Stay or Leave?

[papayahed]

No, not the forum.

Hypothetical situation:

You belong to a local chapter of a professional organization. The local chapter meets once a month for lunch. The president of your chapter every so often makes veiled comments about "other" workers (ie non american workers). The last meeting the president came out and made blatant racist comments about a specific group of people, if you hadn't spoken up he (and another member) would have continued. The meeting went on without further incident.

Question:

What do you do now? Do you quit the organization? Do you bring a few friends from that specific group to the next meeting? Do you complain to the national organization?

[Scheherazade]

I wouldn't quit or complain but try to bring in more like-minded people...

Complaining would not solve anything, I believe, and leaving would mean they carry on the way they see fit freely, which would not make me happy.

Stay and fight it, I say.

[JuniperWoolf]

I'd go at it head-on, no beating around the bush. Next time someone said something about "other" workers, I'd blatantly say "oh, you mean hispanics (or blacks or asians or whatever he happens to be referring to)? It sounds to me like you have something against hispanics." Then I'd see where it went from there, gauge his reply. The group might be so freaked out by your willingness to adress the behaviour that they cease immediately. If there was complete denial of the behaviour (which usually happens with closet-racists) and yet it still continued, I'd keep hammering away at it while simultaneously communicating to the national organization.

Buuuut you might not make many friends. :D

[Maximilianus]

I agree with the previous posters. Someone has to take a stand against evil, so why should it not be any of us? There are suitable times to start a confrontation.

[Alexander III]

Does he not have as much right to be racist as you do of not being racist? As long as he's not trying to convert you you should offer him the same curtesie I suppose.

[Emil Miller]

Does he not have as much right to be racist as you do of not being racist? As long as he's not trying to convert you you should offer him the same curtesie I suppose.

There's no suppose about it.

[Calidore]

The original posting only talks about the president and another member being racist. If this racism is actually an unwritten part of the group philosophy and something most/all members have in common then it's time to find another group. If it's just a personality flaw of the president and this other person, and otherwise the president is good at what he does, and the group (who presumably elected him) simply tolerates it because the pros outweigh the con, then oh well. You can always mention that you're uncomfortable with it (privately--confronting the pres in front of the group will be worse than useless) and see what happens. You can also talk to other members of the group who have known him longer to get the lay of the land, as it were.

[billl]

It's also the case that the organization might prefer that that sort of blatant racism not occur at official meetings at the level of local chapters. It might (understandably) go against official policy. If you think it's fine to move on (and hopefully have made the point that such attitudes shouldn't be publicly expressed as if they were acceptable in the professional context), then maybe just let it pass (as Calidore suggests might be appropriate) and see how things move forward. But it has nothing to do with freedom of speech or people's right to be racist, etc. A professional organization has every right to make racism unacceptable at their official functions.

[Buh4Bee]

If this is a professional organization, I don't know anywhere in the civilized world that would tolerate such behavior from a leader or openly discussed among its members. If there is concrete evidence of blatant racism then there should be some sort of venue to file a grievance or complaint. The question is, are you willing to do that? This is like whistle blower behavior and could have serious consequences.

Just some other questions; what kind of professional group is this? Is this racism particular to these few people or is it rampant?

[papayahed]

Does he not have as much right to be racist as you do of not being racist? As long as he's not trying to convert you you should offer him the same curtesie I suppose.


There's no suppose about it.


Offer him the same curtesie? Really would you sit through a meeting where somebody was talking about your family in a derogatory manner? Would you sit there and smile?



Bill and Jersea hit the nail on the head. This isn't about his right, this is about belonging to professional organization (American Institute of chemical Engineers) and the code of conduct for that organization. The dues are the same for everybody. Most of us go to talk about work stuff not other people.

I don't think it's just the president and the one other guy who engaged the conversation but I think the rest of the group is smart enough not to join in the conversation.

[JuniperWoolf]

To me, killing racism is vital to global progress. If entire groups of people grow up under the stipulation that they're inherantly inferior, they aren't going to be able to realize their full potential because they'll feel like they're somehow "less" than white men which will weigh on them and harm their ability to succeed. This has been proven in many studies which have been conducted and re-affirmed by many organizations and universities - when a black man is reminded in a questionaire that he is black before writing an exam, he preforms more poorly than when he is reminded that he is a man (or indeed, when he is not asked if he is a man or if he is black, he is able to preform without any prejudice at all and this is reflected in his score). When an Asian woman is reminded that she is Asian before writing a math exam, she preforms better than when she is reminded that she is a woman. I can get anyone who won't take my word for it several links to several of these studies if they'd like.

So, removing these stipulations of people being born "inferior" allows them to preform free of any prejudice which might inhibit their progress, and the full development of our people is how we as a species advance. That is reason enough for us to confront biggotry.

[MarkBastable]

There's no suppose about it.

It's a question of separating the president's office from his person.

During a meeting of the chapter, the president is acting in his capacity as the head of that organisation, and anything he says is representative of his position, not of his personal views.

So, sure, he has every right to whatever views he likes in his personal life, but in his position as president of the chapter, he's speaking for all the members - so he shouldn't express racist ideas, or any other idea that isn't specific to the charter of the organisation. (Similarly, if one of the purposes of the organisation were racism, he'd be obliged to express racist ideas, even if he were not racist himself.)

[Emil Miller]

Offer him the same curtesie? Really would you sit through a meeting where somebody was talking about your family in a derogatory manner? Would you sit there and smile?


I don't think it's just the president and the one other guy who engaged the conversation but I think the rest of the group is smart enough not to join in the conversation.

Was he talking about your family?

Sounds pretty smart to me.

[papayahed]

Was he talking about your family?
.

yes.

[Emil Miller]

.

yes.

You mean your actual blood relatives?

[papayahed]

You mean your actual blood relatives?

Do you think I didn't understand the question the first time?



Now, before we get too off course the original question was:

How would you handle the situation?

[The Comedian]

So, leaving aside the derogatory comments for a moment. . . . how important is this professional organization to you? Are there others similar to it?

And how long have these comments persisted? Have you been a meeting since the episode that you described? If so, what was the content/tone of that?

Of all these, I like Scher's suggestion the best. . . especially if the the organization does help you as a professional.

I would not leave right away. I'd go to a second meeting to see what happens, what's said, etc. . . .if the racist comments fade away, then I'd probably just keep going and all but I'd go with a more careful and self-serving attitude. I'd be very leery of personal views of those whom you cited here, and as Scher said, seek people like yourself, and I'd just know that I was going there only for the professional insight that I got there.

[Scheherazade]

Do you think I didn't understand the question the first time?There is always that possibility, you know... :smilewinkgrin:

Is this President elected? If so, why not run against him next time?

And especially since other people are not joining in, I'd still say try to talk to them and get some support to send a message to this guy.

[qimissung]

Some very good points are being made here. Knowing myself, I would probably do as Comedian suggested, but if I ascertained that there was some deep-seated racism, or that it was pervasive, I have to admit that I would probably just quit going.

I would not think I owed him/them any curtesy, however, in expressing views that denegrate others.

[Buh4Bee]

I agree, whatever route you decide to take, I wouldn't back down. Complaining could really make a big wave, but finding a crowd you can sit with of like minded people. He does represent the organization as acting president, so racist comments are wildly inappropriate. If he wants to be a racist at home, well, he can be that way. But I do not believe that engineers are going to sit back and accept that.

Another idea; I find I can be overly sensitive and take comments very literally at times. I try to check myself with other people I work with.