Announcing our Inaugural LEAD Fud Authors for 2017

The Fund for Leadership, Equity, Access and Diversity Announces its
2017 LEAD Fund Authors
College students competed by submitting papers and research
In the fields of Equity, Social Justice, Diversity and Inclusion
For Immediate Release: December 15, 2017
Contact: Shirley J. Wilcher
202-349-9855
240-893-9475

Washington, DC, December 15, 2017 – The Fund for Leadership, Equity, Access and Diversity (LEAD Fund) announced its first class of LEAD Fund Authors today. The LEAD Fund Authors were chosen from the research papers submitted by students or graduates of colleges and universities. The topics for the papers had to relate to the mission of the Fund, which is access, equity, social justice, diversity and inclusion. This year’s authors, Natalie Giron and Dakota Strode, both attended or are currently enrolled at American University in Washington, DC.

Natalie D. Giron, a recent honors graduate from American University, conducted research on the “Educational Experience of Undocumented Latinx Students and Families in the New Political Climate.” Dakota Strode, a senior at American University currently spending his first semester at Trinity College in Ireland, wrote about “LGBTQA+ Rights & Obama.” 1 “The LEAD Fund is thrilled to foster and support the development of a new generation of thought leaders on the critical issues of our time” said Jennifer Tucker, Chair of the LEAD Fund Board of Directors.

“Both topics are very timely, given the current debates about the rights of immigrant students under the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals, or DACA initiative, and the protections of members of the LGBTQA+ community,” said Shirley J. Wilcher, President and CEO of the LEAD Fund. “These papers were well-written and are a testament to the outstanding potential of our future scholars in the Academy and practitioners in the equity and diversity professions,” she added.

The Fund for Leadership, Equity, Access and Diversity (LEAD Fund) was established to provide thought leadership in promoting inclusive organizations and institutions through research and education on issues related to diversity, social responsibility, human and civil rights. The LEAD Fund is a “Think and Do” tank, which advances new knowledge and tested strategies aimed at eliminating prejudice and discrimination.

1. LGBTQA+ is an acronym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Aerosexual, Asexual, or Aromantic, and all others who identify within the community.
The Fund is a 501 (c) (3) charitable organization. It complements the work of the American Association for Access, Equity and Diversity (AAAED) through programs and activities that address a range of concerns, including affirmative action, equal opportunity, equity, access, civil rights, and diversity and inclusion in education, employment, business and contracting. The scope of the Fund’s activities is both domestic and international. The LEAD Fund places a special emphasis on the emerging demographics in the United States in all of its work.

The LEAD Fund Authors Program emphasizes “Diversity in Action” and is committed to promoting undergraduate and graduate research that advances new understandings and tested strategies aimed at expanding organizational or institutional knowledge of access, equity, and diversity.
LEAD Fund Authors are selected among a diverse pool of applicants who present their work in the form of poster presentations at the American Association for Access, Equity and Diversity’s (AAAED) annual conference and in other venues. They may also submit their papers directly to the Fund. Selected presenters will become LEAD Fund Authors and will have the opportunity to have their presentations published by the Fund. If their research is chosen for publication, LEAD Fund Authors will receive an honorarium.

To view the 2017 LEAD Fund Authors’ papers, visit the LEAD Fund webpage.

1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW • Suite 200 • Washington, DC 20006 • Phone: 800-252-8952
202-349-9855 • Fax: 202-355-1399 • leadfund@aaaed.org • https://www.aaaed.org/aaaed/LEAD_Fund.asp

Segregating The “Problem” -We Need To Own Our Symbols

September, 2017
By Robert Gregg

I listened to a radio program about the Charlottesville, VA attack and the resurgence of hate groups. A caller asked “what can I as a White person do to help Blacks on these issues and show solidarity?” The African-American guest expert then answered about what Whites could do to help Blacks with this problem.
The exchange concerned me. The whole premise of the question and the “expert’s” answer was that this was indeed a “Black problem,” in which concerned Whites could help and show “solidarity.” However, it was not a problem for Whites. It was not an American problem, of grave concern for all Americans who value their own freedom and Constitution, and right to live in a democratic society, rather than a Nazi, religiously and racially repressed and hateful country. It was not “our problem” as a whole country.
The caller and the guest expert continued to foster a narrow-minded “we-they” focus; even if it was with the best of intentions.
Only when we recognize that every American and our entire society is at risk for all of us can we be effective. It is not how can I help “those people.” Rather, the issue is how can I step forward to protect and improve my own society, and my own American democracy and freedoms for all of us. We need to recognize that all of us have a deeply vested interest.
Our American Flag is a “We.” Our national symbols are not a “They.” Our Flag and symbols do not belong to any one group, one political party, nor the national government. They belong to US as a people.
I am concerned by the calls to not stand and honor the Flag and National Anthem. I listened to an African-American sports figure who asked that White athletes join him in not standing for the Flag or Anthem to show solidarity. Just as the prior caller and guest expert, this fosters the view that it is all a “Black problem” (or at least a “minority problem”) in which others can show support – but it is not a problem for all Americans. Both the caller, the guest expert, and the sports figure are doing a good job of “segregating the problem,” in a way that all the rest of Americans can feel it is “your” problem – not OURS. They can “give support,” but do not have to be personally invested.
While I support and participate in the imperative to actively protest the tragic shooting of unarmed persons of color and other blatant or institutional acts of discrimination, I believe we should not cede our most cherished symbols to those who, by their actions, demean them. I believe in the right of those who do not stand for the Flag to exercise freedom of expression, and know they are sincere. Though it may be a sincere expression, not honoring the Flag and Anthem is unwise and ill-conceived. It serves to hand the flag and “being American” over to the hate groups.
The American Flag stands for the ideals of freedom and equality and liberty. We have never fully achieved those, but it is our symbol that we strive to do so. The overwhelming
majority of all Americans believe in this principle, as can be seen by the overwhelming public
reaction against hate groups following Charleston and Charlottesville.
The flags of the hate groups are the swastika, the Confederate flag, and other hate
symbols. That is their identity. If we, as liberty-loving Americans, reject the American Flag and
Anthem, we then turn it over to them. Since we are not claiming it – they can. The hate groups
can claim to own the American Flag as their symbol – since it has been rejected by those who
oppose them. They gain power through embracing our rejected symbols.
Instead, those who oppose hatred, tyranny, discriminatory and abusive practices by hate
groups or by parts of our government, should embrace the Flag. We must make it our symbol.
We should own it. We do own it – and should make that clear. We should carry it high and in
abundance at every rally or march. We are the Americans. We should stand proudly and sing
loud.
It is the haters, the intolerant, the oppressors, who should be ashamed to stand for the
Flag and the Anthem. Yet we are in danger of rejecting the symbol of what we seek to achieve,
and turn it over to the other side; give them the high ground.
I cannot participate in not standing for or honoring our Flag. I believe that most
Americans agree with that principle and will also distance themselves from individuals or
organizations which espouse that rejection of Flag and anthem and will be reluctant to show
support or cooperation. Those who espouse the rejection will find that they have further
“segregated the problem,” so that other Americans see it as “your problem” – not as “our issues
to solve.”
I have for many years devoted myself to achieving the ideal of America even in some of
the most problematic and conflicted times. I have seen the Flag and Anthem as representing the
ideals to be restored and achieved. This is the time to embrace those symbols as OURS and
vigorously and abundantly display them in the fight by all Americans against hatred, bigotry and
oppression.
Bob Gregg is a U.S. Army veteran. He was a founding staff member of the Department
of Defense Race Relations Institute, served as an EEO/Equal Rights Officer and has developed
and implemented anti-discrimination regulations, practices, and policies nationally. He is a
member of the American Association for Access Equity and Diversity, Wisconsin Association
for Equal Opportunity, and served on the Board of Directors of the DOD Equal Opportunity
Management Institute Foundation. This commentary is his personal opinion and does not reflect
the view of any of those organizations.

Decades of Well-Meaning Responses to Sexual Harassment Have Failed. Can We Do Better?

By : Pamela Coukos

It’s finally out there for everyone to see. Not just that sexual harassment and sexual assault pervades the workplace — but that decades of well-meaning responses have failed. Sexual harassment training has little to show for itself, and might even be counter-productive. Human resources departments and reporting mechanisms are have conflicting mandates and little institutional power, making them ineffective or even complicit in covering up harassment. Formal policies primarily designed to satisfy the lawyers are unlikely to protect workers from the harm of harassers in their workplace.

Read more here.