On May 19, 2023, Bambi paid a tribute to Dr. Frédéric Basitien on her blog, as shown further below. In it, she promised him to keep his memory alive. Bearing the latter in mind, now is the time to honour her promise by translating a thoughtful article, recently published in La Presse, written by Ms. Murielle Chatelier (https://t.ly/Kpj0) .
Indeed, before even knowing the connection between Ms. Chatlier and Dr. Bastien, Bambi had in mind to translate her article for you, dear readers of this blog. Well, today, when she began preparing this post, Bambi discovered a beautiful link between Chatlier and Bastien called L’Association des Québécois unis contre le racialisme (AQUR) [Association of Québeckers United Against Racialism].
Indeed, Ms. Chatlier is the Founder and President of AQUR while the late Dr. Bastien was a Co-founder, along with Mr. Stephan Fogaing (Parti Québécois Co-Spokesperson for Diversity and Citizenship). The mission of the Association of Québeckers United Against Racialism (AQUR) is “to promote the vision of living together [Bambi will add: le “vivre ensemble” in French and to the readers who speak Arabic: “Alwaysh Al Moushtarak“] specific to the reality of Québec and based on universalism. This vision opposes racialism and is based on the pillars of the values of the Québec nation, which are French as a common language, the secularism of the State and equality between men and women” (https://t.ly/nFiF)
Bambi sends her heartfelt condolences to Ms. Murielle Chatelier and Mr. Stephan Fogaing.
A picture taken from the AQUR website on May 29, 2023.
Before partnering with her faithful friend, Mr. Google Translate below to translate the article in question from French into English, Bambi will share one additional screenshot showing us Ms. Chatelier’s love for “her” Québec. Yes, she wrote: “I am a visible minority and I love my Québec“. Same for Bambi, she is an unvisible (or visible?) minority too and she loves both her Québec and Canada! Note how neither of them called herself “BIPOC” for “black, indigenous, and other people of colour” (what an odd acronym for both humans and deer).
OK, now that he introductions are over, time for Ms. Chatelier’s article in the remainder of this post, along with one comment by Bambi, when appropriate.
“You are a man ? Are you “White”? Are you a sports person? Do you have a typical weight? Are you a parent? Are you a Francophone or an Anglophone? So you have power and privileges. At least that’s what a graph from a training document on equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) presented by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) tells us”.
Aiming to “create inclusive research environments”, this document further teaches us that racialized people, people of immigrant origin and women would by definition be “deprived” of power and privilege and unable to show racism. According to this simplistic and arbitrary segmentation of our society, Dominique Anglade, a multimillionaire woman who led the Liberal Party of Québec and who gravitates in the upper echelons of society, would be an oppressed person. And an American actress like Whoopi Goldberg couldn’t make anti-Semitic remarks because she has black skin – remember here that she was once suspended from her ABC show for saying that the Holocaust “wasn’t not a matter of race”.
On the other hand, any “white” man who checks off several of the characteristics of this graph would necessarily have power and privileges, especially if he plays sports!
Whether he is recovering from cancer, was a victim of sexual abuse or grew up in a disadvantaged environment would not have much weight in the equation. In terms of power and privileges, her skin colour would be more decisive than the many advantages enjoyed by a “racialized” woman like Dominique Anglade. Moreover, as the document indicates in black and white that “Power + privilege = racism”, we understand that we should put this gentleman on trial before doing that of a woman like Whoopi Goldberg whose remarks have been decried several times [Bambi did not follow Goldberg’s comments/story. Thus, she has no clue what all this controversy was about at the time of preparing this post. Regardless, Bambi denounces cancelling anyone for any comment, including Ms. Goldberg].
Training questioned
In recent years, EDI consulting firms have flourished in the country, providing training on diversity in our governmental institutions, in our schools and in our private companies. However, these trainings are the subject of many criticisms. In a review of the literature, researchers Frank Dobbin (Harvard University) and Alexandra Kalev (Tel-Aviv University), co-authors of a study based on data collected from 829 American companies over three decades, argue that such training , the effects of which may wear off within a few days, do not reduce bias or change behaviour.
In addition to being ineffective and very costly, this training aimed mainly at so-called “dominant” groups would even be counterproductive.
Thus, it has been found that by arousing a feeling of guilt among “whites”, these trainings can reinforce prejudices or lead to more hostility towards minority groups.
They also lead many participants to believe that they have to walk on eggshells when in contact with members of minority groups, whom they come to see as fragile and easily offended. Consequently, members of the dominant group become less inclined to try to form relationships or collaborate with people from these minority groups. None of this promotes social integration and living together.
By seeking more to generate a new understanding of race relations than to solve the specific problems of organizations, the contemporary EDI approach misses the mark while undermining relations between fellow citizens. Who will look into these training courses which are multiplying and are given by pseudo-experts without their effectiveness being demonstrated? Who will question the long-term effects of these “white” man rehabilitation workshops? Who will worry about the stigmatization of minority groups through ideological concepts that have no scientific basis?
Finally, who will have the courage to denounce this business that anti-racism has become? Because our shared humanity is already paying the price”.
—
