Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Segregating group discussions about racialised issues

124 replies

Sparklybutold · 24/10/2022 14:48

Currently training to become a psychotherapist and it has been decided to separate the group into those who are non white to have a space they can use to discuss racialised issues. I can't decide how I feel about this. I'm curious how others would feel about this? As a white person do I deserve a say at all? Or is it a missed opportunity to discuss things that as a white person I need to hear? FWIW given the nature of who's running the course it would not be wise for me to share my views on this with them so I wanted to explore it here instead.

OP posts:
sunshineandstrawberryjam · 24/10/2022 14:51

I think sometimes that separate space can be really useful - it works much like women only space to discuss sexism can be useful without having to explain the basics to some bloke, or get bogged down in long tangents about whether or not X is actually sexism or racism or whatever.

I'm sure there will be other spaces that will be mixed and all can have their say.

NewBootsAndRanty · 24/10/2022 14:55

You really can't grasp why it might be needed, and centering yourself.

And you're training to be a therapist??

TheNoonBell · 24/10/2022 14:56

Whatever happens be very careful about complaining about this new way of thinking.

Here is an interview from the New Culture Forum with someone in the same field as you that did complain. Her career is over. Fascinating listen.

RodiganReed · 24/10/2022 14:57

It's not about you or your needs.

Discovereads · 24/10/2022 15:00

I think separating into smaller groups to discuss race, racism and so on is really useful. BUT I think the “everyone not white in the same group and that is only group that discusses these issues” is very lazy and a bit offensive tbh.

I think that the entire group should vote on and decide how many subgroups they want and who is in it. So you might have a S Asian group, a Middle East group, an Irish group, a Eastern European group, a black Caribbean group, a black African group, a Chinese group. It all depends on what the larger group wants. It’s their decision. There’s no one size fits all. And you should never forget always need a white British group.

Everyone should discuss these issues, it’s not right to exempt white people from discussing racial issues within their own subgroup because much of the racial issues in this country are in fact perpetuated by white British.

NewBootsAndRanty · 24/10/2022 15:01

As a white person do I deserve a say at all?

What say do you want to have, exactly?

FuckabethFuckor · 24/10/2022 15:01

I'd echo the above. I'm gay and in situations like this I've found it helpful to have community-specific sub-groups for support/discussion away from a main group.

It can be utterly exhausting as a gay person trying to explain X, Y or Z aspects of gay culture to straight people so I understand why Black and Asian students on your course might feel the same about race issues.

Especially in a psychotherapy course, which can be very emotionally intense. You will presumably have other arenas (such as the large unstructured groups) where anyone can say anything; a psychological free-for-all. So I can definitely see why the sub-group is deemed necessary.

I also think you're looking at this the wrong way; you're centring yourself and your feelings with respect to this issue. As a trainee psychotherapist, shouldn't you be looking to view this through others' eyes?

I'd also be careful with using the word 'segregating'. It carries significant racial connotations which aren't positive.

MotherOfRatios · 24/10/2022 15:03

I'm Black but yes it's important to have spaces to discuss our experiences without a white person who often (not always) will say but that's not racism....

when your whole life is often a battle sometimes it's nice to not have to battle

DamnUserName21 · 24/10/2022 15:03

Hmmm, two minds about this. Sounds like it's lumping all non-whites into a group as if they all have the same/similar lived experiences.
Also,how are people supposed to learn about the other folks experiences (especially in terms of racism) if they are separated? Will it encourage divisiveness?!
However, I also agree, as PP noted above, a separate space may encourage folks to speak up.

ThatsTooFantastic · 24/10/2022 15:29

My first thought is who splits the groups up? I’m just thinking this could be very tricky for peoples right to privacy regarding their race or ethnicity, because contrary to some people’s opinions, you can’t always “tell”.

Do the lecturers decide on splits or is it learner/student determined?

I also think these discussions are often clumsy and lack nuance. What happens to people who may come from a Gypsy, Roma or Traveller background/community? Some would say Roma are not white, some would say the same for some Traveller groups, others not. In terms of discrimination faced by individuals is it fair to compare a white-passing middle class person of colour with a light skinned Roma person in terms of disadvantages experienced? If not, what is the utility of lumping them together in this context?

I’m also minded of the awful way a lot of US universities come at this issue and write off all “Asian” students as privileged when not only is it not the case but some kinds of privilege don’t preclude you from experiencing racist abuse or structural disadvantages.

FWIW our university tried this (MA in a Psychotherapy context) and it descended into a grievance session, which was obviously felt necessary by some students but others (some students of colour) found it really embarrassing and pointless. In terms of a learning opportunity I think it was wasted to be honest.
Plus it seemed like the only tick box the uni was doing to look at “inclusivity”, when the class issue was always neglected (loads of students of Psychotherapy and as a result trained therapists are from middle class and upper backgrounds - which was seen as not an issue despite it possibly being off-putting for working class clients who find themselves in therapy), and of course, as always, people with disabilities largely unrepresented or accommodated in terms of demographics of therapists.

I think these courses need to be specific about why they are addressing these issues, to what end, I think if it’s to make some students feel better that’s fine, but ultimately it should be about ensuring therapists are properly trained to work with a diverse group of people. Treating every “person of colour” like that one person from your course with a particular viewpoint is not the way to go. Is it so that future clients feel comfortable with you? Who is to say that a black woman would want a black therapist, especially if she wanted to discuss issues she felt within her family/community? In some cases finding therapists who are relatable is difficult, not least because therapy is awkward and vulnerable. On the other hand having someone who reminds you of your roots can be triggering, especially if you are seeking to address childhood/familial trauma. I think it totally depends on the client and their needs, which can’t be easily planned for in advanced in a couple lectures or seminars. If you as a trainee are willing to learn and critically analyse but not place yourself necessarily at the centre here, it could be a valuable learning experience.
I do think it’s sad that you don’t feel able to bring this up to your institution, but not surprising.

Hope your university manages it better than mine did !

EmmaH2022 · 24/10/2022 15:38

What sort of discussion? Is it voluntary?

as a non white person, I dreaded something like this happening at work. I’m freelance now thank goodness. I would have felt othered if obliged to participate in something about skin colour.

ive attended a couple of diversity sessions where they came close to trying allocate issues by skin colour and I honestly think a room full of people glaring at them made them stop. But things have changed a frightening amount so what we would have called racism is now seen as progress.

Sparklybutold · 24/10/2022 17:43

@NewBootsAndRanty

I'm not intending to centre myself but appreciate your reflection. Thank you.

OP posts:
Sparklybutold · 24/10/2022 17:51

@TheNoonBell I'm not going to complain as I appreciate the points raised in this thread about the benefits of protected spaces but I wonder how some or the views expressed within this space may be missed by those (including myself) may need to hear. I'm more than open to reflect on my own unconscious and conscious biases.

OP posts:
Sparklybutold · 24/10/2022 17:52

@Discovereads I was wondering about the division bit. It will be interesting to see how that evolves. I'll just watch from the sidelines and see what happens.

OP posts:
Sparklybutold · 24/10/2022 17:54

@Discovereads

I agree with the role of whiteness in race related topics. I have also witnessed my white colleague conplteley refute the claim they are racist and I'm just curious how this will work if we are to be separated?

OP posts:
PinkFrogss · 24/10/2022 18:05

How much are you separated for? A couple of race related discussions, fine. Entire modules or semesters - not fine imo

Rotherweird · 24/10/2022 18:12

You asked how other posters would feel. I would be pleased that there were enough trainees of colour on the course to do this (not a given). I think it’s important for racialised minorities to have a space to discuss what are often very traumatic issues. It’s not a learning opportunity for white trainees (I am white btw). I’d also be glad to have a space to discuss whiteness and my relationship to it - this has been considered best practice for many years (eg Ryde).

In the predictable but useful fashion of psychotherapy training (I am also a trainee) it’s probably worth asking yourself why you are having such a strong reaction to this. I’ve personally found it’s brought up loads of stuff for me.

EmmaH2022 · 24/10/2022 18:18

Rother "I think it’s important for racialised minorities to have a space to discuss what are often very traumatic issues."

what's your feeling on those of us who don't want to participate or have the space?

i'm still not 100% clear on the context - I thought OP was having it as part of workplace training. If it's voluntary, it's different.

Rotherweird · 24/10/2022 18:22

@EmmaH2022 I would say it’s your prerogative to opt out.

OP is training to be a psychotherapist, so it’s part of her course. This is a big issue in the therapy world atm.

NoBlobsNo · 24/10/2022 18:32

I'm not sure how I'd feel about this, I think I'd feel it was nice to have a safe space and not have to explain basic issues, but at the same time I'm not sure it does white people any favours to be excluded.

We've not had this properly yet on my Psychotherapy course but I think we're headed there as last week there were light discussions at the end of a session

NoBlobsNo · 24/10/2022 18:32

For ref, I'm a mixed ethnicity woman

Barbie222 · 24/10/2022 18:35

I think it's a good thing if it's led by the rank and file. If it's imposed as a 'we're aware, we do this' by leaders it often lacks nuance and gathers random not white people together who have little shared experience other than the fact they're not white. Same for many wide categories of experience, which someone has apparently decided all fit together.

It's also necessary to have the exhausting conversations with people who don't share your background at some point, and it's necessary to keep the culture across the organisation one in which people feel like they can ask questions of each other in appropriate spaces rather than just stop asking them at all (I think).

Cw112 · 24/10/2022 18:36

It sounds like it could be a productive exercise a) it maintains a safer space for non white participants to discuss topics that may be difficult and painful without having to deal with white opinions/responses or worry about how their experiences may be received b) it would be interesting to learn from the different directions the two groups go in and there may be opportunities for each group to feed back in a safe way c) you don't need to be in a group of non white people telling you about racism and race related issues there's a plethora of info and books etc online that you can research in your own time, it's not their job or role to teach you it's your job to inform yourself d) your white colleagues deciding they are not racist is an act of aggression in itself and the other half of the class shouldn't be responsible for correcting them and arguing this with them. That's the white classmates job to take on because they have the privilege of being removed from the effects of this.

EmmaH2022 · 24/10/2022 18:38

Rotherweird · 24/10/2022 18:22

@EmmaH2022 I would say it’s your prerogative to opt out.

OP is training to be a psychotherapist, so it’s part of her course. This is a big issue in the therapy world atm.

Yes, I can't figure out the specifics. Is it getting students to talk about their experience, or training for clients who might want to discuss it, for example.

there's an academic on here who I think was reduced to tears by something like this at her work because it was just full of stereotyping.

I once had a dentist who greeted me in another language for a festival day he thought was mine due to my surname. It was quite something to be greeted in a language I don't know for an event I'd not heard of.

Sometimes diversity stuff at work goes that way.

DrDetriment · 24/10/2022 18:38

Segregation is never the answer. It highlights differences and allows 'othering'.