MetroFocus: February 14, 2023

>>> PRONOUNS, WOKENESS, MICROAGGRESSIONS.

IF YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT BEING CANCELED FOR SAYING THE WRONG THING, DON'T BE.

TONIGHT, WE'LL TEACH YOU HOW TO TALK ABOUT RACE, GENDER THE RIGHT WAY, EVEN IF YOU DON'T KNOW ALL THE TERMS, AS "METROFOCUS" STARTS RIGHT NOW.

♪♪ >>> THIS IS "METROFOCUS," WITH RAFAEL PI ROMAN, JACK FORD, AND JENNA FLANAGAN.

>>> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III, FILOMEN M. D'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION, THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND, BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ, BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG, AND BY -- >>> GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

I'M JENNA FLANAGAN.

CANCEL CULTURE, PRONOUNS, MICROAGGRESSIONS, WOKENESS -- WHY HAS IT BECOME SO COMPLICATED TO TALK ABOUT WHO WE ARE AND THOSE WHO ARE DIFFERENT FROM US?

AND WHY DO WE SPEND SO MUCH TIME WORRYING ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF SAYING THE WRONG THING?

WHILE MANY OF US ARE STILL ADJUSTING TO ALL OF THE NEW TERMS BEING UTILIZED TO MAKE OTHERS FEEL RESPECTED AND SEEN, TO EXPERT LEGAL MINDS FROM NYU HAVE WRITTEN A NEW BOOK TO TRY TO HELP US ALL OUT.

NOW, THE BOOK TITLED "SAY THE RIGHT THING: HOW TO TALK ABOUT IDENTITY, DIVERSITY, AND JUSTICE" IS RESEARCH BACK WORK FILLED WITH STRATEGIES AND SUGGESTIONS ON HOW TO EMBRACE TOUGH CONVERSATIONS ABOUT RACE, GENDER, AND IDENTITY WITH THOSE WE LOVE AND WITH THOSE WE MIGHT HAVE STRONG DISAGREEMENTS WITH.

JOINING ME NOW TO TALK ABOUT THIS NEW BOOK AND THE LARGER ISSUES IT TACKLES IS KENJI YOSHINO, THE COAUTHOR OF "SAY THE RIGHT THING: HOW TO TALK ABOUT IDENTITY, DIVERSITY, AND JUSTICE" AND THE CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN PROFESSOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AT NYU SCHOOL OF LAW.

WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

>> THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME, JENNA.

>> ON SUCH A COMPLICATED AND SENSITIVE, REALLY, SUBJECT, FIRST I WANT TO START WITH, WHY ARE YOU THE PERSON TO HELP NARRATE AND WALK US THROUGH THIS?

>> I HAVE BEEN WORKING IN THE DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION FIELD FOR A COUPLE DECADES NOW, AND MY CENTER FOR DIVERSITY, INCLUSION, AND BELONGING HAS BEEN IN FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS.

ONE OF THE THING WES STRUGGLE OVER AND OVER AGAIN WITH PEOPLE IS PEOPLE SAYING, I'M SO TERRIFIED I'M GOING TO GET CANCELED.

SO TERRIFIED I'M GOING TO SAY THE WRONG THING AND HURT SOMEBODY I KNOW.

WILL YOU HELP?

WE RESEARCHED TO HELP FIND A TOOL KIT TO HELP WITH THE ISSUES, COULDN'T FIND IT AND THEREFORE DECIDED TO WRITE IT OURSELVES.

>> I DO WONDER WHO THE BOOK IDEALLY -- WHO THE INTENDED AUDIENCE IS, BECAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE ON THE NYU CAMPUS, YOU DEFINITELY COME INTO CONTACT WITH A LARGE ARRAY OF YOUNG PEOPLE, COLLEGE STUDENTS, AND BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT DEMOGRAPHICS THAT ARE FEELING, PERHAPS, A LITTLE CONFUSED AND SOME ANXIETY ABOUT SAYING THE WRONG THING NOW.

>> I THINK IT'S ALL OF US, RIGHT?

I THINK EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US FEELS LIKE THEY COULD TURN AROUND THE CORN INTER SE THE WRONG THING AND GET CANCELED FOR THAT.

SO NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE, I THINK THAT PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY IMAGINE THAT THIS IS FOR THE SIS GENDER HETEROSEXUAL YOUNG MAN TO TEACH HIM TO BE A BETTER ALLY, BUT AS AN ASIAN GAY MAN I WORRY ABOUT MISGENDERING A COLLEAGUE OR BEING A POOR ALLY TO WOMEN.

OUR THOUGHT IS ALL OF US IN SOCIETY HAVE SOME BUCKET OF ADVANTAGES AND SOME BUCKET OF DISADVANTAGES, AND WHEN WE'RE TALKING ACROSS THAT DIVIDE WHERE WE HAVE THE ADVANTAGE, WHERE WE'RE THE AL LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE SCARED OF SAYING THE WRONG THING, SO OFTEN SO SCARED THAT WE'RE GOING TO OPT OUT OF CONVERSATIONS ALL TOGETHER.

AND WHAT THIS BOOK IS TRYING TO DO IS PUT YOUR ARM AROUND YOU, BE A FRIEND, A COACH, AND GET YOU THROUGH IT SO YOU STAY IN THE CONVERSATION AND LIVE UP TO THE VALUES OF CREATING A MORE INCLUSIVE CULTURE.

>> SPEAKING OF CREATING A MORE INCLUSIVE CULTURE, IF YOU GO BACK IN HISTORY, THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS TIMES LANGUAGE AND CULTURE CHANGED AND DEVELOPED.

IS THERE SOMETHING UNIQUE ABOUT THIS MOMENT WE'RE IN, OR IS THIS JUST PART OF THE EXPERIENCE OF LIVING?

>> I LOVE THAT QUESTION.

I DO THINK THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT HAS SHIFTED OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS OR SO, WHICH IS THAT I THINK WE ARE EXPERIENCING WHAT THE WRITER MATT IGLESIAS CALLS THE GREAT AWAKENING, AND I MEAN WOKE NOT IN ITS PEJORATIVE SENSE, BUT AFFIRMING SENSE.

PEOPLE ARE WAKING UP.

I THINK WHAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS IS NONBLACK PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BLACK LIVES MATTER PROTESTS AFTER THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD.

MEN ARE GOING TO THE WOMEN'S RIGHTS MARCH ON WASHINGTON.

STRAIGHT AND CIS GENDERS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ALLIES BUT WE'VE SEEN AN UPTICK.

ONE OF THE THINGS I SEE IN THE DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION FIELD IS DOMINANT GROUPS ARE STEP UP TO BE ALLIES BUT SOMETIMES LACK THE TOOLS TO BE AN EFFECTIVE ALLY AND ALLYSHIP, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BOOK IS ALL ABOUT.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR ANSWER, WHEN YOU TOUCHED ON WOKE AND HOW IT'S BECOME A PEJORATIVE TERM, BUT IS IT IMPORTANT TO UNPACK WHAT HAVE BECOME NEW TERMS "WOKE" AND "CANCEL CULTURE" AND GIVE THE READER THE ETYMOLOGY OF THEM AS WELL?

SOME PEOPLE, ALL THEY'VE HEARD IS THE WORD WOKE AS A PEJORATIVE AND DON'T KNOW THAT WORD ORIGINALLY WHERE IT CAME FROM AND WHAT THE MEANING WAS.

SAME GOES FOR CANCEL CULTURE AS WELL.

>> I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT.

OUR METHODOLOGY IN THE BOOK IS RATHER THAN GOING WORD BY WORD AND GIVING PEOPLE A DICTIONARY OF TERMINOLOGY.

WHAT WE TRY TO DO INSTEAD IS WHAT WE THINK OF AS CORE VALUES OF DIVERSITY INCLUSION, WHICH IS RESILIENCY AND KOOURS.

THE LIST IS ALWAYS GOING TO KEEP GROWING AS YOU NOTED SO RATHER THAN GIVING PEOPLE NEW WORDS AND SORT OF PREACHING TO THEM, I THINK THE BETTER STRATEGY IS SAY, LET'S GIVE YOU THE MIND SET, RIGHT, OR THE SKILL SET IN ORDER TO GO FORTH IN THE WORLD, AND WHENEVER YOU COME UP AGAINST ONE OF THESE WORDS, WHENEVER YOU'RE USING THEM INCORRECTLY OR INAPPROPRIATELY, YOU CAN HAVE THE RESILIENCE TO TAKE THAT IN, AND HAVE THE CURIOSITY TO RESEARCH IT ON YOUR OWN.

>> BEFORE WE GET DEEPER IN THE BOOK, I WANT TO ASK FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE HOW YOU VIEW THIS THING WE'VE COME TO CALL CANCEL CULTURE.

BECAUSE FOR SOME PEOPLE IT'S SOMETHING TO GENUINELY FEAR, AND FOR OTHER PEOPLE IT'S PERHAPS NOT AS BIG OF A DEAL AS IT'S MADE OUT TO BE.

BUT I'M WONDERING WHERE YOU COME DOWN ON THAT.

>> I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS BECOME MORE NUANCED IN THE WAY WE TALK ABOUT CANCEL CULTURE.

BECAUSE I WANT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING CANCELED.

FOR SOME INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE ENGAGE IN THE TRULY EGREGIOUS BEHAVIOR, I THINK CANCEL CULTURE IS APPROPRIATE.

I WOULD FRAME IT AS CONSEQUENCE CULTURE.

YOU DID SOMETHING TERRIBLE, WOUNDED A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE, AND YOU'RE BEARING THE COSTS OF THAT.

BUT FOR THE VAST SUPER MAJORITY OF PEOPLE, THESE ARE PEOPLE OF GOODWILL WHO ARE TRYING TO GET BETTER.

CANCEL CULTURE IS SOMETHING I'D LIKE US TO PUT A PAUSE ON AND MOVE ON.

ONE OF THE MAIN MANTRAS OF THE BOOK IS WE WANT TO MOVE PEOPLE FROM THE CANCEL CULTURE TO A COACHING CULTURE.

OUR CONCERN CAN CANCEL CULTURE IS FIRST THAT IT'S OVERLY PUNITIVE AND SECOND DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY TOOLS TO GET BETTER.

IF YOU'RE CANCELED YOU'RE OSTRACIZED.

IT'S OVER.

YOU'RE NOT BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO DIFFERENTLY IN THE FUTURE.

OUR COACHING CULTURE IS THE SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF THE BOOK THAT SAYER THIS IS LIKE LEARNING A LANGUAGE.

RATHER THAN TAKING THIS SHAMING APPROACH, WE WANT TO TAKE A SHAME-FREE APPROACH THAT MOVES US AWAY FROM CANCELLATION AND TOWARDS A GROWTH MIND SET THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE BETTER BEHAVIORS IN THE FUTURE.

>> OF COURSE I'M ASSUMING THERE WILL ALSO BE PEOPLE WHO PUSH BACK AND SAY, IT'S NOT MY JOB TO TEACH, BUT THAT'S WHERE, I'M ASSUMING, THIS BOOK WOULD COME IN.

>> THAT'S 100% RIGHT, AND WE COSIGN THAT STATEMENT OF IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE AFFECTED PERSON, THE PERSON WHO'S BEEN HARMED IN THE INTERACTION TO EDUCATE THE ALLY.

ONE OF THE REASONS WE WROTE THIS BOOK IS PEOPLE KEPT COMING TO US, THROUGH STORY -- AFTER THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD, A BLACK COLLEAGUE COMES TO ME AND SAYS, THIS IS LIKE TELLING MY 40 BEST FRIENDS, RIGHT, WHO APPARENTLY HAVE JUST WOKEN UP FROM A 400-YEAR COMA ALL ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST 400 YEARS.

I'M IN TRAUMA.

I'M EXHAUSTED.

THE LAST THING I NEED TO DO IS GIVE OUT READING LISTS AND SYLLABI AND COACH PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.

ANOTHER REASON WE WROTE THIS BOOK IS TO SAY, PLEASE, PLEASE, DON'T GO TO THE AFFECTED PERSON.

THERE ARE RESOURCES OUT THERE.

IT'S A NATURAL INSTINCT TO SAY, I HAVE A BLACK FRIEND.

I SHOULD TALK TO MOMENTUM AND EDUCATE MYSELF FROM A PERSON WHO HAS A LIVED EXPERIENCE.

BUT WHEN THAT PERSON IS AN AFFECTED PERSON, YOU AS AN ALLY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO EXHAUST OTHERS.

HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS.

HAVE THEM WITH PROFESSIONALS, LIKE US, WHO BOTH BY VOCATION AND INTEREST ARE RAISING OUR HANDS AND SAYING, WE WOULD LOVE TO GUIDE YOU ALONG THIS PATH, BUT DON'T BURDEN THE PERSON YOU'RE OSTENSIBLY TRYING TO HELP.

>> AND AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE BOOK VERY SHORTLY, BUT I'M WONDERING, WHAT ROLE DO YOU THINK SOCIAL MEDIA PLAYS IN ALL THIS?

>> IT HAS SUCH A MULTIPLIER EFFECT.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE SO FEARFUL OF WHEN THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT CANCEL CULTURE IS A SOCIAL MEDIA PHENOMENON.

SO IN A PRE-SOCIAL MEDIA WORLD, I THINK WE HAD MUCH MORE CONFIDENCE THAT WE COULD WORK IT OUT.

EVEN IF WE STEPPED IN IT AND SAID THE WRONG THING OR DID THE WRONG THING, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO WALK THE HALLWAYS IN OUR WORKPLACE AND MAKE IT RIGHT AND TO HAVE THE ONE-ON-ONE OR ONE-ON-10 CONVERSATIONS THAT WOULD BE APOLOGETIC AND ALLOW US TO REHABILITATE OURSELVES.

BUT SOCIAL MEDIA JUST AMPLIFIES THE MAGNITUDE OF THIS BY, YOU KNOW, MANY SORT OF ORDERS OF INTENSITY AND MAGNITUDE SUCH THAT WHEN YOU MAKE AN ERROR, YOU REALLY DO FEEL LIKE YOU DON'T HAVE A SECOND CHANCE, AND HOW ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO ENGAGE WITH THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SWARMING YOU AND CANCELING YOU?

SO IT MAKES A KIND OF BRIBE BEHIND THIS BOOK, WHICH IS TO SUBSTITUTE A CULTURE OF COMPASSION AND COACHING FOR A CULTURE OF CANCELLATION THAT MUCH MORE URGENT.

>> SO NOW I KIND OF WANT TO GET INTO THE BOOK, AND ONE OF THE THINGS I FOUND SO INTERESTING WAS THERE'S A PART WHERE YOU WRITE ABOUT, AT THE BEGINNING, WELCOME TO THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF DISCOMFORT.

AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD SORT OF EXPLAIN TO THE AUDIENCE WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> YES, WE TAKE THIS TERM FROM THE PSYCHOLOGIST JENNIFER RICHARDSON, AND SHE POINTS OUT, OFTENTIMES WHEN WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IDENTITY, WE FEEL INTENSELY UNCOMFORTABLE AS THE ALLY.

I THINK ABOUT A STORY WHERE WE WERE COACHING A CEO, AND THE CEO WAS TALKING ABOUT SOME ISSUE RELATING TO GENDER DYNAMICS IN HIS WORKPLACE.

HE SORT OF GAVE SOME RESPONSES AND THEN SORT OF STUMBLED HIS WAY THROUGH IT.

AFTERWARDS WE WERE DEBRIEFING WITH HIM AND HE SAID, WHY AM I FEELING SO UNCOMFORTABLE?

I FEEL AGGRESSIVELY DISTRESSED.

WE SAID, MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT QUESTION.

MAYBE THE RIGHT QUESTION RATHER THAN, WHY AM I SO UNCOMFORTABLE NOW, MAYBE IT'S, WHY HAVE I NOT BEEN COMFORTABLE UNTIL NOW?

MAYBE THE ANSWER FOR POWERFUL PEOPLE IN SOCIETY,S THAT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CONVERSATION HAS BORE ALL OF THE DISCOMFORT.

IT'S BEEN THE RACIAL MINORITIES OF COLOR, THE WOMEN, THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY THAT HAS BORE THE DISCOMFORT ABOUT RACE, GENDER, LGBTQ ISSUES, DISABILITY, NEURODIVERSITY, WHAT HAVE YOU.

THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF DISCOMFORT IS TO SAY, IT'S NOT LIKE ALL THIS DISCOMFORT IS ON THE ALLY.

IT'S JUST THAT IT'S NOW BEING BORE EVENLY.

WHAT MIGHT FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE TO ME AS A MAN HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT GENDER MIGHT NOT BE DISPROPORTIONATE.

IT MAY BE THE FAIR SHARE OF WHAT I SHOULD BE BEARING IN THE CONVERSATION, BECAUSE PRIOR TO THAT, MY POSITION AS A MAN HAS LED ME TO BE CURIOUS AND ATTEMPT TO -- THE ISSUES THAT I DON'T HAVE A LIVED EXPERIENCE IN SPECIFICALLY, THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING A WOMAN.

>> SO, YOU SORT OF TOUCHED ON MY OTHER QUESTION THAT WOULD GO ALONG WITH THIS, WHICH IS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD WE WANT TO DEMOCRATIZE DISCOMFORT?

WHY WOULD YOU WANT SOMEONE ELSE TO FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE?

SHOULDN'T WE GO BACK TO A PLACE WHERE EVERYONE FELT COMFORT?

BECAUSE THERE IS A LARGE PART OF THE POPULATION WHO FEELS THAT WAY.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S EVER BEEN TRUE, RIGHT, AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET TO WHERE WE NEED TO GET AS AN INCLUSIVE SOCIETY WITHOUT EXPERIENCING THAT DISCOMFORT.

SO TO TAKE THOSE POINTS UP IN TURN, I DON'T THINK IT'S BEFOREN TRUE, RIGHT, THAT THERE'S BEEN NO DISCOMFORT, SAY IN MY CLASSROOMS OR MY TEACHING OR MY RESEARCH ON THE BASIS OF GENDER.

I MIGHT NOT HAVE EXPERIENCED IT BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO BE ON THE DOMINANT SIDE OF THOSE EXCHANGES, BUT IT JUST MEANS I HAVEN'T BEEN UNCOMFORTABLE, BUT THE WOMEN IN MY CLASS HAVE BEEN UNCOMFORTABLE WHEN I INADVERTENTLY CALL ON MEN MORE THAN WOMEN OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

YOU HAVE TO BEAR THE DISCOMFORT, AND NOW WE'RE JUST SHARING THAT DISCOMFORT.

THE SECOND THING WOULD BE, IT'S ONLY BY SHARING THAT DISCOMFORT THAT WE CAN MOVE ON TO GET TO A BETTER PLACE, WHERE WE HAVE A CONVERSATION.

SO, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO BEAR THAT DISCOMFORT?

I SHOULD HAVE TO BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN A MORE EGALITARIAN AND JUST SOCIETY.

THAT'S WHY IN THE SUBTITLE WE INSISTED ON KEEPING THE WORD JUSTICE, BECAUSE THAT MORE JUST SOCIETY, THAT BELOVED COMMUNITY IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE AIMING TO ACHIEVE, AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME DISCOMFORT, UNFORTUNATELY, TO GET THERE.

>> JUST TO GO A LITTLE FURTHER ON THIS SUBJECT -- BECAUSE OF COURSE YOU WERE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT -- NOT THE DEMOCRATIZATION, BUT HOW IT'S SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY IS DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW.

AND AGAIN, FOR SOME PEOPLE THERE MIGHT ALSO BE THE SENSE, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT?

I HAD TO DEAL WITH DISCOMFORT WHEN I WAS STARTING MY CAREER OF COMING OF AGE.

SO IF I WAS ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT AND STOMACH IT AND JUST PUSH THROUGH, WHY CAN'T OTHER PEOPLE DO IT NOW?

>> YEAH, AND AGAIN, I HOPE I AND MY COAUTHOR, THE WONDERFUL DAVID GLASGOW, MY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, I HOPE HAVE A NUANCED ANSWER TO THAT.

BECAUSE ON THE ONE HAND, WE HAVE TO SAY EVERYBODY HAS SOME BUCKET OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES, AND SO THEREFORE EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THEMSELVES AS A RECIPIENT OF ALLYSHIP THEMSELVES.

SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE A CISGENDER STRAIGHT WHITE MAN DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVEN'T SUFFERED DISADVANTAGE.

THERE'S CLASS PRIVILEGE, PRIVILEGE ON THE BASIS OF BEING NEUROTYPICAL THAT YOU MAY NEVER HAVE HAD.

WE WANT TO BE VERY ATTENTIVE TO THAT.

DEALING WITH A INDIVIDUAL WHO HAPPENS TO BELONG TO AN OLDER GENERATION, I'M AWARE THAT RELATIVE TO THEM I HAVE AGE PRIVILEGE AND THEREFORE I SHOULD BE THEIR ALLY, RIGHT, WHEN SOMEBODY MAKES AN AGEIST COMMENT ABOUT THEM.

THAT'S THOUGHT NUMBER ONE.

THAT'S ON THE ONE HAND.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND I ALSO WANT US TO BE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT FALSE EQUIVALENCY.

IT'S JUST NOT THE SAME -- OR WE SHOULDN'T ASSUME THAT ALL FORMS OF THESE DISADVANTAGE ARE GOING TO BE THE SAME WEIGHT.

AGAIN, IN OUR CONSULTING AND COACHING WORK, WE ENCOUNTER AN INDIVIDUAL WHO SAID, I SUFFER FROM DISADVANTAGE, TOO, BECAUSE -- HE WAS GETTING UP AND MAKING A SPEECH BEFORE A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS, BECAUSE, OH, WHEN I WAS IN MY SCHOOL YEAR ABROAD, I WAS THE ODD YANKEE, RIGHT, IN MY ENGLISH INTERNSHIP IN THE UK.

I BASICALLY WAS LIKE, PLEASE DON'T EVER REPEAT THAT STORY AGAIN, RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT FORM OF DISADVANTAGE IS, LIKE, COMMENSURATE, RIGHT, WITH THE OTHER FORMS OF MUCH MORE SEDIMENTED AND HISTORICALLY REINFORCED THAT HAS BEEN IMPOSED ON THE BASIS OF RACE OR GENDER.

IT'S REALLY BOTH/AND.

YES, WE UNDERSTAND AS HUMAN BEINGS WE ALL HAVE VULNERABILITIES.

CURIOUS AND ATTENTIVE TO THAT.

BUT ALSO PART OF THE CURIOSITY AND PART OF GETTING IT RIGHT IS TO UNDERSTAND WE SHOULDN'T BE DRAWING FALSE EQUIVALENCIES.

>> I'M WONDERING, BASED ON THE STORY YOU TOLD, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, I GUESS, OFFENDING A GROUP AND OFFENDING AN INDIVIDUAL.

BECAUSE SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE SEE HAPPENING A LOT IS PEOPLE MIGHT SAY, WELL, I HAVE A FRIEND WHO BELONGS TO THIS MARGINALIZED GROUP, AND THEY SAID IT'S FINE, SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY EVERYONE ELSE IS ASKING ME TO MAKE A CHANGE THAT MY GOOD FRIEND SAYS DOESN'T BOTHER THEM.

>> I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE BOTH THE INDIVIDUAL LENS AND GROUP LENS IN MIND.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADOPT THE GROUP LENS -- I THINK THIS IS WHAT TRIGGERED THE QUESTION FROM MY LAST ANSWER, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES WHERE DISADVANTAGE COMES FROM IS A GROUP HAS BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY, AND THAT'S WHERE THE SEDIMENTED DISADVANTAGE COMES FROM, A LONG HISTORY OF TREATING A PARTICULAR GROUP THIS WAY.

AT THE SAME TIME WE WANT TO BE AWARE THERE'S A LOT OF INTERNAL DIVERSITY WITHIN THE GROUP, AND WE WANT TO BE CURIOUS AND ATTENTIVE TO THE FACT THAT INDIVIDUALS MIGHT RESPOND DIFFERENTLY.

SO WE ACTUALLY TRY TO RESPOND TO THIS BY SAYING, REPLACE THE GOLDEN RULE WITH THE PLATINUM RULE.

THE GOLD RULE IS I'M GOING TO HELP THE OTHER PERSON AS I WOULD LIKE TO BE HELP IN THE THIS SITUATION, WHERE AS THE PLATINUM RULE IS I'M GOING HELP THIS PERSON AS THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE HELPED, NOT AS I WOULD.

IMAGINING YOURSELF INTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S SKIN IS A PARTICULARLY FRAUGHT ONE.

RATHER THAN RELYING ON WHAT YOU THINK OR WHAT YOUR FRIEND SAID, EXHIBIT THE CURIOSITY AND ASK THE QUESTION OF, HOW CAN I BE YOUR ALLY IN THIS SITUATION?

IF THAT PERSON SAYS, THIS HAD A REALLY NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ME, THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR TO YOU STEP IN AND TRY TO HELP THEM AS THEY WOULD WISH TO BE HELPED RATHER THAN FALSIFYING OR UNDERMINING THEIR EXPERIENCE BY SAYING, I HAVE ANOTHER PERSON OF THE GROUP WHO FEELS DIFFERENTLY ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

>> TELL ME ABOUT THE STRATEGIES IN THE BOOK AND WHERE THE PHRASE CONVERSATIONAL TRAPS COMES INTO PLAY.

>> YEAH, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, BECAUSE IT TAKES US RIGHT TO THE BEGINNING OF THE BOOK, WHERE THE FIRST SORT OF PRINCIPLE IS BEWARE THE FOUR CONVERSATIONAL TRAPS.

WHAT WE'VE NOTICED OVER TIME IS WHEN PEOPLE ARE DRAWN INTO IDENTITY CONVERSATIONS, WHICH IS ANY ISSUE THAT PERTAINS TO A SOCIAL IDENTITY, THEY FALL INTO ONE OF FOUR VERY COMMON TRAPS.

WE CALL IT A.D.D.A.

BEHAVIORS.

AVOID, DEFLECT, DENY, AND ATTACK.

LET'S SAY A COLLEAGUE STOPS COMING TO YOUR HOLIDAY PARTIES, AND INITIALLY YOU THINK IT'S A SCHEDULING ISSUE, BUT YOU NOTICE IT'S FIVE YEARS IN A ROW.

SO FINALLY YOU SIT DOWN AND SAY, WHAT'S GOING ON?

AND THEY SAY, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE COMING TO YOUR PARTIES BECAUSE THEY'RE SO HOMOGENEOUS AND THERE'S NOBODY WHO LOOKS LIKE ME AND I FIND YOU'RE INSULAR IN THE PEOPLE YOU INVITE TO YOUR PARTIES.

IF I GOT THAT KIND OF FEEDBACK I WOULD BE HORRIFIED, AND I KNOW MY INSTINCT WOULD BE TO GO TO ONE OF THE A.D.D.A.

RESPONSE.

AVOID, LOOK AT THE TIME, I CAN'T TALK.

DEFLECT, I APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK, BUT I DON'T APPRECIATE THE TONE.

TONE POLICING, CHANGING THE SUBJECT FROM THE SUBSTANCE TO THE WAY IN WHICH IT WAS PUT.

DENY IS, I THINK YOU'RE WRONG.

LOOK AT MY LAST GUEST LIST.

LOOK AT ALL THE PEOPLE I INVITE LAST TIME, AND FINALLY ATTACK IS, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE EVERYTHING ABOUT RACE?

BRINGING WAR INTO THE CAMP.

JUST ATTACKING THEM.

WE UNDERSTAND THESE ARE NATURAL DEFENSES WHEN YOU FEEL DEFENSIVE.

I IN THAT SITUATION FEEL, IT'S NOT JUST AS THOUGH I MADE A MISTAKE, I'M TOLD I'M A BAD PERSON.

A RACIST, SEXIST, HOMOPHOBE, TRANSPHOBE.

TAKE A BREATH, SAY I'M GOING TO ADOPT A MIND SET.

I'M NOT GOOD AT PRONOUNS, RACE CONVERSATIONS.

YOU KNOW, TAKING OFFRAMPS WHEN YOU NEED TO SAYING, I'M NOT BRINGING MY BEST SELF TO THIS CAN HAVE.

CAN I SYNC BACK UP WITH YOU TOMORROW WHEN I'M FEELING MORE RESILIENT AND CAN HAVE A CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION?

OF COURSE YOU BETTER DO THAT OR IT'S AVOIDANCE.

SO THE WHOLE BOOK IS REALLY AN ATTEMPT TO HELP YOU AVOID THOSE FOUR CONVERSATIONAL TRAPS, AND WE TALK ABOUT RESILIENCY AND CURIOSITY, BUT ALSO ABOUT HOW TO DISAGREE RESPECTFULLY, APOLOGIZE AUTHENTICALLY, ADOPTING THE PLATINUM RULE, WHEN SOMEBODY IN GOOD FAITH MESSED UP, WE THINK PART OF THE GOOD ALLYSHIP IS HELPING THEM GROW PAST THEIR MISTAKE.

>> SPEAKING OF APOLOGIZING AUTHENTICALLY, CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH HOW YOU HANDLED A SITUATION IF YOU INADVERTENTLY STEPPED IN IT?

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST GLORIOUS CHAPTERS TO WRITE.

AMORPHOUS VERSUS SAYING, APOLOGIES ARE OPEN ENDED AND HUMAN CONVERSATIONS ARE NUANCED.

YOU WE CAN NEVER FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES FOR A SUCCESSFUL APOLOGY.

BUT AS IT TURNS OUT, THERE ARE LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE WRITTEN SMART STUFF, WHETHER IN POP CULTURE, SOCIAL SCIENCE, OR THE HUMANITIES ABOUT WHAT MAKES A SUCCESSFUL APOLOGY.

WE THINK WE CAN DISTILL IT DOWN TO FOUR ELEMENTS, THE FOUR "R"s. THERE'S RECOGNITION, RESPONSIBILITY, ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT YOU DID WRONG.

THERE'S REMORSE, SHOWING CONTRITION, AND THEN REDRESS, UNDERSTANDING THAT APOLOGIES DON'T JUST END SOMETHING, THEY BEGIN A FUTURE COURSE OF CONDUCT.

YOU'RE NOT JUST CLOSING A DOOR ON THE PAST YOU'RE SAYING IN THE FUTURE, I'LL TRY TO EXTEND MY BEST EFFORTS TO NOT REPEAT THIS.

IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE APOLOGIES WE SEE EVERY DAY IN THE NEWS -- I'M SURE YOU SEE THIS MORE THAN I DO EVERY DAY IN THE DAY-TO-DAY NEWS CYCLE.

-- USUALLY SOMEONE FAILS ONE OF THE FOUR.

SOMEONE WILL SAY, IF I DID IT, I'M SORRY.

WHICH DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THE HARM.

OR, WHATEVER I DID I'M SORRY.

THAT DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THE HARM.

I'M SORRY, BUT I WAS AMBIENT TWEETING.

ARE YOU NEVER GOING TAKE AMBIEN AGAIN?

IF YOU LOOK AT THE APOLOGIES IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, YOU WILL USUALLY FIND THEY FAIL ONE OF THOSE FOUR ELEMENTS.

THE FLIP OF THAT IS IF YOU ADHERE TO THOSE FOUR ELEMENTS WHEN YOU'RE SINCERELY TRYING TO APOLOGIZE TO SOMEBODY, THAT'S A GOOD KIND OF RULE OF THE ROAD.

THE LAST THING I'LL SAY ON POLLS IS AGAIN, WE HAVE A LOT OF COMPASSION.

IT'S REALLY WE SEE THIS INSTINCT IN OURSELVES OF WHY PEOPLE ENGAGE IN IF APOLOGIES OR BUT APOLOGIES, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO TRY TO DO IS LIMIT THEIR OWN VULNERABILITY AND EXPOSURE.

IF I HAD DONE YOU WRONG AND APOLOGIZE, IF I APOLOGIZES, I'M ADMITTING ERROR.

WILL JENNA PILE ON?

WILL I NEVER HEAR THE END OF IT?

I TRY TO LIMIT MY EXPOSURE BY SAYING, IF I DID IT, OR BUT, BUT THEN I DON'T SATISFY IF WE TRY TO ARGUE THE GOAL OF PRESERVING MY SELF-ESTEEM OR ALTERNATIVELY SINCERELY APOLOGIZING.

I'M GOING TO RISK BEING VULNERABLE IN ORDER TO GIVE YOU THE AUTHENTIC APOLOGY YOU DESERVE.

>>> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III, FILOMEN M. D'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION, THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND, BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ, BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG,