion were black and minority ethnic people (BME). It is important to highlight the voices of those who are most affected by any issue, whilst at the same time recognising that people encounter differing types of discrimination based on diverse and intersectional identities. It is a truism that everyone has a race, and the priority is not to centre any one race, white or black; and when there is no prioritised race, then there is no possibility of ‘othering’.

The thought of a conversation about race may cause anxiety for many, especially if preceded by layers of data which can be misused like a percussive baton Equally alienating can be rhetoric. Rather we could start with shared values and signpost towards opportunity for consensual solutions, and braving areas of challenge. Social media is riddled with commentators who deny the existence of discrimination, or say they are ‘colour blind’ or proclaim inability to change centuries long practice. The first point can be denied by carefully cited evidence, but the notion of colour-blindness needs more careful dissection. At a superficial level it is attractive to talk about seeing the content of someone’s character rather than their skin colour. But that is akin to the fallacy that COVID-19 was the great leveller as evidenced by the disproportionate effect of the pandemic on  BME people. In fact, the pandemic revealed to many for the first time that there are structural causes of racism rooted in health and class inequality. The notion of being colour blind is to ignore these institutionalised disparities and make the consequences more related to false narratives about genetics or behaviour. Colour blindness also permits the denial of the existence of ‘white privilege’, namely that certain populations experience an innate advantage based on being the majority demographic with historic advantage. Compared to white people, why do people who look like me get stopped by the police more, have our tickets checked for longer, get followed when in shops? In healthcare why do we not warn Black and mixed-race pregnant women that they have 5-times or 3-times the mortality of white women? This is majority privilege, it is not ‘playing the race card’ – and it is important to help to tease these positions out for individuals who may have never considered these issues to any depth.

Equally important in conversation is to put education into context. Reducing individual cognitive bias is not a substitute for de-biasing systems that perpetuate inequity. Any training or engagement needs to be inextricably linked to process change. Having a solution-focused conversation means challenging common fallacies, the most pernicious of which is the 'ignored white working class boys' which has at its heart that socioeconomic factors are the fundamental determinant of outcome. The argument is that if housing and education systems were equitable that would be sufficient to achieve equity for all. The error in this argument is that it ignores that racism leads BME communities to be stratified into certain houses and schools compared to white peers with similar incomes. Lived experience and countless studies have identified that racial inequity persists even adjusting for socio-economic factors.

Workplace conversations about race are essential, for the potential they have to create allies of the willing, and provide hope for the marginalised. The history of racism and its continuing damaging effects mean that these conversations can be emotional, but if handled effectively, not emotive. The privilege of being in an exchange which can change someone’s thinking is surely worth that investment.