You and I may agree that one’s intent behind a remark should be an important consideration, but that’s simply not how an HR department is going to view it. This would be treated no differently than a sexist remark. One can have the very best of intentions in, say, complimenting a young lady coworker on her appearances, but the litmus test here is if the recipients of the comment takes offense. And that evidently is clearly the case.
I think it’s considered “rude” in the same way that a fifth generation Japanese-American answering “New Jersey” in response to “Adele, where are you from?”
There is an assumed passive aggressive subtext. Made worse by text not conveying visual and tonal cues.
Chiming in to say that this is a really clean, succinct way to put it. And regardless of intention, the comment the OP made demonstrated a whole lot of ignorance.
My husband is from India. When I explain my South Indian last name, people immediately ask questions like, “How do you communicate with his family?” and “Oh, do you know the Patels? They live in Delhi.” I’ve also had people approach me in the park when I was with my kids to ask where I “got” them.
I never appreciated how intrusive some of the questions my husband receives must be until I started getting them, too. I have absolutely no problem satisfying others’ curiosity, but I find it frustrating that both colleagues and strangers feel as though my last name or children’s appearance somehow entitles them to ask very personal questions and/or make often inaccurate assumptions. So even if the intent was not racist, I could absolutely see the question being construed as such.
[quote=“Acsenray, post:180, topic:953703”]
When you are interacting with an individual, you treat that individual as an individual, not merely as a manifestation of your assumptions.[/quote]
Do I? No I make a lot of assumptions based on their looks. Don’t you?
So do I.
I think they mean, so if I’m only very racist, not super-racist, I’m not really racist.
Nah, it’s a busted syllogism.
Racist people are bad
I’m not a bad person
Therefore, I’m not racist (nor is anything I do or say racist)
Right, saying something racist doesn’t make you a racist.
Taking offense that it is pointed out just may, though.
The op hasn’t been branded as “racist”. He’s been told that he made a racist comment. That’s a much lesser charge, and one that you can easily move past.
We are all a little racist. We all need to put a little effort into not acting on our racism. If we succeed, we don’t get branded as big-R Racist.
I feel there’s a major vocabulary disconnect in this discussion between “being racist at all is always horrible and only things that are really bad make you racist” and my statement in the above paragraph. I think my take is much more constructive, because instead of arguing over “was that really racist?” we can give ourselves the grace to move on and ask “how can i behave better going forward, in ways that are more likely to achieve my goals and less likely to harm the people i interact with?”
“From my uterus” seems like a good response. It might be useful to develop/memorize a list of snappy answers to stupid questions, which this answer being the first.
And how do you act on those assumptions? Some of those actions might be racist. You know, you do have the ability to make judgments regarding your actions in context. You’re not just a robot loaded with assumptions that program your response.
There are two ways to respond when somebody suggests you made a remark that might be racist.
-
“I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to offend anyone. I’ll try to be better in the future.”
-
“What? You’re accusing me of being a racist? Everyone is so PC nowadays! You can’t talk to anyone without somebody attacking you for being a racist! I’m never going to speak in public again! It’s the only way you can be safe! America is dying! This is 1984 and we have thought police! I’m not a racist! You’re a racist!”
Ha. What’s usually going on in my head is, “Oh, I got them at Target. Two for one sale!”
Oh I don’t doubt that HR are going to view anything with the label of an “-ism” in the worst possible and most conservative, risk-averse way. I’ve seen it done close up.
Doesn’t mean they are always right in doing so and there is a reason why no department in a large company provokes as much eye-rolling derision as HR. What they choose to do is in no way a decent yardstick by which to measure general societal reasonableness.
“Huh. Well, when a man and a woman love each other very much…”
There are far, far more ways to respond than just those two and huge areas of grey in between them. That you think these are the only two options is illuminating even if it is obviously hyperbolic.
You didn’t answer my question.Do you make assumptions about people based on the their looks.
I agree. Yet since the OP is expressly dealing with something that happened at work, it would seem to be the applicable standard.
If they want to avoid catching heat from HR then yes, I agree they would be wise to be ultra cautious.
Years ago, I bumped into somebody in the break room at work. We didn’t know each other at all.
Her name, effectively, was Esperanza Gracia (Spanish for “Hope Grace”). I said something to her in Spanish.
Her reply: “I don’t speak Spanish.”
Not only was my assumption erroneous and clumsy … she is from the Philippines (once a Spanish colony).
And I knew better (than to ‘other’ her, than to assume a language, that Spain had numerous colonies, so a Spanish name didn’t tell me anything about ethnicity, that none of that mattered), but I simply made a faux pas.
I did. I fucked up. I said something stupid.
But I/it wasn’t racist, unless and until we just discard the dictionary definitions of the word:
It was clumsy. It was thoughtless. It was potentially hurtful. It was wrong.
It was a lot of things, and I truly did quite a bit of introspection upon realizing how foolish I had been.
But it wasn’t racist – not as the dictionaries define the word.
And I understand the endless usage nuances for the word, but I would argue that it’s more likely to change the behavior with the carrot than the stick.
I think we have to be careful – more careful than Alec Baldwin, maybe – when any of us points a gun that has the potential to do harm.
At some point – particularly when the faux pas was relatively benign and lacking any reason to ascribe malevolence – the greater harm could quite possibly come from blithely associating the offender with the likes of the Klan.
And remember: just like the ‘offender’ doesn’t get to approve the reaction of the ‘offended’ in one case, the same should be true in the other case.
In other words, it’s not for me to judge the “Indian guy’s” reaction to what he perceives as a micro-agression, but it doesn’t seem my place to tell a person how they should react to being labeled a racist.
ETA: and the distinction between labeling the action and labeling the person isn’t always a simple one for every single person to make.