Should we frame fairness talks as lifting others up?

[RichardVM]

I’ve been thinking a lot about how we talk about fairness in our community lately, especially when it comes to who gets opportunities. I noticed that when we discuss making things more equitable, some people immediately get defensive, as if correcting an imbalance is taking something away from them personally. It makes me wonder why the idea of lifting others up is seen as a threat instead of just making things right for everyone.

[IsabellaJ]

I’ve watched this in our local programs. When we say lift others up, a few folks get defensive because they feel fairness is a threat to what they earned. They’ll say I did it on my own, why should someone else get a leg up? It lands as a personal loss even though it’s about systems, not one person.

[Kenneth39]

Maybe it’s fear of losing status or the idea that merit only shows up in a single moment. If the rule changes, some worry there won’t be room for the same names on the flyer. It’s not just logic, it’s culture and trust.

[Stella_S]

I tried a small pilot where a few folks mentored newcomers and we measured engagement. Attendance rose, volunteers stuck around longer, and we started naming mentors publicly. Still, there were grumbles about fairness and whether the criteria got bent to help people.

[Amelia96]

Is the issue really the problem we’re naming or something softer like trust and language?