Shutterstock

Most of the barriers holding you back from reaching the same level of professional success as men are in your own mind. That’s the message behind Sheryl Sandberg’s much talked about bestselling memoir/manifesto Lean In. Many Black women are responding with a resounding, “speak for yourself.”

Sandberg admits that as an Ivy League graduate and COO of Facebook, she has access to privilege other women don’t. But she still believes women can break down institutionalized barriers by changing the way they think. What about the women who were “leaning in” before there was a book about it? Is “leaning in” enough for Black women to succeed?

Twice the Effort For Less Reward

History says, no. Black professionals have long subscribed to the belief that they have to work twice as hard as their White counterparts to attain the same amount of success. For years, Black women have excelled at Lean In principles like dreaming big and sitting at tables where they aren’t welcome, only to see their efforts go unrewarded.

Professional black women make up only one percent of U.S. corporate officers, despite the fact that 75 percent of corporate executives believe that having minorities in senior level positions improves innovation and better serves customers. Half the Black women surveyed for the Alliance for Board Diversity Census believed they have not received the rewards and recognition they should have earned for their investment on the job.

This may explain why Black women are leaving to start their own business at three-to-five times the rate of all business. Some 1.9 million firms are majority-owned (51 percent or more) by women of color who employ over 1.2 million people according to the Center for Women’s Business Research.

Breaking Rules Effectively

Rather than working harder to succeed at someone else’s game it may be time to work smarter and succeed on our own terms. And Sandberg may be of some help. A big part of her approach to business involves understanding the playing field and reworking it your advantage. As the saying goes, you have to know the rules well to break them effectively.

Ginny Clarke, author of Career Mapping, Charting Your Course and founder of Talent Optimization Partners, tells the Huffington Post that Black women suffer from not being privy to advancement strategies their White counterparts have access to.

“Our mothers might have worked, even as professionals, but not likely in a corporate setting,” Clarke says. “Consequently, we don’t have the same exposure, awareness, confidence or executive intelligence on matters of corporate compensation, politics, etc. We also often don’t know our value and won’t ask for fair remuneration for it. We get dazzled and flattered by big numbers and lofty titles and sometime fail to question these offerings relative to our male counterparts.”

Don’t Tune Sandberg Out

Whether you’re playing the corporate game or striking out on your own, Sandberg’s lessons are worth paying attention to. She advises women on how to position their requests to get around the bias held against successful women and advocates women speaking up and working together to bring about an equal working environment.

So maybe leaning in can help Black women, but it’s not enough. While we’re waiting for the existing system to acknowledge our worth, let’s lean on building systems of our own.

—

C. Cleveland covers professional development topics and entrepreneurial rebels who blaze their own career paths. She explores these stories and more on The Red Read, Twitter (@CleveInTheCity) and Facebook (/MyReadIsRed).

AP Photo/Frank Franklin II

Opponents and supporters of New York City’s ban on oversized sugary drinks made a court appearance yesterday, with critics seeking to put the measure on hold while this lawsuit is resolved. It’s scheduled to go into effect on March 12. At issue, reports the Associated Press, are biases that will disproportionately impact small and minority-owned businesses.

Mayor Bloomberg and his administration say this is an effort to combat the high obesity rate — 24 percent of adults in the city — and trim the $4.7 billion price tag for treating obesity-related illnesses.

The NAACP and the Hispanic Federation have joined the American Beverage Association and a number of other groups who argue that the rule oversteps into consumer choice and isn’t fair to businesses that will be prohibited from selling the jumbo beverages while convenience stores and other large businesses, which aren’t subject to city health rules, can sell the items. Businesses caught violating the 16-ounce rule will face a $200 fine, starting in June.

“The NAACP and the Hispanic Federation, an organization of 100 Northeastern groups, say their concern is that minority-owned delis and corner stores will end up at a disadvantage compared with grocery chains,” wrote the AP.

But some are calling out these organizations because of their ties to the big beverage companies. Among the ties cited: Coke is giving $100,000 to the NAACP for healthy lifestyle initiatives and former Hispanic Federation President Lillian Rodriguez Lopez now works for Coca-Cola. Gawker (h/t New York‘s Daily Intelligencer blog) also points out that the Hispanic Federation’s annual gala will honor Coca-Cola with the Corporate Leadership Award.

“Given that obesity rates are higher than average among blacks and Hispanics, the NAACP should refuse soda makers’ money and ‘reevaluate the position the group is taking in New York City,’ Michael F. Jacobson, the executive director of the nutrition advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest,” the AP adds.

“In its brief, the N.A.A.C.P. conceded that obesity was a significant problem among blacks and Hispanics. But the group urged the city to create a more holistic program to attack the problem, including an increase in financing for physical education programs in public schools,” The New York Times reports.

Are you buying this racial argument from the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation? The ban is a little heavy-handed, but honestly, if you want to drink that much soda, you can purchase that much soda. You just can’t do it in one container. So instead of buying a 20-ounce soda at the corner store, you buy two cans. Is that so outrageous?

The health issues associated with obesity have to be tackled, and we have to start somewhere. Why not start here? And if it doesn’t work, you do away with it. The NAACP is right; there should be increased physical education in public schools. But diet is a huge issue as well. Public policy is stepping in to try and change unhealthy behavior.

Thoughts?

Shutterstock

These days celebrities are naming their babies some unique — some would say weird — names. Beyonce and Jay’s little girl is Blue Ivy. Gwyneth Paltrow named her daughter Apple (though the name is catching on). And then there is Erykah Badu, who is a whole different category. Her son is Seven Sirius and her daughter is Puma.

None of these are among the most popular names just released by BabyCenter, which revealed their annual list of top 100 baby names for 2012. Ahead of the pack for boys is Aiden once again (as it has been for eight consecutive years); Sophia is tops for girls, as it has been for three years running. New to the top 10 are the names Mia and Jack. For girls the others in the  top 10 include Emma, Olivia, Isabella, Ava, Lily, Zoe, Chloe, and Madison. Rounding out the top 10 boys names are: Jackson, Ethan, Liam, Mason, Noah, Lucas, Jacob, Jayden, and Jack.

“BabyCenter’s name list is based on the names of 450,000 babies born this year to mothers registered with the BabyCenter website,” reports Moms Today.

Some names may seem cute at the time, but did you know it could affect your child’s future job propects—and even education?  According to various studies, a name can affect how a child is perceived in school and how an adult might perform on a job. In fact, according to one study, “49% of teachers make assumptions about children based on their name,” reports Business Insider.

And it’s not just the teachers who make judgment calls on kids because of their names. Other kids do as well. One study by parenting club Bounty.com, found that five-year-olds judge their classmates by their names. “Making decisions based strictly on names, four- and five-year-olds told Jack Daniel, a professor of communication at the University of Pittsburgh, that Sarah is smarter than Shaniqua, that they would rather play with Megan than Tanisha, and that Jamal was more likely to take a bite out of their sandwich than Adam,” writes Business Insider.

After school, a person’s name could steer them to one profession versus another, according to the magazine. “Unique names might not benefit your child when it comes to a future job hunt. Career success is often predicted on gender stereotype. And women with feminine names like Emma, Marta and Winnifred are expected to succeed as nurses and hair stylists. Men named Frank, Hank and Boris are expected to succeed as plumbers, truck drivers and electricians,” says Business Insider.

Try getting a high-end executive gig with the name Twanna. You might not even get an interview, an investigative report by 20/20/ABC discovered. Like it or not, racist views — whether overt or subconscious — can cause employers to turn down potential employees just based on their name. “Job recruiters are 17% more likely to download resumes with white-sounding names than those with black-sounding names,” reports Business Insider. Roland Fryer, an economist and assistant professor at Harvard University, told the site, “A distinctively black name tells us that a person typically comes from a neighborhood that has higher poverty, lower income, more likely to have teen mothers, et cetera.”

So, a name is more than just a name.

There are double standards in life. Always has been and always will be. That’s why men get props for having multiple sexual partners while some women get dogged out for it. Somehow, double standards have also crossed over to interracial relationships and with them come lowered expectations, flawed thinking, and poor dating decisions.

Once upon a time, people used to choose mates based on their overall attractiveness, their personality, what they brought to a relationship, and the qualities they deemed acceptable. In today’s world, for some people, race is becoming the lone factor when choosing companions. Some very nice looking, successful, and intelligent men and women are increasingly finding themselves in ratchet relationships with people of the opposite race who have nothing to offer. Why? Because they actually have a beef with men and women from their own race that they don’t want to be honest about.

Time after time, people display their disdain for those within their own race that are too dumpy, too frumpy, too fat, too lean, too angry, too unambitious, too trifling, too hateful, too independent, too this, too that.  Yet when those same characteristics appear on someone of the opposite race they become acceptable.  When a black woman ditches black men altogether because of one terrible relationship and then puts up with just about anything from a white man because she thinks the end results will be better, it makes no sense. When a black man says he doesn’t think a weave wearing black woman is attractive but then parades a heavy makeup wearing white girlfriend around with the same love for extensions, his double standards become painfully obvious. When this hypothetical scenario made its way into reality for me, that was when I realized how common double standards are in interracial dating.

I have a black male friend that has an affinity for white women.  He’s a great person, always treats me with respect, and we always have a lot of fun. One of the best qualities my friend has is the fact that although he exclusively dates white women, he’s never really bad-mouthed black women.  His fondness for white women was a non-issue with me until the fateful day he reached the point of no return.

We were having a discussion about our preferences in potential partners when he jokingly said he could never date a woman with fake hair, bad credit, and no job. When he stated these reasons were what kept him away from black women, I couldn’t help but be bothered by the stereotype he tried to use to justify his appreciation for women of other races. I mentioned that some of his white former girlfriends were uneducated, unemployed, and wore excessive makeup and extensions on the regular.  In response, he explained that his former girlfriends wore makeup because they had bad skin and that they didn’t work because they were trying to pursue their passions, so it was all good. I tried to tell him that I didn’t understand his stance, but he continued to make ridiculous statements supporting his views.  His asinine, stereotype-based explanations for his basis of eliminating black women from his dating life made me think it wouldn’t matter what a white woman had going on: as long as she was white, she was all right.

My friend is not alone in his line of thinking.  There are black women, white women, and white men, Asian women and Asian men, basically people of all backgrounds, who also fall prey to the double standards of dating interracially–what they claim they can’t take about one group of people, they’ll ignore for another. Like who you like and do what you want when it comes to your dating life. One of the best aspects of the freedom we get in this country is the opportunity to date whomever we choose.  However, it would be wise to fairly apply the same standards to everyone without regard to race. All I ask is that people be more honest about what they like, and why they like it, as opposed to using stereotypes and a few bad experiences with a certain kind of individual to blacklist and bash a whole group of them.

iStockphoto

Mitt Romney’s disparaging pre-election comments about the “47 percent,” and his post-election accusations that President Obama “bought” the election by promising gifts to key voting groups, added fuel to the firestorm sparked by Obamacare, which many people view as favorable to low-income Americans, many of whom are black.

Romney’s comments come on the heels of an October 2012 Stanford University and AP survey, in which respondents were asked how well certain terms, such as “lazy,” “hardworking,” “violent,” and “friendly” described blacks, Hispanics, and whites. The results reveal that 51 percent of Americans have an anti-black attitude, up from 48 percent in 2008. The question is whether these assumptions determine how black people are treated across many facets of life, including the most important, medical care. An individual’s health is one of their most precious resources – it determines if they can hold a job, purchase a house, have children, even reach for the American dream. But is it possible that skin color can even affect the level of medical treatment that a black person receives?

Racial bias in medical care can and does affect the level and quality of patient care delivered, as well as the quality of the physician-patient relationship.  And in a 2012 study published in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers discovered that although doctors were not overtly racist, their unconscious biases and preferences towards white patients were revealed using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The study, which involved 40 primary care physicians and 269 patients in the Baltimore area, measured reaction times to good and bad words associated with pictures from each race.  The IAT is a popular tool for measuring subconscious views because the test questions and responses are so rapid that participants don’t have time to think about their responses.

The results revealed that the physicians viewed black patients as being less cooperative with medical procedures and less cooperative in general. In addition, the more negatively a physician viewed the patient, the less likely the chances that the patient would be offered treatment.

The study also utilized recorded medical visits between physicians and their patients (which were authorized by both parties). The audio recordings revealed that when speaking with black patients, physicians were more likely to speak at a slower rate and they also dominated the conversation. In addition, the doctors had a less positive emotional tone.

This study is consistent with a 2011 study of over 200 first-year medical students at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.  That study revealed that the majority of respondents had an implicit preference for white patients.

Whether implied or explicit, medical biases are detrimental to black patients. For example, in 2008, researchers at UCSF evaluated data from a National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which studied the treatment of pain in U.S. emergency rooms. The data identified reasons for the emergency room visit and the physician diagnosis codes. The results, which were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that emergency room physicians were more likely to give opiods – such as vicotin or oxycotin – to white patients who complained of pain than to black patients with the same complaints.

Also, a 2009 study at Georgetown University, which was published in the American Journal of Transplantation, revealed that black and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive kidney/pancreas transplants than white patients.

These types of incidents reduce the trust level of black patients towards the medical profession.  Blacks are severely under-represented in medical research and a study conducted by the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburg and the University of Pittsburg Graduate School of Public Health reveals that mistrust is the primary reason for a lack of research participation.

The 2009 study published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine examined racial differences in the willingness of parents to enroll their children in research programs.  White parents were twice as likely as black parents to allow their children to participate in clinical research. One of the study’s lead researchers, Dr. Kumaravel Rajakumar, in an article in Medical News Today, noted that the participation of blacks is vital for determining the extent to which research findings can be applied to the African-American race.

However, the study’s results revealed that 67 percent of black parents did not trust medical research; 40 percent believed that doctors prescribe medications so they can experiment on participants without their consent; and 46 percent did not think doctors would be truthful if the research involved too many risks.

The cumulative effect of racial bias and discrimination in medical care is a guarded — perhaps even antagonistic — physician-patient relationship. Racial biases that hinder the level and quality of care that black patients receive. This in turn, creates doubt in the benevolence of primary care providers, and black patients may be more likely to reject medical advice or even forego medical treatment.  It’s a prescription for disaster.

The limited available research appears to support this theory. A 2006 study used focus groups in Chicago to determine how blacks view the trustworthiness of physicians. In the study, published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, researchers concluded, “Distrust inhibits care-seeking, can result in a change in physician and may lead to nonadherence.”

Slate reported in 2009 on some research that showed that simply making doctors report back on the medical exams and treatment they administered equalized the results between black and white patients. “Over and over, this theme recurs: Universal quality-improvement plans coupled with publicly reported measures are the best way to cut health disparities,” the article says. Based on the empirical evidence we’ve supplied here, we would disagree with the article’s statement that the issues and prejudices associated with race become negligible when this sort of accounting is put in place. Just to be on the safe side, we would suggest that you keep the lines of open, honest, and respectful communication with your doctor. And if it becomes too difficult to establish and maintain a relationship with your doctor, find a new one fast.

Image: Creatas

Paula Poindexter, a journalism school professor at The University of Texas at Austin College of Communication has a new book, Millennials, News, and Social Media: Is News Engagement a Thing of the Past?, that analyzes the relationship between millennials and the media. Her main finding: young people have little-to-no regard for the news. Specifically, they describe the media as “boring,” “biased,” and “garbage.” Dang!

Perhaps more importantly, her research shows that millennials don’t see the importance of being informed (though they are using their mobile devices to access news when they decide to check in).

“We can’t continue to ignore the problem. The older generation is dying out. Who will be the role model encouraging future generations to be informed?” Poindexter said in a press statement available on JimRomenesko.com, which is also collecting comments on this topic on its Facebook page.

Black millennials specifically have a negative view of the news media, and are “at least six times more likely than whites, Asians and Hispanics” to give it a failing “F” grade. She told the Maynard Institute, which is dedicated to improving diversity in newsrooms and news coverage, that young African Americans don’t think the media is concerned with reporting on their generation, and frequently depict them in a negative light.

For her book, Poindexter surveyed 1,000 adults over the age of 18. Eighteen percent were millennials, and she included participants between the ages of 13 and 17 in that group. The number of participants here seems a tad too small for us, but based on other media data we’ve looked at over the past months, it sounds pretty familiar. Diversity of all kinds needs to be enhanced across the media. Without a doubt, media organizations would see a marked improvement in the depth and breadth of their coverage if newsrooms were more reflective of the world we live in.

If you are a millennial looking for coverage geared to your generation, TechCrunch has been following the launch of #waywire, a new media platform launched and co-created by Newark’s Mayor Cory Booker (love him!) with financial backers like Oprah. That first link will take you to a video of the Mayor talking about the site.

Tyler C and Dharun R - Source: moviespad.com

While Dharun Ravi, now 20, thought he was just playing an innocent practical joke on his roommate, Tyler Clementi, it was decided today in court that it was not a joke, but indeed a hate crime. Ravi captured Clementi’s sexual encounter with an older man and showed it on a webcam to countless classmates in 2010.  Devastated by the fact that he was displayed by his roommate to so many strangers, Clementi committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge soon after finding out. Now this childish act could possibly cost Rhavi his freedom, as well as the opportunity to stay in the United States.

The jury came down with the verdict after 12 hours of deliberation, and Ravi will be sentenced on May 21, facing up to 10 years in prison, as well as possible deportation. Ravi is an Indian citizen who spent the majority of his life in the U.S.  He is currently free on bail, but had to turn over his passport. And while Rhavi and his attorney were hoping to push the idea that it was just a misguided prank by an immature freshman, Ravi’s own instant messages and emails around the time of the crime were the nail in the coffin: “Roommate asked for room till midnight. Went into Molly’s room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay.” Those type of statements, along with the fact that Ravi tried to tape Clementi’s sexual encounters with the same man not just once, but twice–but he was stopped when Clementi found out what was going on–didn’t help him at all.

Ravi was convicted on ALL 15 counts, including two counts of bias intimidation based on sexual orientation (a hate crime),  invasion of privacy and tampering with evidence and witnesses. Last year, Clementi’s family said they didn’t want the punishment for Rhavi to be too harsh. They spoke out today after the verdict was read.

“The trial was painful for us, as it would be for any parent who must sit through and listen to people talk about bad things that were done to their child.”

While I hope they don’t deport Ravi, and that in the end, he doesn’t wind up with all 10 possible years in prison, I can understand why someone would think that sort of punishment would be necessary for him. We clearly live in a time now where bullies are pushing young people way too far (to other acts of violence or suicide), and not much is being done about it. Therefore, if this can open some young person’s eyes to the consequences of their own actions…then sadly, so be it.

Do you think he should have been found guilty? Was it a childish prank gone wrong, or was he acting out of hate?

More on Madame Noire!

• Harry, George, and Other Random White Boys Who Can Bust A Move
• Listen Up Ladies: 7 Things We’d Like to Say to Our Facebook Followers
• Ask a Very Smart Brotha Live: Sleepy Tummys and Office Romances
• Ruben Studdard – Life After “American Idol”
• Editor’s Picks: Toni Morrison’s Top 5 Books That You Should Read ASAP
• Teeny Weeny Afros & More: Celebrity Women Who Have Done the Big Chop
• Former Friend of Phaedra Parks Exposes Her Criminal Past
• What Happened To These Child Stars?

(Reuters) – Best Buy Co agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing the largest U.S. electronics retailer of job discrimination, paying a total of $200,000 to the nine named plaintiffs plus as much as $10 million for legal fees and costs.  The lawsuit was filed in 2005 in U.S. District Court in Oakland, California, by eight current and former employees and one job applicant. They accused Best Buy of infractions such as denying desirable job assignments and promotions and transfers to African-American, Latino and female employees.  Best Buy agreed to a four-year consent decree, during which it would implement “comprehensive affirmative relief addressing the hiring, assignment, promotion and exempt compensation claims.”

Read More…

(Investment News) — U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman dismissed a bias lawsuit brought by African-American financial advisers challenging a broker retention bonus program at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.  The suit claimed that the brokers were victims of systematic discrimination at the former Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and, as a result, received smaller retention bonuses from Bank of America when it acquired the struggling investment bank in early 2009.  The case — George McReynolds, et al., v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc., Bank of America Corp. — is the second filed on behalf of 16 brokers at Merrill who claim that the firm steered more-lucrative accounts to white brokers. As a result, the African-American reps managed less money, produced less revenue for the firm and thereby received smaller bonuses.

Read More…

(Investment News) — U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman dismissed a bias lawsuit brought by African-American financial advisers challenging a broker retention bonus program at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.  The suit claimed that the brokers were victims of systematic discrimination at the former Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and, as a result, received smaller retention bonuses from Bank of America when it acquired the struggling investment bank in early 2009.  The case — George McReynolds, et al., v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc., Bank of America Corp. — is the second filed on behalf of 16 brokers at Merrill who claim that the firm steered more-lucrative accounts to white brokers. As a result, the African-American reps managed less money, produced less revenue for the firm and thereby received smaller bonuses.

Read More…