i hope this doesn’t come out wrong, i just genuinely would like to be educated if i’m missing something. I’m struggling to see how this is corporate’s fault when i think it through. Correct me if i’m mistaken, but I think you’re insinuating that corporate is pulling strings/ purposely skewing the hiring process so that stores have ✨diversity✨, when in reality that’s just tokenism.

I get how that would be tokenism and it’s obviously very wrong, but how would SB corporate go about making sure there’s at least one token gender non-conf. parter in every store? Assuming our gender non-conforming partners applied to, interviewed for, and gained the same position that the rest of their peers did...i’m lost as to how this is considered tokenism? Tokenism would be hiring them just because of their minority-status rather than their skill, but given that being a barista is an entry level position that requires no skill, i’m struggling to see how this is tokenism. I feel like it’s really difficult to say that someone who applied for a no-experience-necessary position got the job simply because they aren’t cis. when really anyone who was deemed a good fit would get the job?

I just read this article which was written by someone who repeatedly fell victim to tokenism to try to further educate myself. They reference tokenism as pulling a one or two random, usually under-qualified minority individuals (such as interns) onto predominantly-white projects to make it seem more diverse, or using diversity quotas. Assuming most people begin as a barista, i can’t understand tokenism could occur because it’s an entry level position that individuals choose to apply for. It would be one thing if SB made a quota or sought out minority individuals to apply, or if someone unqualified was hired because they were a minority.. but there is no quota, everyone applies through the same website, and there is no baseline skills needed to be a barista.

Not to mention, tokenism means that there’s one or two token individuals in a sea of non-minority staff. I feel like the term tokenism doesn’t really fit in work settings where the staff isn’t predominantly white. To use your store as an example, wouldn’t the presence of multiple other gender non-conforming partners defeat the claim that you were a token, because you weren’t alone?

Idk, i really really really hope i’m not reading as argumentative or rude. I’m not looking to fight, just to further educate myself on this topic. It seems like you feel genuinely hurt and used by starbucks and I would just like to know how that could have been avoided and how I can, if possible, advocate for my non-binary partners.