Alternate Outlooks

I was reading an article the other day talking about the increase in woman who have taken up woodworking as an artistic outlet. After reading the first sentence, I stop for a moment and thought, “Wow, this is interesting. I wonder how that might manifest itself?” If I would have continued reading, I would have quickly learned that one of the artists created a 4’-0” wooden box stand perfectly sized for an 18-pack of tampons. Again, I stopped reading. This time I grabbed a pen and jotted in the blank space of the article, “Why is diversity a good thing?” It was immediately clear to me that there is not a single male woodworker I know, or have known that would have created a storage box for tampons. Had I just continued to read, the very capable writer went on to make that exact point. Not covered in the article was my final thought. “Perhaps I should just read the article and avoid the stop-think-start method of digesting information! I’m an old guy. That ship might have sailed.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are very much on the minds of everyone today as political leaders work to destroy the voice of all in favor of the supremacy of one. I’m not sure I understand why this is considered a favorable action. I’ve never heard a cogent argument for exclusion. If all voices are uniform, then why do you need more than one “yes man?” Who believes inequity should be a defining goal of a business, let alone a government and its people? This is just one example where there is a benefit to a different voice.

During most of my career in residential lighting, we knew our primary customer is a female between the ages of 35 and 50. That is a narrow palette and it has since widened, but while men are now more involved in home décor, most residential design decisions are still made by women. Nonetheless, more men are employed in the lighting business. That too is changing. I see multiple notices in LikedIn featuring the promotion of a woman taking on a new role. Perhaps they’ll do a great job. Maybe they’ll fail, but it won’t be genital based, it will be skill-based. In the past there was this mythical “old boys network.” We now see the ALA has a “Women in Lighting” subgroup that appears to be growing each year. This can only be a good thing.

I remember, in the early days of LED I was asked to give a talk to a Houston area NKBA meeting. By that time, I was pretty good at explaining this more complicated technology to people who only understood the simplicity of incandescent. After the talk, one of the attendees of the all-female audience stopped me. I’ve never forgotten what she said. (Some paraphrasing may be included after so many years!)

“I did not want to come to this meeting, but I knew I had to. I knew this LED technology was going to change a large portion of what I do for a living and if I was going to be a successful guide for my clients, I had to understand it. My apprehension was that some pencil-neck engineer was going to either speak down to me, or speak over my head. When I saw you with that bowtie and cool shoes, I figured it would be OK and I was right. You told me exactly what I needed to be successful. Thanks!”

Imagine if the speaker at this afternoon lunch was a female engineer. Would more female designers have attended? Would the design community have adopted LED faster? Would the LED stigma have disappeared quicker?

Sometimes the messenger is as important as the message. We can’t immediately assume acceptability, hence the importance of opening our arm to everyone. We need everyone because we never know from where the next great idea will emerge. By including a wide expanse of people, we have the best possible shot at overall and total excellence. Just because our political leaders want to narrow the future does not mean the lighting community must follow.