Rules for Privileged Straight White Males

By Michael Quinn Patton

The social justice issues being addressed in our world at this turbulent time are mammoth, reflecting long-standing structural and systemic racism. Privileged straight white males have been guardians of such systems, purveyors of it, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and have benefited from it, including myself. This is about the transition from Straight White Males RULE to rules for straight white males. What follows is lengthy and detailed, so much so that I am posting it into parts. The rules (posting Part 2) require considerable context (Part 1), which contributes to the length.

Part 1: Context

Part 2. The Rules

Part 1: Context

Rita Fierro challenge (June 4, EvalTalk):

“So, for you guys, are you willing to discover and educate us on how white men can confront white men effectively? What have you learned? What has worked? Has *anything* worked?...

“Thank you for getting your white boy. And when you figure out how to get through to white boys, would you share your findings with the rest of us who are TIRED of banging our head against a crooked wall?”

MQP Response

What I’ve learned is the need for a transition from Straight White Males RULE to rules for straight white males. I speak about this transition as an old straight white male who has resisted it, experienced it, and is still working on it, personally and societally. In working on it, I’ve come to understand that this involves doing what Rita has asked: engaging with other straight white males.

So I take Rita’s question to be serious, and my response is serious -- not a joke, not tongue-in-cheek, not sarcastic, and not another “awful musical rendition.” Whether it turns out to be bullshit you’ll each judge for yourself.

Sources and caveats

1. New rules but not my rules. The rules for privileged straight white males are not my rules. I’m reporting what I’ve come to understand are the rules from many sources I’ve encountered, including postings on the EvalTalk listserv. I take responsibility for the way in which the rules are worded and interpreted here, but substantively these are not rules I’ve made up. Many of you reading this have contributed to them.

2. For evaluators but not limited to evaluators. The rules as reported here are not limited to straight white male evaluators though the examples and explanations I will offer will reflect my evaluation experiences and thinking, and my encounters with other straight white male evaluators, including postings to EvalTalk.

3. Why rules?

a. Rules focus on behavior. Time is of the essence. Transformation is urgent. Education, dialogue, discussion, and deepening understanding are all worthy and desirable processes and outcomes, but the bottom line is changed behavior and systems change. After decades of trying to educate men about sexual harassment, the movement has come to focus on enforcing behavioral rules. Men may or may not “get it” about what constitutes sexual harassment, but acceptable behavioral rules are now stated and increasingly enforced because of the consequences and penalties for those institutions that do not enforce the rules. That’s both individual and systems change, the two being mutually reinforcing.

b. The transition from Straight White Males RULE to rules for straight white males has to be, at least in part, about rules: what the new rules are, who makes them, and how they are enforced. Rules will get the attention of straight white males because they know about rules in their role, formal or informal, known or unknown, as rulers, and have enjoyed a world where rules are for others not them. They will therefore take umbrage at being presented with new rules that are about them and that will at least get their attention, which, as those who engage with straight white males know, is a large part of the battle.

4. Rules not principles. I have spent a great deal of time in the last decade thinking about, distinguishing, and writing about rules versus principles. I’ve advocated a principles-focused evaluation approach for supporting innovations in complex dynamic systems. The first half of the book I did on Principles-Focused Evaluations is about the difference between rules and principles. Rules, as noted above, are simple and behavioral. A STOP sign means stop. No judgment is involved. No interpretation is necessary. STOP means stop. In sexual interactions NO means NO. Principles require judgment, contextual adaptation, interpretation, and thinking. Defensive driving is a principle. In sexual interactions, mutual consent is a principle. Because many appear to have difficulty interpreting and applying this principle, institutions, like universities, have had to convert the principle to a rule that where power and status imbalances exist, mutual consent is not possible and is therefore not a defense when allegations of harassment arise. One can hope that social justice and equity transformations usher in a principles-focused world based on mutual respect, valuing diversity, meaningful inclusion, shared power, and authentic equity for all – but in the interim, straight white males cannot be trusted to understand and appropriately interpret principles, so they need the concrete and unambiguous guidance provided by rules.

5. Assertive, even aggressive, tone and style. Remember this is an encounter between and among straight white males, especially, perhaps mostly, Western-culture straight white males. That is not a culture of subtlety, nuance, or sensitivity. It is a culture of aggression, assertiveness, domination, winning, and control (see any action movie or video game for confirmation). The formulation and aggressive tone of the rules reflect that culture. They will be off-putting to those who, appropriately, abhor that culture. Stating the rules in those cultural terms makes them less ambiguous and more attention-grabbing.

6. Standing Rock Inspiration. I take inspiration from several sources that I’ve encountered in deliberating on rules versus principles. One of the most notable is the set of rules formulated by Native American leaders who organized the Standing Rock protest against the oil pipeline. The Standing Rock Sioux and the Oceti Sakowin leaders had to deal with substantial numbers of white supporters coming to join the protest. They established rules for those supporters and created a training orientation to explain the rules. Adapted versions of some of these will be recognizable in some of the rules for straight white males. The diplomatic public version of the Standing Rock rules can be found here.

I’ve talked with several people who went through the training orientation at Standing Rock and the version they received was more concrete and assertive. Two examples as told to me:

  • Don’t make suggestions. You’re not here to offer advice. We’ve heard all the suggestions and advice. We know what we’re doing.

  • Do what you’re asked to do. Don’t ask why. If you’re asked to do it, it’s something we think needs to be done. If you’re here to help, do what you’re asked to do. If you don’t want to do what you’re asked to do, leave.

7. Personal experience informing the rules. As noted above, the rules for straight white males reflect my own ongoing journey as a privileged straight white male, some of which I’ve written about. This article in the American Journal of Evaluation appeared two decades ago as part of an AEA forum on “Some Framing Questions About Racism and Evaluation.” That forum provides one kind of baseline for where things were some 20+ years ago.

To get an up-to-date view of where evaluation has been and where it is now with regard to “the construction of race in and through evaluation,” Dr. Vidhya Shanker’s dissertation is essential reading (University of Minnesota , 2019).

8.Rules are inherently over-generalizations. We evaluators are trained to avoid, detect, and detest over-generalizations. Forget about it. Overgeneralization comes with the territory of rules. Nuances and variations in application come with principles. Rules, in contrast, are universal for those targeted. That’s part of the resistance and umbrage. Indeed, let me offer just such an overgeneralization as part of this context: most straight white males will see themselves as worthy exceptions to these rules because, as individuals, they know themselves to be different. Even though they may recognize the problem with other straight white males, the new rules don’t apply to them, or, even more self-delusional, they may assert and argue that they are already in full compliance. That sense of individuality, exceptionalism, and entitlement is the very reason that the rules must be stated as universal. One of the rules is that there are no exceptions to the rules. That applies to me as well.

9. Facilitation rules. Rita and I, with many others, share an interest in facilitating evaluation. She co-edited a volume of New Directions for Evaluation on “Evaluation and Facilitation.” She has written eloquently and insightfully, in my view, about “dancing with dynamic tensions” when facilitating. A common facilitation practice when beginning to work with a group is to establish shared norms and rules at the beginning of the process, posting them, and referring back to them periodically throughout the group’s work together. These rules for straight white males, in contrast, are not a matter for co-creation. They are, as you will see, to be presented as firm, absolute, and not up for discussion. They may or may not be understood, but they are to be complied with.

10. An incomplete list. I’ve offered 10 contextual considerations. I’ll offer 10 rules for privileged straight white males. The list is incomplete, a starting set (kindergarten level), far from exhaustive. Others may want to add their own rules. Bring them on.

Context conclusion

I noted above that in interacting with female colleagues and colleagues of color about what needs to be done to support a more just and equitable world, I have regularly been advised, indeed urged and instructed, that the greatest help I can offer is to take on other straight white males.

Many are reiterating this point at this time. Those calls for engagement, including on the EvalTalk listserv, are part of the context for the rules that follow in Part 2. Here is a powerful and moving example that appeared today (June 5) from Dax-Devlon Ross, an African- American police officer in “A Letter to My White Male Friends of a Certain Age.”

PART 2: Ten rules for engaging with systemic racism for straight white males

A starting place

How to begin? You are in conversation with a straight white male who is showing himself to be largely clueless. Look for an opportunity to ask, “Say, I’m curious if you know the new rules for straight white men?”

“Say what? What new RULES?”

“Well,” you explain, “rules change. You used to be allowed to smoke anywhere, even college classrooms. Now smoking is prohibited in public buildings. You’re probably aware that it is no longer acceptable in writing and even speaking, at least publicly, to use what was called the `universal masculine.’ People now say humankind instead of mankind. Instead of `all men are created equal’ it should be ‘all people are created equal.’ You can’t just say ‘he’ to mean everyone, you actually have to say ‘she or he, or they.’ That’s an example of a new rule.

“I understand some people don’t like it, some male people to be more precise, but if you don’t want to appear clueless and out-of-touch, you follow the rule. Most organizations have adopted that inclusive grammatical rule for all correspondence and reports.

“Now, that rule is fairly well known and widely adhered to, but I wonder if you know the other new rules. And, let me ask, do you want to know them? I ask because, right now, you can still claim ignorance. Once I tell you the rules, you don’t have that excuse. But if you’re curious….

Some such scenario sets the stage to introduce the new rules for privileged straight white males.

TEN RULES

1. Do not make general authoritative statements about the state of the world, or any parts of it (like evaluation). Do not pontificate in general authoritative terms about how things are and/or how things ought to be. An example would be to state unequivocally, as was recently done: “Evaluation is not a tool for social change.”

The appropriate way to express opinions is to preface those opinions with some conditional introduction like, “From my perspective,” “In my view,” or “Based on my experiences…..”

You do this not to alert others that you are expressing a personal opinion but to remind yourself of that fact because, straight white males often confuse their opinions about the world with how the world actually is because, in their arrogance, self-assurance, and cluelessness, they actually believe they speak truth and that others ought to feel privileged to hear their truth. So, it can be helpful to remind yourself that you are expressing an opinion not speaking truth by prefacing your opinions conditionally. Others already know that anything and everything you say is conditioned by your being a privileged straight white male. They don’t need to be reminded of that. You do.

Moreover, the sub-rule of this rule, is never add IMHO. By invoking that particular conditional, you are communicating not humility, but the exact opposite. The language of “my humble opinion” is arrogant, grating, insensitive, and infuriating because it tells the listener that you are the exact opposite of humble, but you think you can disguise your arrogance, insensitivity, and cluelessness with that juvenile phone text shorthand.

2. Don’t deny you are privileged. Privileged straight white males, which is all straight white males in a society that inherently privileges straight white maleness, understandably feel uncomfortable with having their privilege named and exposed. The Standing Rock guidance states: “Standing Rock challenges allies to be aware of their white privilege, and to occasionally be comfortable sitting in your own discomfort.” Protesting that you are not privileged simply demonstrates your cluelessness about your privileges and the systemic and structural nature of those privileges. Instead of resisting the privileged status, put your energy into thinking about and identifying the nature of your privilege. A simple example.

Growing up, my father paid me an allowance to mow the grass, shovel snow, and other “male” tasks. My sisters were required to do housework without pay because as housewives they would not be paid, so they should not come to expect to be paid for housework. I was exempt from housework. I was allowed to deliver newspapers to make money. My sisters were denied such opportunities.

In elementary school the black students regularly got detention for talking to each other in class, but the white students never did. Several detentions led to suspension; suspension led to failing a grade; being held back a grade and then another, led to dropping out of school; and onward into poverty and prison. Such are the small, trivial beginnings of disadvantage versus privilege that build and accumulate and become systemic and make you believe that you’ve earned the position of privilege. The rule: Don’t deny you are privileged. Understand your privileges. Search and you will find them, aplenty.

3. Avoid adding contingencies, explanations, conditionals, and limitations to your straight white male identity and corresponding privilege. What does that mean? Should you find yourself in a situation where people are introducing themselves, or in providing a context for something you write, you state, appropriately: “I am a privileged straight white male.” End the statement there. Full stop. Don’t rush to add: However…, But…, Nevertheless…, Despite that… or any of scores of such conditionals that communicate that you actually are not aware of the implications of being a privileged straight white male as you rush to explain away the very significance of that revelation. Your conditionals will simply reveal your cluelessness. Omitting the conditionals won’t eliminate your cluelessness. That would require adherence to rule number two. But omitting the conditionals would at least keep you from overtly exposing your cluelessness.

4. Don’t profess to understand the experiences of women and people of color. You don’t. I don’t. You can’t. I can’t. They know it. You and I need to know it. For example, you are rarely even aware that you are a straight white male. It scarcely, if ever, even enters your consciousness that whatever is happening at any moment is a consequence of and has to do with your being a straight white male. In contrast, women and people of color regularly explain that they are always aware of how their status, whatever it is, is present in the moment at some level in some way. Part of being privileged, indeed, a big part of being privileged, is not having to think about your identity as a straight white male and the privilege that comes with that identity.

5. “Speak to understand not to be heard.” This is another rule gently articulated by the Native American leaders who organized the protests against the pipeline at Standing Rock. Straight white males have a long history of dominating conversations, not listening, not asking questions, not listening, interrupting others, did I mention not listening, especially interrupting women and people of color, taking up too much air time, and being in love with hearing themselves talk. These tendencies flow from socialization as a privileged straight white male. These tendencies are not congenital, but become deeply embedded through reinforcement and practice. Learn to ask questions rather than make statements. Take an inquiry stance. You and I have nothing to teach about injustice, racism, and sexism. You and I have everything to learn.

Extra credit homework personal growth assignment for privileged straight white male evaluators: Read Vidhya Shanker’s (2019) dissertation on “the construction of race in and through evaluation,”

Read it appreciatively, to learn. This is not an evaluation assignment. It is a personal growth assignment. Read without critique, without judgment, without automatically agreeing or disagreeing. Don’t evaluate it. It has already been evaluated by her doctoral committee. Absorb it. Examine your reactions. Seek to understand. Ask clarifying questions. But don’t express opinions about it. You don’t actually understand enough to have opinions about it. A great leap forward would be to actually identify things you don’t understand and questions you have.

6. Don’t complain about political correctness, identity politics, affirmative action, intersectionality, diversity initiatives (Does that include me?), inclusion concerns (ditto), and equity (ditto). Just don’t. It’s tiresome and enraging.

7. Don’t ever complain that you are being treated unfairly. The world is not fair. Your sense of unfairness pales in comparison to the unfair challenges and obstacles faced by those on the front lines working against racism and for justice. During the protests about the murder of George Floyd, a major, I would even say dominant, theme in news interviews with black mayors, female mayors, black female mayors, and other mayors representing minority groups has been that twice as much is expected of them as of the white male mayors that they replaced and they get 10 times the criticism. When things go well, the successes are attributed to others; when things go badly, they get the full blame. Fair? African-Americans have twice the infection rates from the coronavirus as whites and twice the death rate from Covid-19. Job losses due to shutting down the economy are significantly greater for women and people of color. Poor people are significantly more affected by pollution of water, land, and air. The list goes on and on. These are indicators of systemic and structural injustice and unfairness.

8. Don’t whine about being misunderstood, misrepresented, and misinterpreted. In so complaining you simply demonstrate a deep, embarrassing cluelessness about your own actions and statements. Instead of lamenting your ill-treatment, think about how you presented yourself and what you said that has led to the reactions you have received that feel unfair. Don’t ask others to behave differently. Your only way to affect their reactions of others is for you to behave differently.

9. Focus on systemic and structural racism and injustice. It’s not about you personally as a privileged straight white male. It’s about the system that you are part of and are either upholding or working to change. These rules are about changing behaviors to change relationships, perspectives, dynamics, and boundaries to change systems. The affliction of being a privileged straight white male is making everything about you. You are a cog in the system. Get cognitive.

10. Don’t complain about these rules. Of course, you resist and detest such disrespectful, authoritarian, and demeaning rules. The very scope and depth of your anger at such rules is evidence of your long-standing privilege of not being subject to arbitrary and capricious rules. Four years ago, Philando Castile, a 32-year-old African American man, was stopped while driving and fatally shot by a police officer in Saint Paul, Minnesota. He was carefully following the rules he had learned about how black men should behave when pulled over by police for “driving while black.” At the time I was involved with a team in evaluating an African-American afterschool program in the inner city of St. Paul. Teachers and parents worked together to teach six, seven, eight, nine-year-old black boys the rules for how to behave to avoid racist retaliation by white teachers, white police, and white people generally. The teachers and parents struggled with how to offer their children a vision of opportunity and hope while alerting them to be careful and follow the rules, unfair rules, disrespectful rules, outrageous rules, but potentially lifesaving rules.

Conclusion

You don’t have to like the rules. You don’t have to agree with the rules. You just have to follow the rules. If you comply with, indeed master these rules, you may get to move on to principles: mutual respect, shared power, and authentic engagement. But first you have to complete kindergarten and demonstrate “proper” behavior.

Let me acknowledge the double-bind these rules put you in. Any protest about or resistance to the rules will be evidence of your privileged white male status and cluelessness. Complying with the rules may feel emasculating because you’re not used to such rules being imposed on you. The only way out of double-binds is a path that embraces both. Hate then rules but follow them so that you can move to the next level of principles-focused engagement. There are some lovely, welcoming people at that level who want to transcend injustice and will include you in that process. But you only gain entry to that level by demonstrating that you can comply with kindergarten rules. Aim high. Try for first grade.

Let me reiterate. There are still good folks willing to dialogue with you, try to help you see some light, deal with, even treat empathically your complaints, whining, assertions of truth, and general cluelessness. Until you’ve got these rules down and in compliance, when you encounter such folks, do them and the world a favor by not wasting their time with your nonsense. They have other more important things to do. Give them a break. Stay focused on following the rules.

Postscript: Rules for others

Stop reinforcing bad behavior by privileged straight white males by giving them attention. Two-year-olds learn to act out because it attracts attention so they act out more. Privileged straight white males revel the role of being misunderstood, misjudged, attacked, debated, and otherwise engaged. That’s their adrenaline rush. You feed it. Don’t be diverted from your important work by these distractions from those who don’t get it. Don’t beat your head up against the wall. It hurts you and doesn’t help them. Give them the rules and walk away. If they encounter the rules often enough, they may actually be forced to consider why these rules keep coming their way. That could be a start.