The question of tokenization is one many POC in cycling representing marginalized groups wrestle with on a regular basis. And it’s one that can leave us feeling unsettled or even raw, depending on the situation and the extent to which someone is being tokenized. Because while we might have every right to be somewhere, we are generally conscious of why others think we are there and where we do or do not fit in to the larger picture.
Which means that we are also aware that your continued access to that space may be contingent on how well we fulfill the role that others have imagined for us. And that our performance is likely to be judged, not on how much we contributed to an outcome or challenged a particular issue, but how well we’ve stayed within our lane and didn’t put others on the defensive.
Tokenization is something I am highly conscious of as a blogger in women’s cycling and is perhaps the biggest struggle I face when approaching collaborations with brands, PR companies, organizations, or events.
It has made me occasionally question myself and my role in cycling advocacy and influence. Which reminds me that as a “certain type of woman of color,” I am seen as less threatening and given greater access to white-centered spaces than other folks of color. I truly believe that I have a right to be in these spaces – I am knowledgeable, experienced, educated and good at what I do as a blogger. But I’m also aware that everyday women of color who cycle look to me as their go-to-blogger on issues of women’s cycling, advocacy, and women’s specific cycling products. To be honest, there are literally a handful of woc in cycling doing this in an authentic way which makes the role we have a huge responsibility.
Cycling as a whole is still struggling to decenter the narrative of white, male, cis gendered cyclists. Adding a layer of a bigger national conversation around representation, inclusion, equity and intersectionality, my concern for brands, journalist, bloggers, and organizations in cycling is that they will lack relevancy. The idea that they are backbones of cycling advocacy and industry just isn’t true because they aren’t including voices of women, POC, low income, undocumented, and LGBTQIA folks in cycling.
I’m highly aware that when I speak to the issues of women’s cycling as a woc and have much of the support of the women’s cycling community behind me, that I can also be utilized as a token blogger to expand the message of a brand. This is a constant personal struggle I have in choosing who I work with and can only hope that I’m making a real difference by being honest in my reviews and experiences with partnerships.
Centering the conversation on representation, inclusivity, and intersectionality on CGR, has made it easier for me to take a second shot at building new relationships with woc and brands that desire building community in cycling while deepening and strengthening existing ones. I understand that doing so can introduce tensions into the core of cycling as predominantly white and privileged but to make cycling accessible, acknowledgement of the elephant in the room is the first step.
Otherwise, it would be hard for brands, journalists, or advocacy organizations to claim success in improving accessibility of their services, products and the bikability of the community while folks of color and others in the margins are still being denied basic access to the sport and safe streets.
It’s time to untoken influence. When we have reckoned with white supremacy bottom lines embedded in cycling, only then will existing political, industrial, and organizational systems in cycling move in a direction that equitably serves our communities. There are influencers and advocates that have been doing this work for years, they don’t need saviors, they need allies who are willing to support their influence and make it available for collective benefit.
In other words: until underpresentative communties can go to a company’s or organizations website and social properties and actively see that an organization or company is invested (financially and intellectually) in representing the voices, experiences, and images of women from all cultural backgrounds, sizes, abilities, and sexual orientations, they are absolutely right to decline acceptance of sponsorship, panels, or any offerings. If BIPOC feel they are being tokenized when they are invited to participate in something, it’s absolutely correct that they wouldn’t be interested in participating. On the flip side, companies and organizations need to be actively hiring BIPOC both internally, and in market-facing influencer campaigns but with the same compensation and treatment as white influencers.
I’m not the only influencer in cycling whose spoken on this. Athlete Ayesha McGowan’s call for #REPRESENTATIONANDINCLUSIVITY has made magazine covers, articles, and sponsorship for her to voice her views on the subject which is a big win. Other influencers, advocates, and athletes have been calling for the same level of inclusivity and representation. And so many brands are (or should be) playing a game of very swift catch-up in order to create digital spaces that are visually representative of the kinds of diversity they know they need to hold as a bottom line to be financially solvent in today’s market.
I get that influence is a women’s industry and everyone wants to use us to learn from, to hold powerful conversations, to learn about new brands or trends to keep up with. But only a few want to hire us for our insights, conversations, community reach, and knowledge. While I believe most brands want to do good, these days I’m paying attention to who wants to take their ethics and package it intersectionaly.