In this episode of “Collage,” the Rev. F. Willis Johnson interviews Ryon J. Cobb, an assistant professor of Social Work at Rutgers University. His research interests focus on social determinants and consequences of population health, health disparities and the religious dimensions of racial attitudes among adults.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Read More
Abortion, race and the fracturing of the anti-abortion movement
Oct 16, 2024
Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.
The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision sent shockwaves through the very soul of America, shattering the fragile peace that once existed around the issue of abortion. But amid this upheaval, a quiet reckoning is taking place within the anti-abortion movement itself — a reckoning that lays bare the tangled threads of race, religion and power that have long defined this struggle.
To truly understand this moment, we must first confront the roots of the anti-abortion movement as we know it today. It is a movement born mainly of the white evangelical Christian right, which found its voice in opposition to Roe v. Wade in the tumultuous decades of the 1970s and ‘80s. For many conservative evangelicals, the issue of abortion became a rallying cry, a bulwark against the perceived threats to traditional authority and values.
Yet this history sits in uneasy tension with the movement's professed commitment to the sanctity of all human life. It is a dissonance that grows harder to ignore as the movement itself becomes more multiracial, more multifaith. Today, increasing numbers of Black and Latino Christians stand as anti-abortion witnesses, driven by a potent mix of religious conviction and deep concern over the disproportionate impact of abortion in their communities. These voices are calling the movement to account, forcing a reckoning with its racial blindspots and its often-unexamined alliance with a conservative agenda that has all too often devalued Black and brown lives.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
At the same time, the goals of the anti-abortion movement have grown more politically charged. In the aftermath of Dobbs, many states have enacted near-total abortion bans, with no allowance for rape or incest. These laws have sparked outrage even among some conservatives, who feel the movement has lost sight of its earlier emphasis on finding common ground to reduce abortions through supporting women and families.
This is not merely an academic question. The answer will have real-world consequences for abortion access, for racial justice and for the very health of our democracy. It demands introspection and courageous conversations about some uncomfortable truths that have long divided us. For courageous conversations to happen, curated space is required where the diverse voices within the anti-abortion movement can be truly heard, particularly those from communities of color. This means more than just tokenizing their presence — it means actively centering their stories, perspectives and wisdom.
Second, the movement's fraught history must be faced head-on without recourse to platitudes or evasions. To do so means grappling with how opposition to abortion became intertwined with resistance to racial and gender equality and how this legacy continues to shape the movement's priorities in the present day.
Third, a more expansive definition of "pro-life" encompassing economic justice, racial equity and the inherent dignity of all human life is demanded. A more expanded or nuanced understanding should advocate for policies that support vulnerable families, address the racial disparities that have long plagued us and promote a more just and equitable society for all.
Finally, we must dialogue with those who disagree with us as our human peers, driven by sincere convictions and a shared desire to do what is right. It means listening actively, speaking humbly and seeking common ground wherever possible, even as we stand firm in our principles.
Ironically, in this moment of upheaval lies an opportunity to forge a new path that is more inclusive, more just and more truly committed to the flourishing of all human life. The question is, will we dare have the necessary courageous conversations?
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
More support is needed in schools, says Latina youth leader
Oct 14, 2024
Spadacini is a freelance journalist who writes about social justice and public health.
The Fulcrum presentsWe the People, a series elevating the voices and visibility of the persons most affected by the decisions of elected officials. In this installment, we explore the motivations of over 36 million eligible Latino voters as they prepare to make their voices heard in November.
The Arlandria neighborhood of Northern Virginia is located just a few miles southwest of the nation’s capital in a patch of land adjacent to the Potomac River, an area that was prone to frequent flooding in the 1960s and 1970s. The history of this diverse and resilient community is rooted in the struggles of the Civil War, Jim Crow and periodic land grabs by developers eager to profit from the never-ending supply of labor lured by government jobs.
Arlandria sits on the northern edge of Alexandria, bordering Arlington County, hence the creative spin on the name. Before the influx of immigrants fleeing civil war in El Salvador in the early 1980s, it was a predominantly African American residential area. It was one of the few neighborhoods with affordable housing where Black people could live in Virginia while still being close to the nation’s capital and benefiting from its steady job market.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Many immigrants who settled in Arlandria in the 1980s and ‘90s came from Chirilagua, a town in El Salvador, now a nickname for this neighborhood. While tensions between Black and Latino residents occasionally flared, shared concerns over affordable housing, workers’ rights and social justice brought the community together through Tenants and Workers United, a grassroots organization serving Chirilagua.
Sindy Carballo-Garcia is the youth group coordinator at TWU. The 22-year-old arrived in Arlandria from El Salvador with her parents when she was 8 years old and has lived there since. She is now married and planning to vote in the November elections.
“I want politicians to prioritize schools, making sure that students feel safe and are supported,” she says. “Students should not walk into schools, pass through a metal detector and feel surveilled. They need caring adults. The whole purpose of schools is to build community and not to push young people aside.”
A few years ago, Carballo-Garcia was involved in a campaign that challenged the use of school resource officers (SROs) in Alexandria public high schools. “We saw that Latinx, Black and Brown students were the ones getting arrested,” she says, adding that the program had been in place for 20 years, yet no impact data was being collected. In the end, they got the city council to defund the SRO program and divert resources towards psychologists and other psycho-social support measures.
A study on school policing published in the Virginia Law Review in 2022 indicates that Hispanic and Black students comprise almost three-quarters of students arrested due to an incident at school or referred by schools to the police. According to the Sentencing Project, in 2021, Latino youth were 16 percent more likely to be detained or committed to juvenile facilities than their white peers, compared to 76 percent in 2011.
Carballo-Garcia would like to see more school resources going to restorative practice circles instead of detention and punishment. “We need to repair the harm and build community. We must create spaces where young people can talk, acknowledge the wrong that has been done and the impact it has,” she explains. “Instead of suspending a kid for days because when they return, the issue will still be there.”
As a young Latina woman, Carballo-Garcia also cares about reproductive health and rights. “I believe a woman’s health is a personal choice, not something decided by law or controlled by others.” When asked about same-sex marriage, Carballo-Garcia says the choice to love anyone is also a personal one and one that does not need to be regulated by others. She adds, “This election is critical, and a lot is at stake.”
According to PRRI, a public opinion research group, support for same-sex couples has increased among religious and religiously unaffiliated Hispanics since 2014. Generally speaking, younger generations express higher levels of support for same-sex marriage, as indicated by the Pew Research Center.
Last, but not least, on Carballo-Garcia’s mind this November are immigrant rights and equitable health care, which are also core issues for Tenants and Workers United. The organization has recently circulated a housing survey among Chirilagua’s residents, and one of the findings is that many older tenants do not have health insurance.
“The kids are on Medicaid, but the adults are mostly uninsured,” says Carballo-Garcia. “If they get sick, they go to a Latino store to get medicine, but they cannot go to a hospital.” Despite working multiple jobs, many don’t have access to basic health care. For this young Latina leader, this is unacceptable.
In the weeks leading to Election Day, The Fulcrum will continue to publish stories from across the country featuring the people who make up the powerful Latino electorate to better understand the hopes and concerns of an often misunderstood, diverse community.
What do you think about this article? We’d like to hear from you. Please send your questions, comments, and ideas to newsroom@fulcrum.us.
Keep ReadingShow less
Voters without kids are in the political spotlight – but they’re not all the same
Oct 10, 2024
Jennifer Neal is a professor of psychology at Michigan State University. Zachary Neal is an associate professor of psychology at Michigan State University.
In the 2024 election cycle, voters without children are under the microscope.
Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance has said that “childless cat ladies” and older adults without kids are “sociopaths” who “don’t have a direct stake in this country.”
So it was notable that when pop star Taylor Swift endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, she didn’t simply express her support and leave it at that. She also called herself a “childless cat lady.”
Politicians and others often use the word “childless” as an umbrella term for people who do not have children. But as social scientists who study people without children, we know that this doesn’t capture some important nuances.
Using large-scale demographic data, we’ve found that there are many types of nonparents – and each has its own set of political priorities.
The range of nonparents
Only about 3% of Americans are truly childless, or what the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls “involuntarily childless.” Most Americans who do not have children are not childless. They are some other type of nonparent. Social scientists often distinguish several types of nonparents:
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
- Childless people want children but cannot have them due to circumstances such as infertility.
- Not yet parents are people who do not have children yet, but plan to in the future. They tend to be younger.
- Undecided individuals aren’t sure whether they want to have children.
- Child-free people have decided they do not want children now or in the future.
These distinctions matter. When nonparents are combined into a single group, they seem demographically and politically similar to everyone else.
But each type of nonparent is affected by political issues differently. And some issues are especially consequential for child-free people.
The ramifications of Dobbs
Take abortion rights. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson ended a constitutional right to an abortion. The ruling limited access to reproductive health care in several states and created uncertainty in others.
Some politicians have expressed concerns about the fallout of the Dobbs decision. They’ve pointed to the inability for some not-yet-parents to access reproductive care if complications arise during pregnancy. They’ve also raised the alarm that Dobbs will lead to limits on access to in vitro fertilization for childless couples.
But these concerns are relevant only for people who want to have children. There is usually little talk among politicians and pundits about the importance of reproductive rights for child-free people who do not want to have children.
The share of Michigan adults identifying as child-free rose from 21% before Dobbs to nearly 26% immediately afterward. This increase occurred during a time when there was significant confusion about access to abortion in Michigan because state laws were ambiguous and being challenged in the courts.
Since Dobbs, there has also been a dramatic increase in vasectomies and tubal ligations nationwide. Some of this increase is the result of child-free people now turning to surgery to avoid having children.
Child-free people are overlooked in other areas, too, such as tax policy and in the workplace.
Child-free people pay federal income taxes alongside parents. But both Republican and Democratic presidential platforms have placed a heavy emphasis on expanding the child tax credit, which directly benefits only people who have or will have children. Child-free people work alongside parents. But parental status isn’t a protected category, which could be why child-free people tend to work longer hours and have less leeway to take time off.
Will a new bloc emerge?
Nonetheless, child-free people are primed to play an important role in American politics for several reasons.
First, there are a lot of them.
How many Americans are child-free depends on how you ask them. Data from nationwide face-to-face interviews suggest that around 10% of Americans are child-free. But data from anonymous surveys in Michigan and nationwide peg it at closer to 20% to 25%. If that’s the case, it could mean as many as 50 million to 60 million Americans are child-free.
Second, their numbers are growing. A range of studies suggest that every year, more Americans are reporting that they simply never want to have children.
Third, politicians’ derogatory comments about “childless” people have gotten the attention of child-free people. And they’re starting to organize. For example, Shannon Coulter, the influential activist behind the nonprofit group GrabYourWallet, is bringing them together through the nonpartisan Alliance of Childfree Voters.
It’s too soon to know whether child-free people can be thought of as a distinct voting bloc. But in our research, we found that child-free people in the swing state of Michigan lean liberal. While there are similar numbers of liberal and conservative parents in the state, child-free people who identify as liberal outnumber conservatives 2 to 1.
Given their size, growth, organization and liberal leanings, it may be time for American politicians to think more carefully about how child-free people fit in.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Keep ReadingShow less
DEI is worth saving if programs focus on expanding advantages
Oct 09, 2024
Myatt is the co-founder ofThe Equity Practice and a public voices fellow alumna through The OpEd Project.
DEI backlash is prolific. Many companies inspired to begin diversity, equity and inclusion work after the racial unrest of 2020 are pausing those same efforts in response to pushback from customers and employees.
The reasons for the pushback vary, but for many, DEI represents a threat to status and access to resources. These fears are not entirely unfounded. Some DEI strategies aim to “level the playing field” by eliminating what some see as unfair advantages.
For example, research shows that white men are more likely to benefit from employer referral programs during hiring, which contributes to disparities in hiring and compensation. Some DEI strategies would end these referral programs to address these disparities so no one is advantaged. Eliminating the program strips people of something that helped them succeed. These types of shifts might fuel fears about DEI programs.
But as my grandmother said, “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.” What if DEI programs focused on expanding advantages for everyone instead of eliminating them and taking away resources from some?
Advantages for people in the dominant groups in workplaces are well documented and happen across the employee life cycle.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Research shows that hiring managers value white people’s referrals of other white people more than they value people of color’s referrals of other people of color.
White people are more likely to have access to mentorship than people of color, which helps them navigate the ins and outs of their workplaces. White people and men have more access to informal networks that help them understand unwritten rules that affect how someone is perceived and whether they advance at work.
Resources are more likely to flow to people perceived as in the ingroup or dominant group. White men get better work assignments that make them more promotable than people of color and women.
Men are more likely to be seen as brilliant than women. The contributions of men and white women are more likely to be heard and acknowledged than those of women of color. Men and white people get the benefit of the doubt when someone evaluates their performance compared to women and people of color, respectively.
When it comes to developing and growing at work, white men are advantaged because they get more candid, developmental feedback compared to women and people of color. When they make mistakes, white men are advantaged because they are more likely to be forgiven for errors than women and people of color.
White men are more likely to think other white men have more potential than women or people of color, which leads to advantages related to promotions.
These advantages are examples of care, access, ease and assistance that help people succeed in the workplace. Ideally, everyone would have what they need to be successful and thrive at work. Instead of removing these advantages, we could reframe how we see them — these advantages are the resources contributing to success. Here are some strategies for expanding access to these resources to all team members:
Hiring:
- Hold open group information sessions with candidates to share insider tips about how things work inside your company and how to be successful in your hiring process.
- Expand referral programs to networks and organizations that can help you diversify your team.
Onboarding:
- Design an onboarding plan that helps new hires learn about their role, team, organization and manager. Be sure to include activities for knowledge transfer and relationship building.
- Assign an “onboarding buddy” who can help the new hire understand your organization's unwritten rules. Be sure to provide the buddy with training and resources so they are well set up to help the new hire navigate the organization.
Mentorship:
- Create a mentorship program that connects all staff with senior leaders trained to help staff navigate the organization and act as champions for staff in the rooms that staff are not in.
Expand the ingroup:
- Create rituals across your team that foster regular authentic relationship building, which research shows expands who is included in the ingroup. This type of relationship building is not about surface-level activities like icebreakers, happy hours or trust falls. Instead, it focuses on building a sense of shared vulnerability, safety and connection across the team.
Managing performance:
- Gather multiple, diverse perspectives about performance, which research shows leads to a more accurate performance assessment than single evaluators.
- Foster a growth mindset about staff development, and use manager rituals to help managers identify and celebrate potential in all employees.
- When there are performance issues, treat staff members with care and approach remediation with a restorative lens aimed at helping the staff member return to your agreements about expectations.
Career advancement:
- Create visibility for upcoming roles for everyone on the team.
- Use a transparent process for assessing criteria for advancement.
- Share power by using diverse groups to make decisions about promotions, which has been shown to mitigate bias and support more equitable decision-making.
Some may doubt companies’ abilities to expand advantages equitably, and based on the track record of U.S. companies providing equitable treatment of employees, that concern is valid. We can’t let unjust history keep us from trying new strategies to create a more just future.
Diversity improves company performance, and DEI strategies are necessary to benefit from that diversity. By focusing on expanding who has access to care and working to foster relationships that expand who is in the ingroup, more people will be able to thrive at work. Expansion instead of contraction — with an eye for supporting everyone — will help organizations get their DEI efforts back on track.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More