Jackson Free Press

I've been thinking a lot about who's in charge lately. This first entered my brain because of Haley Barbour's half-hearted attempts at appointing a Cabinet that looks like Mississippi (for the record, that would be close to half black and just over half female. And a good percentage of them would be under 40. For the record). But, he tells us, there aren't enough "outstanding" women who are "qualified" for "leadership" positions in his administration. Ouch.

Ah, those deceptive words: outstanding, qualified, leadership. My B.S. radar is buzzing big time here, as it always is when these excuses are used to stack power positions with one type of person—usually middle-aged or older white men, or those who think like them, who reinforce the beliefs of the one doing the stacking.

Barbour is not alone in this charade. When I took the current-events exam for entry into the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, the 30 "newsmakers" I had to identify included one woman (a black woman, so she did double duty). When I asked a professor there what the hell was up with that, he got a little red-faced and said that the questions come from the headlines; therefore, there must not have been that many women in the headlines in 1999. Come again? Then, what in Joseph Pulitzer's name was wrong with the headlines? Of course, I would soon learn that there aren't that many blacks "qualified" to attend the elite journalism school, either. Buzzzzt.

OK, I can hear the Femi-Nazi hunters ranting: I'm just another "angry" feminist—oh the F-word; I recall Jill Conner Browne's incredulous response: "Of course I'm a feminist"—wanting the governor, or Columbia, or somebody to "bean-count" white guys right out of their rightful places at the head of the table. Barbour told WAPT when asked about the over-representation of the Y-chromosome in his Cabinet that there aren't enough women to choose from for those positions: "There are some outstanding women but they're rare," Barbour said. "I'm not in the bean-counting business. As we fill out this administration, I feel very comfortable that people are going to say those are the right people, they work hard, they're very representative of the state, but I'm not in the quota business." Buzzzzt.

Quota? I think we're a long way, baby, from demanding a "quota" here. As much as I'd like see the "leadership" always look like those being led, I'm not a quota kinda gal, either. People hide behind quotas—like media outlets that flaunt their "diversity" hiring record while doing a terrible job of covering communities of color. You can have all the multi-colored window-dressing you want, and institutional racism (or sexism, or whatever) will still seep through. (By the way, you do know that quotas are already unconstitutional, right? Buzzzzt.)

Now is the time to get beyond excuses and realize that diversity is good for business. This week a Catalyst study of 353 Fortune 500 firms found that companies with high numbers of women in senior management positions financially out-do (higher returns on equity and returns to shareholders) companies with proportionally fewer women at the top. "The Bottom Line: Connecting Corporate Performance and Gender Diversity" stated: "These findings support the business case for diversity, which asserts companies that recruit, retain, and advance women will have a competitive advantage in the global marketplace."

Want to run government like a (good) business? Then more women in leadership positions would be good for our state government and its bottom line.

OK, insert the whine: "But there are no women qualified for the positions." ( Buzzzzt.) Go find women with potential for a Cabinet job and let her have the reins. One could argue that Mr. Barbour is not qualified for the position he just took over as well. He's training on the job.

But that's not enough; diversity has to be built, cultivated, mentored. You're not a truly diverse organization because of a few female or ethnic faces, but you're sure as hell not diverse a-tall if all of your appointees or hires look alike and think alike. Or if they don't question your decisions, or go out looking for different and creative approaches. Or if they can't turn you on to communities (or markets) you know little about. And here's the real paradox: In order to build the pool of diverse leaders, we need diverse leaders to inspire younger people to step up and take the helm.

The answer is not to start spitting out excuses like "quota" (buzzzzt) and "bean-counting" (buzzzzt); it is to figure out how to seek out diverse leaders—and how to train and mentor them so there's a steady pool of diverse, creative talent at the ready. This is hard to do, though, if you're scared of different cultures, or of young people who don't dress or talk or even think like you do.

It is vital for leaders—of government, business and community—to actively seek out people for "leadership" roles who are creative and unique, and not just yes-guys and gals. In his "Creative Class" book that we starting hawking in our first issue, economics professor Richard Florida argues that a city's strength depends on its cultivation of a Creative Class and relies heavily on whether a city promotes and accepts diversity: of races, sexual preferences, youth culture, artistic styles, and so on. Pardon my impudence, but diversity efforts trump the need for a Convention Center any day. Build the damned municipal structures, if you must, but don't lose sight of the most vital aspect of urban strength—tolerance.

That means age, too. At the Free Press, our ages run the gamut; we're even fairly unique to other alts in other cities because we seek out older people who have a lot to offer our younger staffers and interns and readers, and we then throw them all together in what are delightful and often bizarre scenarios (the time David Banner's posse anointed writer/copy chief Lynette Hanson "Curly Gee" comes to mind; Gee stands for gray). The older people attracted to the JFP's mission know that they have to respect young ideas. And vice versa.

Last night I attended a meeting at the new Flashbacks video store and coffee shop on North State (very cool) called by a handful of young women who attend or hang out with folks from Millsaps. Most were in their early 20s. They were gathering to figure out what they could do to make Jackson a better city, and a place where young people want to live and stay.

This little cabal was one of the most hopeful things I've witnessed here. About 20 or so people, hipsters all, showed up and filled out idea sheets that asked (1) what do you want to change about Jackson? (2) how can you help make those changes happen? (3) what new kinds of events do you want to see in Jackson? Not only that, but they called and invited me (not exactly a spring chick) to come give ideas and they invited Virgi Lindsay of the Greater Belhaven Neighborhood Foundation to talk about spaces where they might incubate creative businesses, or set up artists' studios or creative housing. The Flashbacks folks—wise dudes, them—laid out some great free food for these future (or present?) leaders of the city.

It was, quite simply, outstanding.
The new Creative Wave group will meet again at Flashbacks on Sunday, Feb. 8 at 8 p.m. You're invited, too, especially if you're under 35.