As racialized and gendered structures, organizations can reinforce complex inequalities, especially with regard to emotional labor. While the literature on emotional labor is established, little is known about how race and sexual orientation shape feeling rule enforcement. Interviewing staff at university LGBTQ resource centers, we argue that feeling rules have a sexual orientation-based dimension and are experienced and enforced differently based on race. White LGBTQ staff find that they can express anger strategically to bring awareness to issues of race, but do not confront racism in their work for fear of alienating other Whites, which they believe would harm their center. LGBTQ staff of color experience organizational consequences for their anger, which is directed toward the racism they and students of color experience in the university. Lacking the credential of Whiteness (Ray 2019), staff of color find they cannot reach the benchmark set by Whites’ enthusiastic performance of emotional labor. These feeling rules operate in service of what James M. Thomas (2018) calls diversity regimes, which are performances of a benign commitment to racial equality, that retrench racial inequality by failing to redistribute resources along racial lines. By sanctioning anger toward the university—as an institution that reproduces racism—feeling rules have organizational consequences: Whites can advance through compliance and enthusiasm; staff of color are terminated or denied opportunities; and critiques of racism are silenced. While created to address diversity, LGBTQ centers are purposely not structurally positioned to radically shift resources in a way to combat racism, and feeling rules maintain these arrangements while allowing universities to claim a commitment to equality. These findings hold implications for broader concerns of racism, sexual orientation, and inequality within work organizations, especially manifestations of worker control within diversity work.

作为种族化和性别化的结构，组织可以强化复杂的不平等，尤其是在情感劳动方面。虽然关于情绪劳动的文献已经建立，但关于种族和性取向如何塑造感觉规则执行的情况知之甚少。在采访大学 LGBTQ 资源中心的工作人员时，我们认为感觉规则具有基于性取向的维度，并且根据种族的不同而不同地体验和执行。白人 LGBTQ 员工发现他们可以策略性地表达愤怒以提高对种族问题的认识，但不会在工作中面对种族主义，因为他们担心疏远其他白人，他们认为这会伤害他们的中心。有色人种的 LGBTQ 员工因他们的愤怒而经历组织后果，这是针对他们和有色人种学生在大学中经历的种族主义。由于缺乏白人的证书（Ray 2019），有色人种的工作人员发现他们无法达到白人热情的情绪劳动表现所设定的基准。这些感觉规则服务于 James M. Thomas (2018) 所说的多样性制度，这是对种族平等的良性承诺的表现，通过未能按照种族重新分配资源来缩小种族不平等。通过制裁对大学的愤怒——作为一个再现种族主义的机构——感觉规则会产生组织后果：白人可以通过服从和热情进步；有色人种员工被解雇或被剥夺机会；对种族主义的批评被压制。虽然 LGBTQ 中心是为解决多样性而创建的，但在结构上故意不定位以从根本上转移资源以打击种族主义，感觉规则维持这些安排，同时允许大学声称对平等的承诺。这些发现对工作组织内的种族主义、性取向和不平等的更广泛关注具有影响，尤其是多样性工作中工人控制的表现。