
As the nation becomes more aware of the insidious nature of modern diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, Johns Hopkins Medicine recently found itself at the center of a heated controversy. Dr. Sherita Hill Golden, the institution’s Chief Diversity Officer, sent out a “monthly diversity digest” to staff, igniting a backlash with its content that led to a prompt apology and retraction.
Golden’s email, which included a section titled “Diversity is the Word of the Month,” presented a list of “privileged” social groups. This list boldly included categories such as White people, males, Christians, and English speakers, branding them as inherently privileged. Golden defined privilege as “a set of unearned benefits given to people who are in a specific social group.”
This must end! https://t.co/TDo5Wi3qIm
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 11, 2024
The response was swift and intense. Critics, including high-profile figures like Elon Musk and Donald Trump Jr., condemned the divisive nature of the list. In a post to his social media platform X, formerly Twitter, Musk called for an end to such ideologies. At the same time, Trump Jr. criticized the widespread “rot and racism in higher education.”
Golden’s approach in the newsletter was seen as an overgeneralization that inadvertently stoked division rather than fostering inclusivity. This incident highlights a growing concern: the potential for DEI initiatives to backfire when they inadvertently categorize people based on race, gender, or other inherent traits, leading to generalizations that can be perceived as discriminatory in themselves.
UPDATE: The Johns Hopkins DEI Office has retracted their "privilege list" after our post went viral and drew massive outrage https://t.co/DWirlJBpKg pic.twitter.com/j26FUKSp2w
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 11, 2024
The backlash led to a retraction from Golden, who acknowledged the problematic nature of her message. In her retraction, Golden admitted that the definition of privilege was “overly simplistic and poorly worded,” and failed to meet the goal of fostering an inclusive community. Johns Hopkins Medicine also distanced itself from the language used in the newsletter, emphasizing that it contradicted the institution’s values.
This incident at Johns Hopkins raises critical questions about the role and implementation of DEI programs in educational and medical institutions. While these initiatives often aim to promote understanding and inclusivity, there is a fine line between raising awareness about societal inequalities and inadvertently perpetuating division. The challenge lies in addressing these complex issues in a way that unites rather than divides and fosters a constructive dialogue about privilege and societal disparities.
The Johns Hopkins controversy is a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of oversimplification in discussions of sensitive topics like privilege and diversity. It underscores the need for a more nuanced and thoughtful approach, one that recognizes the complexity of societal dynamics without resorting to broad generalizations that risk alienating the very communities they aim to support.