Many nonprofit policies are written by people in the majority culture and unknowingly exclude or disadvantage people from marginalized groups. A rule that seems neutral often isn't.

Example: "We value professionalism and expect professional dress at events." This seems neutral but can exclude people for whom formal dress codes don't match their culture or gender expression. It can also exclude low-income people who don't have access to formal clothing.

This lecture helps you spot bias in your policies and write guidelines that actually work for everyone.

Hidden Bias in Policies

Language and Communication

Policy: "We speak English in our spaces."

Hidden bias: Excludes non-English speakers or people who are more comfortable in other languages. Even "English only" for official documents excludes people who struggle with English.

Better: "We provide translation services where possible. Meetings are in English, with interpreters available upon request. We welcome multilingual discussion."

Time and Accessibility

Policy: "Everyone must attend events in person."

Hidden bias: Excludes people with mobility disabilities, transportation barriers, childcare constraints, or work schedules that don't allow in-person attendance.

Better: "We offer both in-person and virtual participation. Let us know what you need to participate."

Expertise and Authority

Policy: "Only people with formal credentials can speak or lead."

Hidden bias: Excludes people without formal education (often from low-income and marginalized communities) even if they have lived expertise. It centers academic knowledge over lived experience.

Better: "We value both formal expertise and lived experience. Speakers can come from any background."

Professionalism and Style

Policy: "Use professional language. No slang, humor, or emotion."

Hidden bias: "Professional" often means white, male, straight, wealthy cultural norms. It can exclude cultures with different communication styles (call and response, storytelling, expressiveness). It can silence people's emotions in spaces discussing their own oppression.

Better: "Communicate in ways that work for you. We ask that you aim to be understood and respectful."

Appearance and Dress

Policy: "No visible tattoos, piercings (except earlobes), or dyed hair."

Hidden bias: These rules disproportionately affect BIPOC communities, LGBTQ+ people, and working-class folks. They enforce dominant white culture's standards as universal.

Better: No appearance-based rules at all. Unless there's a safety reason (jewelry in workshop settings), let people look however they want.

Decision Framework: Is This Rule Necessary?

Before including a rule in your guidelines, ask:

1. Does this protect safety? If yes, keep it (with equity considerations).

2. Does this advance our mission? If yes, keep it (with equity considerations).

3. Does this just enforce cultural norms of the majority? If yes, question it. Whose culture are you centering? Who does it exclude?

4. Have marginalized people been part of deciding this? If no, pause. Get their input before finalizing.

5. Would we enforce this equally across people? If no, it's biased enforcement.

Equity in Enforcement

Even well-written rules can be enforced inequitably. Someone who "breaks the rule" might get a friendly warning if they're in the in-group, but get removed immediately if they're an outsider.

To enforce equitably:

  • Document enforcement. Who did what? What did you do about it? This prevents selective enforcement.
  • Apply consistently. Same behavior = same consequence, regardless of who did it.
  • Get multiple perspectives. If enforcing a rule against someone, hear their side. Don't assume.
  • Consider power dynamics. Someone with power violating a rule is more serious than someone without power.

Creating Inclusive Guidelines

1. Include diverse people in writing. Get input from people from different races, genders, abilities, class backgrounds, ages. Each person brings perspectives others miss.

2. Ask: Whose norms are we enforcing? For every rule, ask what cultural group's norms it represents. If it's one group's norms, question whether it's necessary.

3. Make space for difference. "Professionalism" should accommodate different communication styles. "Respect" should work across cultures. "Appropriate" should include diverse expressions of identity.

4. Be explicit about exceptions and accommodations. Acknowledge that some people will need modifications. Build that in, don't treat it as special favors.

5. Review and update regularly. Annual review with community feedback. Is this still necessary? Does it still exclude people? What are we missing?

Example: Before and After

Original community guidelines: "Members must attend monthly meetings. Members should speak clearly and concisely. We expect professional dress. Disagreement is okay, but keep emotion out of discussions."

Problems: Assumes everyone can attend monthly meetings (ableist, classist). "Speak clearly" favors English speakers. "Professional dress" centers white culture norms. "Keep emotion out" silences marginalized people discussing their own oppression.

Revised guidelines: "We meet monthly in person and via video. If you can't attend a particular month, no problem — catch up when you can. We welcome all communication styles, including those that might be unfamiliar. Wear what makes you comfortable. When discussing difficult topics, emotion is natural and welcome. We ask that you aim to listen and respect each other."

Improvements: Flexible attendance. Welcomes diverse communication. No appearance rules. Validates emotion. Still maintains respect baseline.

Making Guidelines Inclusive

Start by reviewing your current guidelines with a diverse group. Ask: Who might these rules exclude? Who benefits from these rules? What's actually necessary vs. what's just enforcing dominant norms?

Then revise with input from people who are most affected by the rules (which is usually people from marginalized groups in your community).

For related guidance, see Lecture 1.5.1: Code of Conduct and Lecture 1.5.2: Guidelines vs. CoC vs. ToS.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it okay to have any appearance rules?+
Only if there's a safety reason. In healthcare or food service, certain standards might be necessary. In most nonprofits, there's no safety reason for appearance rules. If you don't have a safety reason, drop appearance rules entirely.
What if people from the majority culture feel excluded by inclusive guidelines?+
Good inclusive guidelines don't exclude majority-culture people. They just stop centering dominant-culture norms as universal. People from dominant groups usually have flexibility (they're used to their norms being accepted everywhere). Guidelines that don't center their norms might feel different, but that's not exclusion.
How do we balance inclusivity with having any standards at all?+
You can have standards (respect others, don't harass) without enforcing cultural conformity (speak like this, dress like this, communicate like this). Standards should be about protecting people, not about enforcing norms.
Should we have different rules for different groups?+
No. Same rules for everyone. But recognize that "equal" rules can have unequal impact. Offer flexibility and accommodations so people can follow rules from different starting points.