Now I’m not sure what “tone” or context his words were said in, but she seems to argue in favor of what the man said, and then claim he is wrong for saying it? And then assume a bunch of things that he “implied”? Her opinion seems rather incoherent.<p>Her:<p>> The truth is, having board members with different backgrounds is important, and that is now being recognized, not ignored … The executives and boards of these companies prioritized diversity of experience as critical to their organizations’ success. My identity as a Black woman is part of that experience.<p>Him:<p>> Edith, you must be in great demand — as a Black woman.<p>He’s literally just recognizing her diversity as an in demand experience, something he does not have, which now may hold him back. Which she could have just agreed with instead of problematizing him, no?<p>> Company executives, the majority of whom are white, for the most part still struggle with how to address race at work.<p>I fear that this will continue to happen as long as we make confusing arguments about how to discuss race and gender.