Asking someone where they are from
- Thread starter Lysander
- Start date
Which is probably why she was asking the question.
I think the issue is that its been treated like a horrible incident of racism. The lady involved is milking this for all its worth and using it for her 5 minutes of fame. Most people agree that it was rude but I think most people also think its been massively blown out of all proportion.
Being offended as a black person doesn't automatically classify something as racism. Theres a good reason a lot of people are absolutely petrified to talk about race now. You simply can't win unless you nod and agree that something is racist when someone else decides it is.
Then she should've respected her first answer of her being from the UK.
Of course being offended as a black/white/brown/green person doesn't automatically class something as racism but I also believe someone can do something racist without actually being racist and I think that's likely what's happened here.
I'd be shocked if the lady was an actual every day racist but I'd not be surprised to hear she has prejudiced views due to her age.
I'm not perfect. I try not to offend anyone but every now and then I'll put my foot in it and say something that's not necessarily right. Fortunately, I get to use those as learning experiences so that I don't make the mistake again in the future. The lady should chalk this up as one of those.
She, and everyone in this thread, can likely see the difference between the wording and how it can be received. That's only a good thing as it means people are less likely to make the mistake and be in a sticky position in the future
People should never be afraid to ask questions about our differences. We're all different and I think those differences should be celebrated
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
I have been really busy so only perusing this extensive thread when I can, but to reaffirm my take on why the BBC are running this in premier positions on the news and their web site I copied the below about Susan Hussey's late husband's time as head of the Corporation.
He locked horns with the old and leftist / liberal guard there constantly, and tried to bring a more balanced approach to what even the hierarchy have confessed was a time of marked left wing bias.
It culminated in a big row over how sections of the BBC had knowingly supported the scandalous and devious means of Bashir getting the late Princess Diane on the channel. Marmaduke Hussey was enraged to learn of the lengths of deception and even fraud that had been used.
It was undoubtedly his condemnation that brought the whole sordid affair into the public domain and resulted in many high ranking staff having egg on their faces, and the BBC having to pay very costly damages.
Marmaduke became a pariah in their eyes. The opportunity to get their claws into his wife, Susan, is something that they will be doing with relish.
It will be interesting if this has repercussions with how the BBC and The Firm rub along with coverage of Charles' coronation. There will be many old guard senior courtiers fuming about their relentless coverage.
He was appointed Chairman of the BBC in 1986, upon the death of Stuart Young, thanks in part to his close connections to the ruling Conservative Party.[2]
Within three months of joining the BBC, he had forced the resignation of the Director-General, Alasdair Milne, following a series of rows in recent years between the BBC and the Conservative government.[4] In the 1990s, Hussey fell out with Director General John Birt over his management style and Panorama's controversial interview with Diana, Princess of Wales in 1995.[5][6]
On 11 September 1996, Hussey was made a life peer as Baron Hussey of North Bradley, of North Bradley in the County of Wiltshire.[7]
He locked horns with the old and leftist / liberal guard there constantly, and tried to bring a more balanced approach to what even the hierarchy have confessed was a time of marked left wing bias.
It culminated in a big row over how sections of the BBC had knowingly supported the scandalous and devious means of Bashir getting the late Princess Diane on the channel. Marmaduke Hussey was enraged to learn of the lengths of deception and even fraud that had been used.
It was undoubtedly his condemnation that brought the whole sordid affair into the public domain and resulted in many high ranking staff having egg on their faces, and the BBC having to pay very costly damages.
Marmaduke became a pariah in their eyes. The opportunity to get their claws into his wife, Susan, is something that they will be doing with relish.
It will be interesting if this has repercussions with how the BBC and The Firm rub along with coverage of Charles' coronation. There will be many old guard senior courtiers fuming about their relentless coverage.
He was appointed Chairman of the BBC in 1986, upon the death of Stuart Young, thanks in part to his close connections to the ruling Conservative Party.[2]
Within three months of joining the BBC, he had forced the resignation of the Director-General, Alasdair Milne, following a series of rows in recent years between the BBC and the Conservative government.[4] In the 1990s, Hussey fell out with Director General John Birt over his management style and Panorama's controversial interview with Diana, Princess of Wales in 1995.[5][6]
On 11 September 1996, Hussey was made a life peer as Baron Hussey of North Bradley, of North Bradley in the County of Wiltshire.[7]
We don't necessarily know if she did ask where she's "really from" though, it's still just an issue with rudeness/lack of tact though if that were the case.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Nov 2019
- Posts
- 4,322
Curious to know why you think she has to have a borderline personality disorder?
Definitely agree that she is milking it now though.
Makes me feel so sorry for Prince William and Princess Catherine who are in America.
All rather convenient timing for this to happen.
Last edited:
Just a quick point. (LOL and I immediately make it a long post, apologies!)
Saying people are racist if they don't find this racist is a common theme in the thread. The issue with this is that the definition of the 'racist' or 'racism' (even 'casual racism') is mainly predicated on prejudice as the motivating factor and I think what you are seeing is a bunch of people that don't see the manifestation of prejudice in the exchange..
I'm not saying that is black and white, I think it's far more nuanced, for example, saying a racial slur without ill intent (i.e. innocently) is not necessarily illegal (??), but good luck trying to defend its use.. there is (almost) no 'context' to which you can plausibly attribute innocent usage.
And this isn't aimed at yourself, I don't know you, but I have noticed this is a divisive issue for some time and pollutes many threads but lets take this thread as an example.. I can say from my end, I feel I undertand the potential prejudice that could be inferred (i.e. my understanding aligns with this reference that fully covers all aspects discussed: https://www.greatplacetowork.com/re...the-workplace-how-to-identify-respond-to-them) but the key difference is, I look at the context, I look at what was said and who said it, and then ask if I feel SH was making the assumptions required to then be sure that it was a manifestation of prejudice.
This does make me wonder if a lot of rhetoric that effectively causes "You are racist if you don't find that racist" might well be that it's an unconcious reaction to their own prejudices, I mean why immediately jump to the conclusion that SH assumes all PoC are the same, or that PoC are all perpetual foreigners (using the aforementioned references terminology)? Or is it you are approaching it purely on the recipients end, it's not the prejudice of SH that is the issue, it's simply NF's interpretation/assumptions of what SH 'could' have meant that immediately is abhorrent? But then thats subjective and open to abuse.
What I can say is that Ngozi herself (justiably or not) seems quite prejudiced (https://futurehackney.com/ngozi)
e.g.
I don't like the phrasing, she was traumatised purely on the basis it didn't feel authentic and she feels she was in a colonial environment despite the UK population being only 2.2% black around that time (with 5 black people, that's over representation) and admits her white heads of department treated her well?
Do we have similar for SH that can help us contextualise her comments to establish plausible prejudice so we can agree this was actual racism?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,828
"British" isn't an answer to where someone is from- it indicates citizenship, not necessarily origin. There are several million people who are British, and were born outside the UK.
However, repeating the question is downright rude and annoying.
Perhaps thats where we differ. I think that labelling something racist is giving it a certain level of nastiness and intent which I don't think there is here. I think people have a tendency to read too much into things simply because one of the people is of a certain group. If this was an encounter between two white people racism wouldn't come into it. It would just be a rude old lady dealing with a stubborn lady.
No doubt. I think most people hold some outdated views. I also have a suspicion that some views that we deem outdated are just not deemed acceptable and yet are perfectly valid. They are just treated as horrible because they pertain to protected groups. There are plenty of views on the English that if you were to voice a similar view on certain nations or peoples would be considered deeply offensive. Its all a bit silly at times.
Right, I completely agree. The difference is that this ladies learning experience is having to step down from her job, be accused of abusing the charity worker, being on the front page of every newspaper and generally having her life ruined over a very simple interaction. The response and fallout to the indiscretion are madly out of proportion.
Again, I think we differ here because people don't like being publicly humiliated and told off for what are minor incidents and quite often instead of a learning experience it just makes them bitter and resistant to change. I think we saw this a lot with Brexit. Telling people that the only possible reason they could not want to be in the EU was because they were racist and xenophobic just pushed them to the side, made them less likely to engage with anyone from the other side and surprise surprise, their views remained the same.
We know that the best way to teach is not to punish and humiliate and yet that seems to be the go to for anything like this. Doesn't make any sense in my eyes.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Nov 2019
- Posts
- 4,322
I have a borderline personality disorder myself, which is why I was curious, and asking you but thank you for replying.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Nov 2019
- Posts
- 4,322
ThanksFrom your signature it sounds far from borderline Alice
I agree that being “British” does not necessarily confirm that someone was born in the UK.
In this context, the question was “where are you from?” rather than “what is your citizenship?” - the answer “British” therefore meaning that the person is choosing to answer that they come from the UK.
Asking for clarification of heritage/descent as a follow up is a little strange but potentially possible in a socially acceptable way. As you say though, the approach was rude.
is this even relevant?
The transcript says this:
Lady SH: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space.
SH: No, where do you come from?
Me: We're based in Hackney.
SH: No, what part of Africa are you from?
Me: I don't know, they didn't leave any records.
SH: Well, you must know where you're from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, the UK.
SH: No, but what nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British.
So, she clearly answered that she was from the UK, and that in terms of her African heritage (which could be centuries back as her parents are from the Caribbean) , she simply does not know the specifics (which is fair).
If that transcript is true, she answered more than reasonably, before getting unduly pressed about it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,110
- Location
- Birmingham
If it comes out that she has asked that question before to other people, including white people, would you concede its not racist?
By extension, the only way to know if it was racist therefore is to judge the person on history not one single event.
I think it unlikely that she asked a white person in that room what part of Africa they were from.