Decompiling Oppression #55
Sam McVeety
In the past few months, I've found myself in discussions about the differences between asset- and deficit-based thinking, and I wanted to explore that topic more here. I also thought it provides an interesting window into observing Black History/Futures Month and returning to our perennial visitation of Afrofuturism.
We can start with some background: reminiscent of our focus on language last time, a deficit lens looks at a problem that an individual is experiencing as a characteristic of that individual (or group). Concretely, one way this shows up is in the language of "achievement gap" vs. "opportunity gap". "Achievement gap" looks at the achievements (or lack thereof) as a property of the individual, creating a link between the person and that characteristic. Conversely, talking about an opportunity gap invites us to think more broadly, because we're now looking at a comparative question that implicates the rest of society -- who gets opportunities and who doesn't? (What is the distribution of life chances?)
In contrast to a deficit lens, an asset lens centers the strength of an individual or group. It doesn't necessarily name systems in the process, the way "opportunity gap" does, though the approaches can be complementary. One way to bring an asset lens (that is particularly subversive of dominant structures) is to look at the skills and qualities that may have developed in spite of, or better, because of the struggle against oppressive systems. This kind of framing is common for authors like Octavia Butler, whose protagonists use their strength and adaptability, acquired over years of trauma and oppression, to survive and thrive in contexts that would overwhelm others.
We can also compare asset/deficit framing to the perpetrator vs. victim perspective, which I thought would be interesting to revisit in today's context. I'd argue that the asset/deficit framing complicates and updates the victim perspective, because beyond focusing on the circumstances of an individual who experiences harm, it opens us to multiple ways of seeing those circumstances. Some movements replace "victim" with "survivor" for precisely this reason -- to acknowledge and see an individual as not merely someone that something has happened to, but someone who has had the strength to survive that occurrence, and who has gained unique ways of seeing from it (while acknowledging the reality of that harm).
When I think about why I personally try to avoid a deficit lens, what resonates most with me is that I see deficit lenses as promoting distance and othering. If you view someone else solely through a lens of how their ways of being are all things with negative valence, that creates inherent distance between you and them. Even if you nonetheless want to help, it's happening from a place of distance. If we're being honest, it means that you aren't seeing them as fully human, as a potential peer. An asset-based approach instead finds a spark of recognition in the idea that we are interconnected in the ways that we can express gifts and gratitude for each other.
Of course, an asset lens isn't a cure-all. We can also other, when we see assets too narrowly. The "shut up and dribble" crowd would no doubt tout their admiration for the athletic skills of many Black athletes, but they see the rest of their lives through a deficit lens -- when those athletes speak out, they are seen as implicitly (or explicitly) not educated, nor cultured enough to have opinions worth being shared, much less heard.
In exploring what it means to move from a deficit lens to an asset lens, I found the work of Dr. Jarvis Givens around the history of Black educators and Black education to be particularly resonant. He uses the term "fugitive pedagogy" to bring an asset frame to the extraordinary ingenuity, determination, and risk that accompanies Black educators:
A lot of this kind of early traditions around the politics of black education are developed in that context where black education and criminality are essentially equal transgressions. The very act of learning was deemed criminal activity ... I find the language of fugitivity to be dynamic. I like the language because for me, it allows me to be truthful and honest about the violence and the narratives of aggressive neglect that black people experience when we think about inequality, but at the same time, it allows us to appreciate the human struggle, the sacrifice, and the kind of pursuit of a new world that black people were collectively engaging in at the same time.
For me, this beautifully captures the dynamic tension that suffuses asset/deficit thinking and observances like this month: how to see the both/and of harm and growth, and be moved to action through the alchemy of their duality.
Here are this week's invitations:
Personal: When do you see yourself through an asset lens? A deficit lens?
Communal: What community norms contribute to framing something as an asset or a deficit?
Solidarity: Support Wa Na Wari and their work to create space for Black ownership, possibility, and belonging through art, historic preservation, and connection.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FAQ
Can I share this newsletter with non-Googlers? Yes! Feel free to forward this note externally; it does not contain confidential information.
Is this an official Google newsletter? Nope. The views expressed in this newsletter are not the official position of Google, and we are not affiliated with any particular ERG.
I am leaving Google or transferring to another bet. Can I still receive this newsletter? Yes! You can join the external list here.