The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2021

42 JULY-AUGUST 2021 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL meets staunch resistance from the deputy chief of mission (DCM) when implementing a new departmentwide policy, forcing her to check and double-check to see if there are excep- tions. The DCM finally relents when the white male manage- ment counselor convinces him this actually is the new policy. Or, in another example, an RSO convenes a “core” Emergency Action Committee (EAC) meeting, that excludes the Black community liaison office coordinator and the female economic section chief yet includes other white male noncore members. A Culture of Exclusion Microaggressions, especially microinvalidations and microinsults, within the workplace are easily overlooked, which enhances their perpetrators’ power to maintain dominance and keep minority employees marginalized. Recent studies of microaggressions aimed at the LGBTQ community provide a framework for understanding the ways that social, cultural and ideological paradigms of normalcy are shaped by those with power and define notions of what is “normal.” Experts suggest that microaggressions typically have three components: perpetration, context and response. Perpetration refers to the type of microaggression and the relative power differential between the perpetrator and target. Context refers to the setting in which the microaggression takes place, be it among friends or loved ones; in an institutional setting, such as a university, a house of worship or the workplace; or in interac- tions with governmental bodies at any level. Perpetration and context are important, but it is the emotional, cognitive and behavioral response that is of most concern. Sue and Spanierman’s research indicates that when sub- jected to microaggression, people engage in intense self- questioning, trying to figure out what is going on before settling on a response. Because microaggressions are subtle and often ambiguous, victims may spend an undue amount of time pon- dering, “Did this really happen?” This is classic “gaslighting,” a form of psychological manipulation in which the victim is made to believe that “It’s all in my head.” While it is well documented that overt discrimination detrimentally affects mental and physical health, quality of life and the self-esteem of victims, microaggressions can also place considerable psychological, emotional and physical stress on a victim. Employees who fall into multiple, intersectional catego- ries (e.g., Black and gay) can be expected to experience even greater self-doubt in such situations. Studies have shown that people ultimately respond to microaggressions in one of two ways: engagement or disen- gagement. If they opt to engage, they may carry out direct or indirect confrontation with the perpetrator, advocate on behalf of others and become active in public awareness initiatives. All too often, however, unsure of themselves and their place in an organization, victims or bystanders do the opposite: they disengage. They keep their heads down, avoid uncomfortable situations, and withdraw emotionally and psychologically from the organization. It is not surprising, then, that experiencing microaggres- sions can have a negative impact on job performance and pro- ductivity, for they are associated with a host of consequences: anxiety, depression, a feeling of helplessness or inadequacy, loss of motivation, trouble sleeping, intrusive thoughts and a decreased ability to focus. In many cases, alcohol abuse or other unhealthy behaviors can ensue. Disengaged, under- performing and feeling that they don’t belong—that they are abnormal, incompetent or not trusted—some victims of micro- aggression ultimately separate voluntarily or involuntarily from the organization. Toward a More Inclusive Culture While individuals may suffer personally and professionally, ultimately it is the organization that pays the price for tolerat- ing a noninclusive work environment. Fortunately, our foreign affairs agencies have not been the exclusive domain for straight “pale, male and Yale” employees for many years. And while there is still a long way to go, our workforce increasingly reflects the full diversity of America. However, our push to build on this progress will be for naught if we don’t do more to create a truly inclusive culture in which diversity—in all its forms—can take root and thrive. So, what can we do to build a more inclusive culture? Disengaged, underperforming and feeling that they don’t belong, some victims of microaggression ultimately separate voluntarily or involuntarily from the organization.