Was the ‘race card’ pulled??

[Glittercloud17]

So just got back from vacation. At the airport, my daughter and I were queuing for passport control when a girl/teen pushed past in front of us. 5 seconds later I heard a lady say to me “excuse me, we just want to join our niece” pointing to the girl who’d pushed in. Without focusing too much attention on her or the family, but seeing an additional 3 people (another teen and two women) I said “sorry, but that girl just shoved in, so maybe it’s better she joins you instead” (meaning the 1 girl who’d pushed in should join her family behind my daughter and I, and not the whole family move in front of my daughter and I.

The lady said “oh, I don’t think she pushed in, darling” in a clearly sarcastic tone, but I didn’t reply as the girl/teen then walked back to join her aunt behind us.

Then I heard the woman say to the girl “you know exactly why she thinks she needs to be in front of us, this is another example”. At this stage I assume she meant I felt entitled to say this because they were a family of colour! So instead of pulling up the teen for pushing past us, the adult put the responsibility of this situation on me, insinuating I was bullying them for racially motivated reasons!!

It hadn’t even crossed my mind that they were black/white/asian whatever family! Only that a person had pushed past my daughter and I and the family felt they then had a right to go in front.

Comments continued among the adults in the family to the teens around how this was another example why the teenagers had to be more assertive “in this world” and that I, “the lady” was in the wrong.

I didn’t react, or say anything as I didn’t want to escalate something that clearly wasn’t there, and continued to look in front (not in their direction) or be accused of anything especially in an airport with a flight to catch! Later after passport control, I was standing talking to my daughter when the other adult (who I hadn’t looked at previously) violently pushed into my back as they walked past. I was very shocked by this (again I brushed this off).

People who have genuinely experienced racism - was I unreasonable, and were they justified to jump to this conclusion? I understand there’s a long, complex history around race, but I am not aware, at least on a conscious level, of discriminating against anyone like this??

My takeaway from my time in that job is that there are times when it pays dividends to own up to your errors in judgement. More people should try it

As someone who makes too many mistakes I thoroughly agree, @MuckFusk

A thought that occurred is that we hear a lot about the disproportionate number of ethnic minorities who are convicted, and I wonder how much effect this widespread blaming of anyone else has on this, and whether a simple admission of guilt where appropriate might lessen the numbers who may otherwise receive a more severe penalty

Because an accusation of racist discrimination on a teachers work record has serious implications for their career!! How naive of you to suggest it doesn't matter. Even at 23 I knew enough to get my union rep into a meeting with my head when the spitballing teen accused me of being racially motivated when he was reprimanded.

I did not say false accusations don’t matter, I said to politely and respectfully challenge them rather than relying on assumptions, which you successfully did.

The example you cite is different to the case in this thread. In your example you were directly accused of racial discrimination and challenged the accusation. Whereas in the case in this thread, there was no direct accusation - only an assumption of racial bias on the part of the OP. Which she could have confirmed or refuted by engaging with the people, but she did not. Now here we are as strangers online speculating as to their intentions, and assuming that it was motivated by skin colour. Which only lends itself to further encouragement of the practice of assuming that people with the same skin colour will think/act a certain way. Which fits within the definition of racial prejudice.

@RhaenysRocks my question ‘why does it matter what they think of you’ was to highlight that stopping wrongdoing should be more important than ensuring the other person’s good impression of you, which is something that is not within anyone’s capacity. It was a rhetorical question.

Assuming the incident took place as the OP describes, as you say, we can only speculate but I suppose that was why she phrased her op as a question, not a statement, which is fine. However, the discussion has widened to include posters suggesting that there is no such thing as people using a protected characteristic to gain an advantage in a particular situation where they have behaved poorly, as per several examples that have been given and that, in my case, the fact that I was accused must mean I should examine my motives and "unconscious bias" rather than accept that it does, in fact, happen. My example is unambiguous and I have related the details several times.

It absolutely does matter what people think of us but it is not always appropriate or proportional to challenge, as in the OP. Even if the comment from the family were explicit, a crowded airport, and an indirect comment rather than an open challenge probably does warrant a non response, whereas in my case it was imperative I challenge so I did, but according to some posters, the boy's stated perception of my motives holds more weight than my own actual knowledge of them.

I've been there and it finished my teaching career. Well rather, I retired early, when I was falsely accused of racism and homophobia. Why? Because I had asked a student to apologise for lateness, when she casually walked into my classroom an hour late. Preparing college students for employment, by teaching them work etiquette - how dare I. SLT spoke to the student first. Now, as I was teaching a law class, I could have easily asked the student to provide a working legal definition of both racism and homophobia - she had accused me of both things, in front of the class. Instead, I told SLT to shove it. One of their Heads had persuaded me to take on a 2 year contract. That was the last time I would compromise all the years of hard graft it had taken me in my career.

I have read through the full thread, and my understanding of the conflict between certain posters and others including you is this:

• some people have said that they believe people with protected characteristics can try to use those characteristics to gain social advantage in certain situations. They call this playing the ‘protected characteristic’ card.

• others have said that protected characteristics do not confer social advantages (which is why they are protected in the first place) and so they don’t believe that people with protected characteristics can try to use the characteristics to gain advantages in situations. At best, they can claim the protection inappropriately - i.e. claim that they are being subjected to harm on account of their protected characteristic when this isn’t actually happening, in order to achieve a selfish goal of getting what they want eg evading accountability for a wrongdoing. They have pointed out that the danger in seeing protected characteristics as a trump card that people use is that it detracts from the harms which people with protected characteristics are at risk of.

In this understanding of ‘playing the protected characteristic card’, playing the race card in this scenario would have been if the girl and her family had insisted on the advantage of jumping the queue because of their race. Essentially people are making the distinction between crying wolf and seeking unfair advantage.

I haven’t seen any posters on this thread say that crying wolf doesn’t happen. It’s essentially a debate over semantics. As to bias, everybody has them, as I said, it’s a function of being human, which is why it’s good to stick to facts.

Exactly this

I agree with most of that but @Tandora has in fact suggested, by telling me I should consider my unconscious bias, that perhaps my classroom incident was not in fact "crying wolf" but something more sinister on my part. (Ie a racially motivated reprimand). She has also acknowledged that some people might MISTAKENLY see racism where none exists but has stopped short of acknowledging,( I think anyway, it been a long thread) that some will DELIBERATELY do this. I and other posters have cited examples of exactly this. So she seems comfortable to say that one group will act on racial grounds deliberately but not the other.
As in all things, nuance is all. Absolutes are almost never true. To insist or deny that something is NEVER or ALWAYS the case is foolish. We can only go on a case by case basis and accept the possibility of poor behaviour on any of the parties, regardless of their colour.

that perhaps my classroom incident was not in fact "crying wolf" but something more sinister on my part. (Ie a racially motivated reprimand).

I said that you should reflect on the ways in which it is possible that unconscious racial bias may have played some role in influencing your behaviour. This is not personal to you- this is something that affects all of us and we all have a duty to reflect on.

She has also acknowledged that some people might MISTAKENLY see racism where none exists but has stopped short of acknowledging,( I think anyway, it been a long thread) that some will DELIBERATELY do this.

This is false. please read my posts.

As you say @RhaenysRocks it’s been a long thread. I will share this quote again:

”The problem is that white people see racism as conscious hate, when racism is bigger than that. Racism is a complex system of social and political levers and pulleys set up generations ago to continue working on the behalf of whites at other people’s expense, whether whites know/like it or not. Racism is an insidious cultural disease. It is so insidious that it doesn’t care if you are a white person who likes black people; it’s still going to find a way to infect how you deal with people who don’t look like you. Yes, racism looks like hate, but hate is just one manifestation. Privilege is another. Access is another. Ignorance is another. Apathy is another. And so on. So while I agree with people who say no one is born racist, it remains a powerful system that we’re immediately born into. It’s like being born into air: you take it in as soon as you breathe. It’s not a cold that you can get over. There is no anti-racist certification class. It’s a set of socioeconomic traps and cultural values that are fired up every time we interact with the world. It is a thing you have to keep scooping out of the boat of your life to keep from drowning in it. I know it’s hard work, but it’s the price you pay for owning everything.”

scott woods

Brainwashing.

They obviously thought they were in the right and she hadn't pushed in. People often misunderstand what has happened in situations like this. Without video of the event, we can't really say who was right.

I think we should probably put this to rest now @Tandora . It's been an interesting discussion on all sides.

I think you articulated this well.

It is true that, in some instances, individuals may interpret certain interactions or treatment as racially motivated when other factors may be at play. However, it is overly simplistic and dismissive to characterise this as playing the race card. Such interpretations often arise within a broader context of lived experience, where repeated exposure to discrimination, microaggressions, and systemic inequality shapes how individuals perceive and respond to ambiguous or negative encounters. From a sociological and psychological perspective, the attribution of certain behaviours to racism should be understood as part of a complex interplay between personal history, social context, and structural power dynamics. I think can be applied to all ism's including sex, gender, disability, classism etc

The thing you're denying is that some people DELIBERATELY do it to gain an advantage in that specific situation.

I never denied that was possible, I just explained that is rarely if ever any meaningful advantage to be gained, which is why the “race card” is a fantasy/ projection..

Also please read @Lavenderflower post.

That’s an excellent example of what I’m talking about, thank you.

Bit you've been given several examples on this thread of exactly that. It's not fantasy.

The only example where a real advantage was claimed was someone’s third hand opinion/ perception that someone else was crap at their job but able to keep it by “playing the race card”.

The mess I had to clear up when I took over his job took me quite a while, on top of keeping my original job and the new one running to a decent standard. I KNOW he was poor at his job, as a barely adequate admin should have been able to carry out that role well in under a day a week rather than failing in 5 days. The boss of the other team came to me apologising for the mess and said he had tried via all methods open to him to either get the job done adequately by the incumbent or have them replaced, and that racial prejudice was cited by the admin every time. This boss was of a different racial group than the admin, but not white British.

He was transferred to a different area but was finally dismissed in his next role, and took the department to tribunal which he lost. I know of a similar situation but as that was third hand and was of no impact on me I haven't even mentioned it; same result in that case of a lost tribunal claim.

Possibly the most impactful case mentioned above is when the police and other authorities failed to act in Rotherham due to the fear of being labelled racist. These gangs continued for many years due to being unchallengeable for this very reason, destroying the lives of young girls in the process.

The attempted gain in @RhaenysRocks case was to not be moved to where he would be under the eye of the teacher so no longer able to muck about.

But there are also cases when racism has been claimed not as an advantage for the accuser, but as a way of harming the person they have accused. We all know and understand that in certain jobs like a social worker or a teacher, an upheld accusation of racism will get them dismissed and struck off any registers and thereby unemployable in their field.

To a minor degree, another example is if someone doesn't get the results they want through one social worker they will try whatever method they think will work to be allocated to another who they hope will get the results they want. Of course in these cases most of the time what the complainant wants isn't in the power of the social worker e.g. getting council housing immediately when there's already a large queue of more needy cases (this is one I have seen time and time again).

So… your colleague lost his job and then his tribunal claim. I see.

The Rotherham case was way more complex than saying race was the reason they go away with it.

@RhaenysRocks case resulted in no benefit.

the other examples you give are theoretical.

Oh had I not fought it, it would have "benefitted" him to know I had it recorded and do you really think I or any other teacher would have risked reprimanding him again? Come on, you are reaching now.

But what benefit did the boy actually receive ?