One of the most challenging aspects of embracing inclusion is understanding that impact is always greater than intent. Couple this thought process with the idea that a person is not the sum total of a singular action, and that the recipient of the action gets to determine the damage inflicted, and we’ve just created a field of landmines.

There is a misconception that identification of a person committing an action that is classified as an “ism” (racism, sexism, sizeism, etc.) automatically and unceasingly discounts that person’s preexisting “goodness” negating all prior behavior and immediately transforming them into a “bad” person. In the era of “cancel culture,” this value judgment is particularly weighty and can (in certain circumstances rightfully so,) carry dire circumstances. Instead, in intentionally inclusive spaces, in the majority of these instances, we ask people to consider isolated actions, to be an identifier of a moment in time rather than a complete and immutable character judgement. These isolated moments tend not only to be teachable for the individual who has caused the affront, but instructive for the community, and when carried out thoughtfully, can have a building and collaborative effect.