It may feel like the safest option among the minefield of language and politics we all traverse, but I’d argue the term - for all its seeming inoffensiveness - is not just deeply harmful, it’s inaccurate. Now, folks use the term “underrepresented” instead. It doesn’t take a lot of social awareness to cringe at that term today. Remember when media outlets and academia used to refer to socially marginalized groups as “ nonwhites”? It makes the real problem more visible, and puts the responsibility of change on the discriminators and the systems that enable and trap them. “Underrecognized,” on the other hand, invites us to address the behavior driving underrepresentation: a lack of recognition.Then, it winks knowingly should this group not manage to beat the odds, again. “Underrepresented” also suggests that the solution to inequity is for leaders to place marginalized social groups into very visible positions while simultaneously failing to give them the tools needed to overcome individual and systemic biases.Instead, it puts the onus on the socially marginalized person. Nwangwu argues that “underrepresented” fails because it shifts our focus away from the leaders, the institutions, and the systems that have the power to sustainably change the status quo.Chloé Nwangwu argue that “underrecognized” is more accurate than - and a more productive alternative to - the word “underrepresented.” In this article, brand strategist and visibility expert N.
0 kommentar(er)
