How to respond to racist dog whistles
Dear J,
Our Headteacher, whom I’ve copied in, would like to meet with us on Monday, 24 November at 9:45 a.m. for a discussion regarding the teaching strategies used in Global Perspectives lessons. We will therefore meet in the Headteacher’s office at the scheduled time. I wish you a good weekend.
Kind Regards LP
— - - -x
Dear Mr A,
I am writing this email to question the reason and subsequently your intentions of having taken the sheer liberty of commenting on one of my student’s homework assignments. Not only does this raise serious questions on the privacy of the whole class it also poses the highly sensitive issue of whether this was ethical due to the fact that you must have read my assignment as well as the student’s answer .
As far as I am concerned your responsibility lies with the Individual Report and Team Project in 4G and not with the Written Paper . I therefore request that you refrain from commenting on their/my work which if I have to be honest is beyond belief. I would never, ever have taken such action as I consider it to be totally inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional.
Furthermore, you were invited to this Classroom as an “observer” which according to the Cambridge Dictionary is “a person who watches what happens but has no active part in it” (C2). To make matters worse this is the second incident in the past few weeks (the first being my lesson on Trump’s claim on Tylenol/autism and the use of my research sources on the Amish and Cuban populations). As a result I feel that it is high time we are removed as observers from the relevant classrooms to avoid any further discussion and to protect both mine and the students’ privacy.
Kind regards ,
Nnn
—x-x-x-X-
Hi, Nnn
Thank you for your email.
The request to Luca was because I was alerted to a submission. I incorrectly assumed he wished me to review it. I also work with him.
This cross over is caused by my having visibility of the group work you are conducting. I agree clarity is required and important. I was given this visibility. I did not request it. I would be very grateful if it were removed.
My working practice is to provide support without causing discomfort.
Regards J
—x——x -
Hi, Nnnn
I’m following up on your email from yesterday. I felt my response didn’t quite do it the justice it deserves.
The use of my last name is a dog whistle in English culture, a fact of which I’m sure you are aware. It is creating the racist otherness, the outsider, the one who needs to know his place in the scheme of things. This deliberate avoidance of my usual convention of ‘J’ signifies for me a departure from the typical professional civility we owe each other, if only to mask this kind of ugliness.
Your assumptions about my intent follows this line of reasoning closely. Phrases like ‘having taken the sheer liberty of commenting’ equates to how dare a non-white (Mr A) respond to ‘one of my student’s homework’. Forgive me, but this is a student in one of my classes. Since the request for comment on their work was not addressed specifically, I responded appropriately.
You go on to claim ‘Not only does this raise serious questions on the privacy of the whole class it also poses the highly sensitive issue of whether this was ethical.’
A student’s work is not subject to non disclosure agreements as this is not a commercial environment, so I’m struggling to understand what aspect of your or his privacy has been violated. Further, the fact that I can see his work and your instructions was assigned to me, I assume to provide oversight, which once again makes your claim of privacy violated a puzzling one. You then claim this is an ethical violation. Once again, your evidence for this claim is what precisely? That I must have read your instructions? Again, unless those instructions contained something of a private nature, I fail to understand the ethical violation. As I’m sure you’re aware, ethics is about harm and not about cultural norms. I fail to see how my reviewing a student’s work is an act of harm against them or you.
You claim ‘As far as I am concerned your responsibility lies with the Individual Report and Team Project in 4G and not with the Written Paper.’ While this is true for 4G, it is not true for my overall responsibilities; i.e. I am also responsible for Written Exam in other classes. The classroom messages from students do not make it clear which class it came from and I’m afraid I don’t know the students well enough to differentiate them by class/ subject. As I understand it, you also have oversight of my classes and groups and I am more than happy for you comment on their work if you see fit. It can only help not harm, as I see you as a fellow professional with the same duty of care that I have. After all, this is the true spirit of oversight. Another pair of eyes.
You follow this with the request ‘I therefore request that you refrain from commenting on their/my work which if I have to be honest is beyond belief. I would never, ever have taken such action as I consider it to be totally inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional.’
You claim that my commenting on their work is ‘beyond belief’, why? I’m a teacher, it’s my role, perhaps not with ‘your’ student but my role nonetheless. And, just for the record, we don’t own the students or their work.
Why is it ‘totally inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional’. This practice of throwing around uncivil language with no foundation in fact is precisely what we’re supposed be teaching the students to guard against. What makes my commenting ‘inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional’? My failure to understand my place in the mindset that sees English as the sole domain of white Anglo Saxon mother tongue speakers? I have lived in my skin for 70 years 40 of them in the UK and I’m all too familiar with language designed to put me back in my western oriental gentleman box.
Apparently this is not all the perceived harm and damage I have done you. You go on to claim ‘To make matters worse this is the second incident in the past few weeks (the first being my lesson on Trump’s claim on Tylenol/ autism and the use of my research sources on the Amish and Cuban populations).’
Excuse me, this information is in the public domain. In the spirit of supporting a colleague’s enthusiasm for a subject that is also close to my heart, I choose to amplify the significance of your messaging. It’s interesting that you see this as threatening and an attack upon your… (fill in the blanks).
You appear to keeping score of the number of times I have offended you with my actions. My attitude towards you is one of friendly, professional indifference on the assumption that you know your job and bear me no ill will.
Clearly, I’m wrong. Your accusations of my conduct sound more like admissions of your own attitudes and prejudices and I would argue they have no place in civil discourse. We don’t have like each other, but it is our professional duty to leave our emotional baggage at the door when we enter.
I welcome your thoughts.
Regards
J
——+ccx—=
Dear Nnnn
I hope this finds you well.
I have not heard back from you about my most recent reply to your email to me. I trust this is not because you are unwell.
The last time I wrote, I took a mild stance regarding your remarkable email in the hope that by keeping it between ourselves you might find it easier to make some kind of meaningful response. You appear, instead, to have chosen silence.
I have attached below the complete analysis of the incredible arrogance and racial superiority you have shown in your email. I chose originally to spare you the detailed analysis as shown italicised in the notes in chain brackets. I had excluded this in the hope that you might find some professionalism and human decency in yourself to attempt to address the harm your words have caused.
My hope seems in vain.
In the interests of transparency and safeguarding of professional conduct, I have now copied the Head and Luana Pasi into this exchange.
Regards
J
———+++-x
Hi, Nnn
I’m following up on your email from yesterday. I felt my response didn’t quite do it the justice it deserves. This version includes a detailed analysis of exactly how I see your comments, claims, accusations, and general prosecutorial attacks. The full analysis is contained within chain brackets and in italics.
The use of my last name is a dog whistle in English culture, a fact of which I’m sure you are aware. It is creating the racist otherness, the outsider, the one who needs to know his place in the scheme of things. This deliberate avoidance of my usual convention of ‘Ja’ signifies for me a departure from the typical professional civility we owe each other, if only to mask this kind of ugliness.
{Note: the use of my exceptionally non Anglo Saxon name sets racial boundaries and establishes the usual white to coloured hierarchy and marks me as the racial outsider by replacing collegial familiarity with arms length Islamophobic distance.}
Your assumptions about my intent follows this line of reasoning closely. Phrases like ‘having taken the sheer liberty of commenting’ equates to how dare a non-white (Mr A) respond to ‘one of my student’s homework’. Forgive me, but this is a student in one of my classes. Since the request for comment on their work was not addressed specifically, I responded appropriately.
{Note: the phrase you use informs me I have overstepped your mark and challenges my impertinence. This implies that one such as me should not speak unless spoken to, thus echoing a historical colonial attitude towards babu Indians. In the literature this is recognised as a policing trope intended to keep me in my place}
You go on to claim ‘Not only does this raise serious questions on the privacy of the whole class it also poses the highly sensitive issue of whether this was ethical.’
{Note: this ‘pearl clutching’ charge of some imagined breach extends into racial suspicion of my motives for reading materials that apparently I should not. You accuse me of overreaching ethically, that I have some malign intent and am not to be trusted. In doing this you are claiming the moral high ground while morally degrading me; a trope I’ve encountered before and recognise as suspicion projection based on my ethnicity, Indian or Muslim, your choice is wide.}
A student’s work is not subject to non disclosure agreements as this is not a commercial environment, so I’m struggling to understand what aspect of your or his privacy has been violated. Further, the fact that I can see his work and your instructions was assigned to me, I assume to provide oversight, which once again makes your claim of privacy violated a puzzling one. You then claim this is an ethical violation. Once again, your evidence for this claim is what precisely? That I must have read your instructions? Again, unless those instructions contained something of a private nature, I fail to understand the ethical violation. As I’m sure you’re aware, ethics is about harm and not about cultural norms. I fail to see how my reviewing a student’s work is an act of harm against them or you.
You claim ‘As far as I am concerned your responsibility lies with the Individual Report and Team Project in 4G and not with the Written Paper.’ While this is true for 4G, it is not true for my overall responsibilities; i.e. I am also responsible for Written Exam in other classes. The classroom messages from students do not make it clear which class it came from and I’m afraid I don’t know the students well enough to differentiate them by class/ subject. As I understand it, you also have oversight of my classes and groups and I am more than happy for you to comment on their work if you see fit. It can only help not harm, as I see you as a fellow professional with the same duty of care that I have. After all, this is the true spirit of oversight. Another pair of eyes.
{Note: by weaponising the Cambridge definition for observer you are patronising me by defining my role, eroding my legitimacy, and subordinating my role to you. This is classic racial erasure by unilaterally removing my professional standing and delegating me to a passive role. While in keeping with the definition, your preference violates the spirit of oversight intended by Cambridge.}
You follow this with the request ‘I therefore request that you refrain from commenting on their/my work which if I have to be honest is beyond belief. I would never, ever have taken such action as I consider it to be totally inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional.’
{Note: the prescriptive language you use consolidates what you perceive as the correct hierarchy and is exclusive in tone, reinforcing the ‘know your place’, a trope so familiar its almost nostalgic. This attempts to provide ethos for your earlier gatekeeping by offering it as a procedural concern.}
You claim that my commenting on their work is ‘beyond belief’, why? I’m a teacher, it’s my role, perhaps not with ‘your’ student but my role nonetheless. And, just for the record, we don’t own the students or their work.
{Note: your use of the possessive case ‘my class’, ‘my assignment’, ‘my student’ is marking your territory and one where I am the intruder. This is not the first time you have implied this: you may recall your outrage at my daring to upload exercises on academic collocations for your group, with which I also work and need them to know for the work they produce for me. Paired with the salutation your are telling me that I am intruding, a stance commonly recognised as racial gatekeeping in a professional context. You don’t even attempt to keep the heat and anger out of your words. You clearly do not understand that anything written will haunt you forever, especially when it’s as toxic as this.}
Why is it ‘totally inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional’. This practice of throwing around uncivil language with no foundation in fact is precisely what we’re supposed be teaching the students to guard against. What makes my commenting ‘inappropriate , unacceptable and unprofessional’? My failure to understand my place in the mindset that sees English as the sole domain of white Anglo Saxon mother tongue speakers? I have lived in my skin for 70 years 40 of them in the UK and I’m all too familiar with language designed to put me back in my western oriental gentleman box.
{Note: your accusatory tone implies moral superiority and racial dominance. You are not being collegial but prosecutorial. This type of moralising is typically associated with control of racialised colleagues by using disciplinary codes not descriptions, a tactic all too familiar to me during my time in the UK. Basically, you are, once again, legitimising yourself at my expense.}
Apparently this is not all the perceived harm and damage I have done you. You go on to claim ‘To make matters worse this is the second incident in the past few weeks (the first being my lesson on Trump’s claim on Tylenol/ autism and the use of my research sources on the Amish and Cuban populations).’
Excuse me, this information is in the public domain. In the spirit of supporting a colleague’s enthusiasm for a subject that is also close to my heart, I chose to amplify the significance of your messaging. It’s interesting that you see this as threatening and an attack upon your… (fill in the blanks).
You appear to be keeping score of the number of times I have offended you with my actions. My attitude towards you is one of friendly, professional indifference on the assumption that you know your job and bear me no ill will.
Clearly, I’m wrong. Your accusations of my conduct sound more like admissions of your own attitudes and prejudices and I would argue they have no place in civil discourse. We don’t have to like each other, but it is our professional duty to leave our emotional baggage at the door when we enter.
I welcome your thoughts.
{Note: in summary, your email covers so much ground it should serve as a case study for your next exercise in the Written Exam. Depersonalise it, claim you found it on the net and, hey presto, you’ve work for weeks. Well done, you!
The key points are;
Racial othering (surname-only address)
Racial gatekeeping (“my student”, “your responsibility lies…”)
Racial suspicion (false privacy accusations)
Racial erasure (dictating observer role, stripping autonomy)
Racial behavioural policing (“sheer liberty”)
Racial moralisation (“unprofessional”, “beyond belief”)
Regards
J