Diversity video no laughing matter to city worker

By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Evan Semon © The Rocky

Supple: "Their diversity program is racially motivated against white males."

The city of Denver is showing its employees a diversity training video that portrays a white man as a narrow-minded buffoon - triggering allegations of "institutional racism" against Anglos.

"Right now, their diversity program is racially motivated against white males," said Dennis Supple, a heating, ventilating and air-conditioning mechanic who has worked for the city 1 1/2 years.

The video, titled Laughing Matters - Think About It, is meant to show employees how humor at the expense of others diminishes respect in the workplace. The character who breaks all the rules is Billy, a white, blue-collar worker who's a racist, sexist goofball.

In one scene, Billy is told that another employee named Carlos can't do anything because he's waiting for supplies.

"What's his problem?" Billy says. "He can't sell breakfast burritos without the supplies or he takes a siesta?"

Supple said the video violates his civil rights and that he's considering taking the equity in his house to file a lawsuit to stop the city from showing it.

"Diversity, to me, doesn't mean hammer the white guy," Supple said. "Diversity means you have respect for everyone, regardless of their race, their gender, their religion, their sexual orientation."

Councilman Charlie Brown, who is white, took offense at the video, too.

"To just target the white race, I don't think that's fair," he said.

Brown said he wrote a letter to Mayor John Hickenlooper and the city's diversity manager, Susan Maxfield, after Supple, who lives in his district, called and complained.

"How can city employees have meaningful discussion after seeing only a Caucasian male making insensitive comments?" Brown wrote. "All ethnic groups have a role in changing behavior across the board."

Brown said Friday that the video perpetuates a stereotype.

"The only thing left out was the white plumber's crack when (the actor) bends over to work," he said.

Maxfield, who is on vacation, was unavailable for comment.

Kathy Maloney, spokeswoman for the Career Service Authority, said the video is part of a one- to three-hour facilitated discussion.

"The video itself is scheduled for updating in either 2008 or 2009, so (Supple's) input would certainly be taken into consideration for the next video," she said.

Maloney noted the last thing to appear on the 8-minute video is this phrase: "Remember, Billy could be anyone."

She also said the teaching guide tells facilitators to "ensure participants recognize this video does not highlight or target any particular individual or group."

"It's meant to represent anyone who could (use) inappropriate humor in the workplace," she said.

Supple said he raised concerns about the video during his diversity-training class but that they were brushed off. When he met with Maxfield, Supple said she told him it was "no big deal."

"If you portrayed a black woman (or a Hispanic or a homosexual) in that manner, there'd be hell to pay," Supple said. "But it's OK for them to portray a white man in this manner because you put down one little (disclaimer) at the end of the (video) that says, 'Remember, anybody could be Billy.' That's a bunch of bull."

The video, developed by the city's Diversity Advisory Committee in collaboration with Channel 8, the city's television channel, won second place in 2005 for Instruction/Training from the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors.

"Congratulations," Brown said sarcastically, "but it didn't win any awards in my book."

• November 24, 2007

  7:50 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  T1anda writes:

  The video was obviously made by or influenced greatly by pro-Hispanic groups or pro-illegal alien groups like La Raza, Lulac etc. I am white and we are still in the majority in this country sooo live with it!!

• November 24, 2007

  11:34 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  RS writes:

  The damage of this "white males are evil" construct throughout the "diversity" establishment was very highly demonstrated in the Duke false accusation case. The rush to judgment when ever white males are claimed as perpetrators was very clearly demonstrated, exposing a huge problem infecting our society and judicial system. No one believes the Duke situation, where three men, fortunately, had the resources needed to prove their absolute innocence when being railroaded by government with the unlimited use of taxpayer funding, is the only example of this extreme bias. Yet, in-spite of the clear racist bias demonstrated by the individuals and the "establishment" in the Duke case, none of the perpetrators have been prosecuted. The woman making the false allegation has been given a free pass and Mike Nifong, who took her charges and used them to gain personally, has yet to be prosecuted by the federal government for obvious civil rights violations.
  It is always easy for the people who are never subject to this hatred and discrimination to claim "no big deal", but those of us under the constant double standard our entire lives are more than a little sick of it!

• November 24, 2007

  2:33 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  DenverDem writes:

  I have known work places where most of the nasty back talk and insults are women against woman. Regardless of race. And this is the case where I work now. And it is a very diverse work place.

• November 25, 2007

  12:07 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  bassoon writes:

  I've seen some very good, balanced diversity videos, including one that showed examples of boorish, hostile, illegal activity of straight whites, as well as from "target" groups (an anglo employee being the odd one out, unwanted same sex attempts to seduce, female supervisor hitting on a subordinate employee, etc.). It's a sad irony when a diversity video has the effect of giving the impression to any group that the environment is hostile to them.

  While Straight White Men have been responsible for unacceptable behaviors, we aren't the only ones.

• November 26, 2007

  10:15 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  pegasus99_aka_DR writes:

  This kind of "anti-white-guy" projection really isn't anything new in the past 25 or 30 years - and my black and Hispanic friends mostly agree. To be sure, there is still unfair bias against certain groups that varies from city-to-city, and different parts of the country. But by-and=large, what I'm hearing is that the protected groups believe that there are now far more programs and laws set to help them, than there are in place to ensure Caucasians enjoy equal rights as well.

  I agree with what Dennis Supple essentially said in the article, and it's something I've long held as a position: There should be no laws that protect a certain group or set of groups - the law should simply read: It is unlawful to be prejudiced against another person, at any time, for any reason. Deliberately villainizing any group, as whites are in this video, defeats the point needing to be addressed - I can assure you that bias for and against every ethnic group on the planet exists, and must be dealt with on an individual basis.

• November 27, 2007

  11:45 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  bornin1953 writes:

  BFD, TFB, stop playing the damn victim and make your country a better place to live for all people.

  Wow, if I could be a white man, the most protected class in America as opposed to a white woman, I could truly rule the world.

  These 30 somethings Right Wingers need to pull themselves up by their damn bootstraps and act like real men and stop destroying America like they've destroyed the GOP. There is a real difference between hate speech and First Amendment rights and for some reason you all are always the ones who get caught not knowing the difference between the two.

  And the idea that is it unlawful to be prejudiced against another person, at any time for any reason is a wonderful idea but it will never pass with this group of neo-con racists masquerading as Republicans. Some of them are haters, they want the right to use a racial slur if they damn please, beat up a gay guy or a transgendered person, poke fun at fat woman or a fat midget, not feel offened when they hear the term a chink in the armour. A prominent Right leaning blogger was peddling one of these tests on her website a few years back.

  http://michellemalkin.com/2004/08/04/...

  Let's face it, the 30-something generation wants to be insensitive to those who are different and neatly fold it and wrap it up in a pretty package called "dump on the white guy". I blame it on their youth, but I never believed that when I was in my 50s I would see 20 and 30 year olds acting like Fred Phelps. Scary indeed.

• November 29, 2007

  10:15 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  IntellGrunt49 writes:

  Mandatory Diversity Counseling in Your Workplace?

  Danger. Danger. Danger! Anything you say or do in these PC, Hate
  Whitey 'Counseling' sessions can and will be used against you in
  a court of law. And, joy-joy! Management does not have to warn you or read you your Miranda Rights! This according to a number of US Supreme Court decisions where Government workers were fired for things said during these hate filled, PC sessions by the well paid, bigoted facilitator.

  In order for this toxic PC session to work, the Government paid
  Hate Monger must have a 'witness'---usually a slug from upper
  management.

  Oh, and it does not matter what you said, only what the bigoted
  hatemonger THINKS you said.

  So, how to thwart this? Get a lawyer for the grunt employees to
  attend! Or, record this session and do not make it known to the
  PC facilitator. (Most states and the Federal Government allow you
  to secretly record if you are in the same room with those that
  you are recording.) Even better: get a picture cell phone and
  send a copy of this session to your computer! Again, check your
  State laws. It's legal here in Georgia.

  How do I know all this? I worked as an Electrician for over 12
  years for Fulton County, Georiga, and was forced to attend one of these mandatory 'Diversity Sessions' with about 20 of my co-workers and words said or alleged to have been said by me were used to fire me.

  It does not matter if what you said was true. It does not matter
  if the PC Hate monger lied, you're fired if you do not have recorded back-up. Oh, if you demand to be polygraphed? Only use
  polygraphists in good standing with from the American Polygraph
  Association.

  The SEIU local I'd been a dues paying member of for over 2 years
  abandoned me. And my civilian attorney didn't know Civil Service
  procedures, filed in the wrong court, etc... Now, I'm blackballed.

  Bill Bryan
  EducationChoiceActivist@yahoo.com

• November 29, 2007

  5:51 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ThePiper writes:

  Excuse me: in the USA (portrayed so eloquently in its white-biased media) it's as if WHITE is the NORM and everything else is an OTHER. Why don't we ever read about "white community leaders" in the media?
  Where are these "black", Latino and Hispanic and Asian communities supposed to be? Don't those people elect public officials along with their white counterparts? Who are the white community leaders? How much more racist can a country be?

  Racism in this country is alive and well because that's how it's been configured: wanting a decent home, safe neighborhood, good schools and the ability to pursue happiness are not specific to any race -- yet, in America, safe neighborhoods are typically thought to be "white" .... Try being safe in a "white" neighborhood if you're black in Alabama or Kentucky.

  Americans by and large are racists - basically because most of them are so narrow-minded they can't even understand how derogatory statements in and of themselves can hurt someone - if that someone is not of the same race: take Don Imus' stupid statement to the black girl basketball players. He asked them to tell him why it hurt. What an idiot. Who likes to be called a whore? Who likes to be called nappy headed?

  What kind of idiot doesn't understand that ugly words can hurt? A racist white idiot, that's who.

  And who would contrive a video portrayal of one guy as a reflection of all white men? White racists who can't stand to see the truth.

• November 30, 2007

  7:02 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  RightBeDone writes:

  The vitriolic tone of the American Race discussion has managed to alienate those who should be most included in the group. Mr. Bryan above, is an example of someone who is no longer willing to focus on ending racial discrimination because he is angry about that tone. Mr. Bryan's arguments do not add to the debate, but only silence the majority of people in this country who know that a)racism still exists and b)want to do something about it.

  The question that Mr. Bryan should have put is this; why did the filmmakers who developed the anti-discrimination film feel that it was okay to depict only harassment from white straight males against minority groups?

  Our culture tells a vivid story about discrimination. We say there was discrimination in the past, but now it's mostly gone.

  The truth is much more complicated. White people have been surrounded by privilege for so long that they don't even realize that they are privileged anymore. Similarly, minority groups internalize discrimination. A lecturer with the same script will be taken more seriously if he is white than if he is Asian or Latino, even if the students are from minority groups.

  Having said that, the group that benefits the most from discrimination are white straight males. The ways in which white men benefit are not enumerated, like affirmative action, they are myriad and extensive. Mr. Bryan points out rather clearly, that attacking white males may not be a good strategy for equality. Though it may be mostly accurate, it has the tendency to alienate the group that has to give up the most in order to end racial discrimination, in very real fiscal and social ways.

  My biggest fear is that Mr. Supple, who undoubtedly cares about ending racism, as most of us do, is acting unconsciously to protect his privilege. One does not file a law suit unless one feels attacked. I hope that his anger is not motivating his actions, but I fear that it is. Many groups have the right to feel enraged by discrimination. White men are not one of them. We should feel responsible.

  Nuriel Heckler
  rightbedone.blogspot.com