THE SHORT LIST pirate riffs on equality* *A talk given at Ridgeland Federal Correctional Facility on September 3, 2009 in honor of Federal Women’s Program Equality Day

In October 1967, Executive Order 11375 added sex to other prohibited forms of discrimination in the Federal Government. In August 1969, Executive Order 11478 integrated the FWP into the overall Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program and placed the FWP under the Directors of Equal Employment Opportunity. Federal Personnel Manual 713 was issued to carry out Executive Order 11478 , and Federal Personnel Manual 713.9, dated May 29, 1970, directed Directors of EEO to have on staff a Manager for the Federal Women's Program. In March 1972, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was amended to apply equal opportunity protection in employment to the Federal government. The designation of a Federal Women's Program Manager was codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR 1614.102) as appropriate for carrying out equal employment opportunity functions in all organizational units of an agency, and at all agency installations.

What is equality? Write your definition. You’re not going to share what you write. Try to write a definition. Just try. Now, write the names of three people who are your equals. Next to each name, write a quality that you share that makes you equals. What is equality? This is a tough question to answer, isn’t it? Does at least one of the names on your paper belong to someone of another gender? Someone older or younger? Someone of a different religion? Someone of a different race. Someone from a different economic class? Okay, so what does diversity have to do with equality? Words are like butterflies – they float from our minds into our mouths and out into the world, often with little understanding of meaning! What if I were to suggest that equality is nothing more than a perception? That whatever is most important to you: gender, race, religion, politics, age, economic class, region, nationality – whatever is most important to you will form the basis for your definition of equality. What if I were to suggest that equality is nothing more than a balance of power? We spend a great deal of time these days engaged in power struggles. We most often feel that we are either in a stronger or a weaker position than someone else. We compare. We seldom identify. This keeps us in a constant state of struggle. When we compare, we most often examine differences. We look for what is different about how someone dresses, speaks, works, drives, banks, prays, loves, cooks, protects. When we identify, we recognize similarities, sometimes things shared only in principle – but what a different perspective is brought to bear upon coexistence when we begin spending more time considering similarities, shared qualities, shared likes, shared dislikes, shared values. Shared-anything-at-all makes life easier to bear. Why? Because when we find something, even one small thing that helps us identify with or relate to another, tension in the power struggle is released. The struggle loses its power to control the individual. We take back our power to direct our energy, to be productive, to be a team. We become efficient communicators because we no longer feel inferior or superior – we, I and you, are equal. Another word for communication is relate. Relate. We relate to others to express needs and wants. In relating to others, we form relationships. Some would argue that the best relationships are those based in equality. Each party shares equally in power. Neither dominates. Both agree to agree or to disagree, but both parties honor the right of the other to choose for the self what is best for the self. Relationships among equals can exist only when all involved agree to respect the other. Respect, like equality, is a matter of perspective. We each have our own definition of respect – how we expect it to be given us by others and how we expect to give it to others. Expectations. Whew. That’s a tough one to define! But respect, we can define respect. We respect others by not telling them how to think, feel or act because we understand that the other is capable of deciding how to do that. We expect the same respect in return. Because to do so is to say: your thoughts, feelings and actions have value I recognize – I value you as a human being – I value your ability to decide, to choose, to be. In the military world and in the world of correctional institutions, this formula takes on a different dimension. Military members subjugate their right to act in order to maintain good order and discipline to ensure a society’s protection and survival. In correctional institutions, prisoners are denied the right to act as they might like to or feel compelled to because they have been proven incapable of acting according to acceptable standards, and, therefore, they pose a danger to other members of society. In both cases, in the military world and correctional world, those who must enforce the rules face extreme stress on a daily basis. Much of this stress results because of the massive shift in power relations, in which one party is called upon to control another party. Equality in the military and in prisons is nearly nonexistent. And yet, despite the equality vacuum, dignity and respect is maintained for the most part. How does this work? How does this happen? Military people are told how to think and how to act. Their feelings remain their own. Even between leaders and subordinates, human emotion is respected. We all must cry sometime. Human emotion knows no rank, no boundary, no class distinction, no religious value, no race, no nationality, no economic standing or political bent. Our emotions are the one thing we can neither control nor hide – no matter how hard we try. They will out, sooner or later. Our emotions keep us human, even in the most difficult of circumstances, even during the most trying power struggles. Within the prison system, prisoners are able to act only as they are allowed to act by guards and administrators, by rules and regulations. The balance of human dignity is maintained because prisoners have their own thoughts and feelings. They are human because it cannot be prevented, their human-ness can only be acknowledged, no matter how depraved their crime against humanity, perhaps because of their crime. And even between prisoner and guard, thinking and feeling is recognized as unique, individual, and yet shared – thinking and feeling is what makes both prisoner and guard human. A guard will tell a prisoner how to act, but cannot change how a prisoner thinks or feels about what he or she is ordered to do. A guard must maintain a sense of professionalism no matter the circumstances, yet that does not change how she thinks or feels about the situation. Only her action is evidence of what she endures. In respecting this autonomy of thought and feeling, a balance of relations is achieved, a sense of respect between guard and prisoner evolves, a certain sense of equilibrium, a principle of equality. So whether we are in war, in a cell, or guarding one, we can achieve a sense of dignity, of balance, of respect, for our enemy or our charge. We can balance as best we can the power in our relations with others. And when we do, things go more smoothly. Life unfolds in such a way that coexistence is possible. Have you ever thought of a child as being your equal? Isn’t it true that every human being is your equal? That not even a child likes being told how to think, feel, or act, that to do so is to devalue the child’s ability to reason. And yet, we know we must guide, suggest, protect. We must. And so, in order to achieve peace in our relations with others, as we guide, suggest, and protect, we learn to allow for free will, for choice, for the occurrence of mistakes as well as successes. To think, to feel, to act – these three things make us human. To take even one of these abilities away is to alter the power relation between individuals. If I am taking away, I am superior. If I am being taken from, I am inferior. To give is often thought of as superior. To receive is often perceived as the mark of inferiority. Or so we are taught in our competitive culture. Is equality possible? Like so many other concepts, equality is an ideal. It is nearly impossible to achieve in totality. There will always be something between us. One of us will be superior and one inferior. Sometimes I will need to lean on you and sometimes you will need a shoulder to lean on. It is when we cut ourselves off from possibility, from achieving potential by saying, No–Never, that we lose. How can you help move our culture closer toward equality for all? Try identifying rather than comparing with others. Raise your children to understand what No–Never means. Help them understand that everyone has a right to think, feel, and act as they choose, and that everyone must take responsibility for how they think, feel, and act. That for every choice there is a consequence, that each individual still has a right to decide, to choose how to think, feel, and act, that each individual has a right to exercise their own humanity. Practice autonomy. Now, please write down your definition of equality. Next, write down the names of three equals. Take your definition and your list of names home. Share your definition with your family and explain to them why each of those people on your list is your equal. Look your mother, father, brother, sister, husband, boyfriend, girlfriend, wife, child in the eye and explain to them why he or she isn’t on your short list. Maybe by the time you finish relating, they will be.