Standing Up Against Racism: An Experiment

by lisa, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:10 am

In this seven minute video, sent in by Dmitriy T.M., actors racially profile a black woman in a retail store (also an actor) to test whether witnesses will step in or stay out of it. They find that 80 out of 100 shoppers do nothing, with people of color more likely to intervene than white people.

Why might people avoid intervening? Some of them, likely, do not intervene because they agree with the rationale of the worker (black people should stay out of upscale clothing stores/are likely to steal). But others may not intervene for other reasons related to small group dynamics. If only we had a social psychologist to help us out…

Also in group dynamics: (accidental) experiments in the suspension of rules of decorum, conformity, extreme childhood isolation, obedience, and prejudice.

93 Comments

Tags: race/ethnicity, race/ethnicity: Blacks/Africans, race/ethnicity: Whites/Europeans, social psychology

1909 News Article: “Faculty Bars Flirting”

Health Insurance Companies and Coerced Sterilization

Comments

Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist 11:05 am on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

people are shit. Period.
Gomi 11:27 am on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

I’d guess that the majority don’t intervene because they don’t want to get involved. Not intervening doesn’t imply implicit agreement with the profiling, just a basic unwillingness to get involved in other peoples’ problems (or an unwillingness to make other peoples’ problems their own).

People like to stay in their little cocoons. It’s easier, safer and less hassle.
- Alia 9:04 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  I agree. Though some people definitely might feel that something wrong is going on, most people don’t like to get involved and help others.
- NMjayd 12:23 pm on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Sounds like the same excuse people give the world over for not stopping rapists in “good” areas, for watching children get abused. As was sad by a far better writer than I, “all that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.” Period.
- karinova 1:11 am on November 6, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Of course. But what ever happened to “what if that was me?”
  At the very least?
  It’s not particularly altruistic when you think about it, but it does the job. Who are these people who feel they have absolute privilege? Who never, ever got picked on, or threatened, or profiled, or silenced, and therefore apparently can’t relate at all, in any way?
  
  Or… can’t they?
  Notice how hard they all had to (were willing to) work to “ignore” that ugly scene.
  When the one shopper in said she didn’t intervene because “it had nothing to do with me,” I wanted to scream, Yes it does, and you know it!
  
  @&!!*%!
  “When they came for the _____s, I did not stand up, because I was not a _____.”
  Yeah, keep telling yourself that.
  - NMjayd 1:38 am on November 7, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    By my comment, I meant it was our duty to act, in spite of the risk or discomfort, not that there was any in this instance…….because “When they came for the _____’s, I did not stand up, because I was not a ____.”
    I totally agree with you, and am sorry I did not express myself well enough for that to come across. My apologies.
  - Gomi 11:17 am on November 11, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    My comment wasn’t that such passivity was a good thing, merely that it was likely a more immediate reason for people not getting involved than any agreement with the racism. Apathy and passivity are far greater threats than racism and bias, I think. The majority of people, these days, are less racist themselves, in my experience, but still ignore racism in society and therefore allow it to continue.
    
    The racism isn’t the thing illustrated, I think, but the apathy of others.
Cute Bruiser 11:35 am on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

I think it’s interesting they chose an upscale store. I would be curious to see if the results were the same in a different type of store or if they would differ at all.

@Gomi: Some people feel that silence does constitute a kind of agreement. If you don’t speak up, then you are allowing something to happen. You imply that you do not disagree. There is a reason negligence can be considered a crime.
- hypatia 12:47 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Bruiser, the concept of negligence is a good one. If you omit something you know to be wrong or dangerous you would be considered guilty under the law. Maybe, in principle this should be applied to social situations of this magnitude as well.
- Nick Naylor 4:24 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Cate – your interpretation of criminal negligence is way off. Criminal negligence only applies in limited cases, and only when a person’s actions are truly outrageous.
  
  A better analogy here is the fact that in the majority of states, there is absoutely no duty for an average person to intervene or rescue a person in danger. You could see a person drowning and an olympic swimming medalist, but still there is no legal duty for you to rescue.
  
  People are not intervening here because they are avoiding conflict, not because they are racists. In any event, I think we can all agree that the right thing to do is to prevent people from being complete idiots. Racist shopkeepers are such people.
nakedthoughts 12:18 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

the ONE time that a white person spoke up it had a profound effect on the store. Which also shows that white voices are more respected than POC voices. when POC stood up for the actress, only they left the store. But when the two white women voiced that it was racist, and that was inappropriate, half the store walked out.

so even within the context of standing up against racism, racism comes into play. for an interesting post on the whitening of the anti-racist movement check out: http://guerrillamamamedicine.wordpress.com/2009/10/29/anti-racism-what-went-wrong/
- Thaddeus 4:03 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  It wasn’t “ONE” white person. There were almost twenty people who stood up for the wronged shopper. They didn’t show them all.
  
  “with people of color more likely to intervene than white people”
  
  This isn’t an accurate statement either. “people of color feel the most strongly” is what they said. Given the sample size and demographics involved it probably isn’t really possible to really judge who is “more likely to intervene”.
  - nakedthoughts 10:34 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    I was not saying that only one person stood up, but that white people stood up once. I suppose you are right that it could be that it was an even split, though from the clips shown 3 or four of intervening clips were poc and 1 (or 2) were White people.
    
    so 10 or fewer (most likely fewer given the implications) white people intervened.
    
    My point still stands though. that multiple times when POC intervened, only the POC walked out. When the white person intervened, enough other people felt shamed to walk out as well. I really don’t think it is that at that moment there were that many more supporters of anti-racism than every other clip they showed.
    
    I don’t think that everyone walking out when a white woman stands up is noise. I think it is very significant and says something about this culture and who we view as having a legitimate voice.
    - bobsfrankenbeans 12:10 am on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply
      
      Could it be that the two white women lead the actress out with them and clearly stated that she should file a complaint and WALK OUT with them that prompted others in the store to follow? Whereas the other examples the people who intervened decided to leave the store…and the actress.
      
      Also, I must admit that I have issue with your statement that “…so even within the context of standing up against racism, racism comes into play.” Based on your examples I really find it hard to see the racism within that context and find it mildly offensive that one would perceive racism there. I think there seem to be multiple variables which could lead to such outcomes and am having trouble seeing this underlying racism that you seem to be alluding to.
      - nakedthoughts 8:27 pm on November 9, 2009 | #
        
        I’m not saying that the women who stood up to defend her were racist, but that the tendencey of white people to listen to white voices against racism over poc voices against racism is evidence of a racist culture.
        
        I don’t think it is intentional. I think it has everything to do with how inundated we are as a culture with racist practices.
        
        Stuff white people do has a good post on it: http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2009/11/take-racism-more-seriously-when-white.html
        
        I think it is important to acknowledge the power and privilege of white anti racist actions, otherwise it can reify the the racist system unintentionally. I am not saying that white anti racist actions shouldn’t happen. I am upset at the context and culture, not at the individuals speaking up. I am upset because there is not good answer on how to adress this effectively. sorry if my initial anger clouded my ability to express that.
nakedthoughts 12:27 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

sorry there was another white person who didn’t really intervene, but started crying. instead of standing up for the woman, the issue was changed to one about hurting the white person.

not to say one shouldn’t be upset at such things, or that she doesn’t have personal reasons for her level of upset, and its great and compassionate. but it changes the conversation, derails it if you will (however inadvertant), so that instead of dealing with racism and the hurt the actress was dealing with, now everyone is focused on consoling the white person who upset.
- hypatia 12:57 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Sorry but this is so contradictory. We can’t really blame the poor girl who burst into tears but heck let’s blame her anyways?
  
  I don’t think it changed the direction of the piece at all. They did their little intervention, a bit of a hug it out situation and then they immediately moved onto the next reactions. The only difference is that they did the intervention bit in the store which I am assuming that most likely she was sitting there and crying for a while or they were more worried on the legal side of it all.
  - nakedthoughts 2:36 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    I think you are right now that I watch the clip again. I am so frustrated that society is set up that even anti-racist acts are steeped in societal (racist) views on poc (as evidenced to me in the part with the two white women causing half the store to walk out). This theme has been repeating for me recently and i think it made me project onto the other part of the clip.
    
    She really does try to make the sales person admit to being racist. That is actually pretty awesome. Nailing people down to admit that the cause of their actions is racist is really hard.
    
    I apologize.
    - Tiago 10:16 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
      
      the woman that cried was amazing… first she expresses honest and innocent disbelief, and then she can feel it so intensely that she starts crying, because she feels things that happen to others just as strongly as to herself, I think that is awesome empathy, and I’m thinking this has to be like one in a million, a very special person…
- Jillian C. York 1:02 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  A) The person who got upset was not obviously white to me (though she was not Black either). I perceived that as her being upset at something she related to, personally.
  - possiblyj 2:52 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Is that to suggest that to suggest that a person who is “obviously white” couldn’t relate to a victim of racial bigotry?
    - Erika 4:26 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
      
      There is no way for a white person to know what it’s like to be a POC. They might be able to relate, but it just is not the same.
      - Jillian C. York 4:27 pm on November 4, 2009 | #
        
        Erika, I’m saying she’s not white. She appears, to me, to be Arab or Persian.
      - Jillian C. York 4:28 pm on November 4, 2009 | #
        
        Oh, sorry, I thought your comment was a response to mine, but now I see it was a response to possiblyj.
      - Luai_lashire 4:18 pm on November 5, 2009 | #
        
        I disagree. While there are some differences between them, discrimination on non-racial grounds has a similar affect on a white person as discrimination on racial grounds does for POC, and it can be every bit as pervasive and cruel as racism. In fact, depending on one’s condition, ablism can be arguably more limiting (though I really would rather not get into a debate about which kind of discrimination is “worse”, as those lead no where good). To assume that a white person does not belong to any other categories that may put them at a similar disadvantage to that of a POC is foolish at best.
        
        I had to respond to this because I, myself, am white but belong to several categories of people who are discriminated against regularly in different ways, and I am struggling to even manage to accomplish any of the goals of my life due to discrimination- I may not graduate highschool and I probably won’t make it all the way through college because of it. I can’t get the assistance I need to have equal access to society, so I am forced to struggle far more than any of my peers. On top of that, people make all sorts of negative assumptions about me and behave accordingly because of my appearance, all the time. I cannot say that I know EXACTLY what it’s like to be a POC, since I am not one; But from reading and comparing with my experiences, I have a very damn good idea of it.
        
        Oh, and I also am familiar with what it feels like to grow up knowing people out there want everyone like you to die, and having that knowledge of a history of persecution and suffering.
      - Tiffani W 8:48 pm on November 7, 2009 | #
        
        Erika, I strongly disagree with you. It may be rare in the US, but, for example, in South Korea, there is rampant racism against white people (and people of other ethnicities as well). White people – generally foreign English teachers – are represented on NEWS shows as pedophiles, drug addicts, etc. And white men get violently threatened when they walk down the street with a Korean girl. I wouldn’t make blanket statements about people’s experiences or personal understanding based on their skin color. I think it’s demeaning and disrespectful to white people who have been the victims of racism.
      - possiblyj 1:00 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Race is a social construct. Every “race” is a minority somewhere and racial bigotry exists everywhere. Therefore, any person can be a direct victim of racial bigotry.
        
        Read what Tiffani W wrote below and broaden your perspective.
      - Jillian C. York 1:03 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Possiblyj,
        
        Your point makes sense, but I maintain that white people in the United States cannot be victims of racism.
        
        South Korea is a very interesting example of a situation where a white person can be the victim of racism abroad, as they are not necessarily in a position of privilege.
      - Jillian C. York 1:10 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Possiblyj, again, there you go with that term “racial bigotry.” I think anyone can be a victim of that too. But I’m not talking about that, I’m talking about racism by sociological definition, institutionalized in the U.S.
      - possiblyj 1:14 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Jillian,
        
        Define racism.
      - Jillian C. York 1:29 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Possiblyj,
        
        I did, already. Prejudice + power.
        
        Highly recommended reading: http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2009/08/wonder-where-to-start-when-they-join.html
      - possiblyj 2:42 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        Jillian,
        
        Among these (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define:racism&btnG=Search) 13 definitions of racism, not a single one defines racism as something that is dependent upon privilege or power. Racism IS “discriminatory or abusive behavior [directed] towards members of another race.”
        
        ANY member of ANY race can be guilty of, or a victim of racism.
        
        In the US, “white” people are privileged to be a member of the racial majority. Statistically speaking, these people are better paid, less likely to be arrested, etc.
        
        However, there are millions of white outliers in the US. There are millions of white people in this country who live in neighborhoods, attend schools, and work in environments in which they are (numerically speaking) racial minorities.
        
        “I maintain that white people in the United States cannot be victims of racism.”
        
        Tell that to the kid who gets beat up at school because he is the only white kid in class. Tell that to the person who endures body checks or racial slurs as he/she walks down the street.
    - Jillian C. York 4:30 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
      
      I don’t think a white person can truly relate to the feeling of being a target of racial bigotry, no. Even – arguably – perhaps this woman cannot, given that she clearly “passes” for white (I guessed from her accent that she is likely Arab or Persian, but I could certainly be wrong. She could be Italian for all I know). All I’m saying is that someone who has been on the receiving end of racism can relate better to another person of color’s feelings than a white person can.
      - bobsfrankenbeans 12:21 am on November 5, 2009 | #
        
        I know this will probably get some angst back… BUT I would like to just point out that we talk a lot about racism with an assumed confine of it only applying to those people of non-obviously white skin color and seem to completely ignore, belittle, and even instigate racism against ‘white,’ people … and the real kicker is that there are a multitude of people who call this ‘backwards racism’ — what’s up with that?
        
        I want to also make a point in saying that I do understand that there is a “rich old white straight republican male,” “majority,” in American culture and that as such every person who does not fall into such a category seems to be more heavily scrutinized in the public eye, especially those people of color… but I do find it interesting that racism a) seems to have ‘ownership’ to certain groups, and that b) anti “white,” discussion is completely tolerable.
        
        Prejudice is prejudice no matter what ‘race.’ [I quote race because I come from the school of thought that race only exists as an (often unfortunate) social construct].
        
        I’m just interested in peoples thoughts on this… and will stop rambling now.
        
        thanks.
      - Leah 10:40 pm on November 6, 2009 | #
        
        I totally agree with bobsfrankenbeans here.
        
        Jillian – perhaps a white person who has only lived in (or hasn’t otherwise expanded beyond) areas that are predominately white cannot “truly relate” to racial discrimination, but I think to classify all white people within the same demographic is just as ignorant as classifying all people of color into one specific box.
        
        I went to a high school with a mostly hispanic population. When your name in gym is totally obsolete, and you are known only as “guerra,” or “white girl,” you’re on the receiving end of racism. When you’re singled out for being the only white girl in class, and made fun of, or your skill at sports is referenced in regard to your color, you can’t be said to not “truly relate” to what it is to receive negative treatment for being of a different color.
        
        Also, I don’t agree with your idea that it the woman in question was offended by the racism specifically because she was not white, and was thus probably personally connected to the concept of racism. White people can be brought to tears by racism, too; even if it isn’t happening to us. It’s called empathy. As a white woman (who has been on the receiving end of racism) I still don’t encounter racism on a personal level half as much as many people of color do, but I see it happen to my friends every day. And it hurts. And it hurts especially to think that we are incapable of understanding solely because of our color.
      - Leah 10:44 pm on November 6, 2009 | #
        
        Edit: Hurts especially to be told that we are incapable of understanding…
      - Jillian C. York 12:15 pm on November 7, 2009 | #
        
        Sorry Leah, the threaded comments stopped at yours, so I hope you see this regardless.
        
        I’m sorry, but by sheer DEFINITION of the word racism, white people (at least in the United States context) cannot experience racism. Racism is prejudice + power, not simply prejudice. And I too am white and have lived in places abroad where I’m the only white person and have certainly been singled out for that, but racism? Not so much.
        
        I didn’t mean to imply that a white person couldn’t sympathize or feel moved to tears, or hurt by racism. Racism does affect everyone, and I do recognize that there are white people who are very sensitive to it. That said, what you and I feel is not the same as what a person of color feels at seeing a racist act. Highly recommend reading http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com
      - possiblyj 1:08 pm on November 10, 2009 | #
        
        As I stated above, ANY person can be a direct victim of racial bigotry. To suggest that a particular race cannot experience racism, is inherently bigoted and incredibly narrow minded.
Mina 12:32 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

I would have liked to think that I would have intervened, but I’m terrified of confrontation. Most likely I would have slipped out of the store as fast as I could and immediately told everyone I knew to NEVER shop there.
Jillian C. York 1:01 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

There’s another video from that same program of a store employee refusing to serve Latinos who don’t speak English. Pretty much NOBODY stands up for the Latinos, with several telling them to get out of the country.
Jillian C. York 1:03 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

Also, I wonder if anyone would have even thought to intervene had it been a Black teenager (or a Black male) instead of an adult woman. I guarantee things would’ve been much, much worse.
- possiblyj 3:00 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  You’re probably right. Age discrimination seems to be the least taboo form of discrimination in the US.
- Tiffani W 8:49 pm on November 7, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  That would be a good experiment to do, but it would probably have to be in a different store, since that one seems to cater mostly to women…I think that would change the dynamics somewhat.
Racism, Gender and Stereotyping | The Global Sociology Blog 3:52 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

[...] here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Powered by Greet BoxVia Sociological Images, this VERY interesting video (note the gender differences in reaction… it would have been [...]
Lu 4:18 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

At first, I was willing to cut the shoppers a little slack. I probably wouldn’t have intervened myself, but only because I can’t stand confrontation. It takes guts to stand up for someone in public. But my jaw dropped when that man said she probably “played the black card”—like it was ridiculous for her to think they were discriminating against her based on race, even when that’s clearly what they were doing. And then when the actor said it seemed like most of the “suspicious” people they saw were black and the man nodded in agreement… wow.
- karinova 2:23 am on November 6, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Somehow he appalled me the most. Maybe that isn’t fair.
  It was obvious how uncomfortable most of the women were, and how they struggled to “not notice” the scene. And I think I cut them some slack knowing (all too well) that women aren’t supposed to “make a scene.” As discussed in a recent post, we’re very effectively trained not to. But as far as I can tell, men are pretty much allowed to vent their spleens at will (especially to women!). So I was really surprised to see this dude not just fail to speak up (really? it’s zero-risk for you!), or even just silently nod (awwwkward!), but actually volunteer that “black card” comment!
  
  I was just… stunned.
  I did not see that coming.
  Again.
  
  Does he really believe it? I’ve watched that part repeatedly; his face while inside the store doesn’t reveal much. I’m not sure. I’m openly searching for a reason not to think so. Except, there it is. At the very least, he was willing to say it in order to go-along/get-along.
  
  And now I’m crying.
  Nice.
  Wow, indeed.
heather 4:20 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

i just think there were many things wrong with this. among them:
i wish they hadn’t changed her hair (from relaxed to natural) for the “dressed down” look. it just keeps with the stereotype that there’s something low-level about natural black hair.

and while it was nice to finally see people stick up for the woman at the end, when the two women find out its a joke, and they laugh it off and go back in to shop. i don’t know, it’s like ha ha i passed the rascist test, let me return to my consumerism. it didn’t provoke a real thoughtful discussion or anything. it was just a test, and regardless of if you passed, or failed (like that guy who was caught saying the thing about the race card), there didn’t seem to be a lot of discussion about the experiment. sure they’ll put the video online where people will watch and critique and forget. but those people who actually interacted with the experiment, that was a real moment to talk to these people about the issue.
- Rebekah 4:45 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  The interaction was probably edited down significantly for the sake of time – besides, it seemed to me that the two women were laughing more from relief that it wasn’t real rather than self-satisfaction at passing the “racist test.”
- Elaine 5:12 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Actually I think it was pretty great that she went back to shopping. It indicated that she must have liked what the store had to offer, but was willing to completely abandon any material interest she had in it in order to stand up for what is right. It says that the ONLY reason she left the store was because of their racist behavior. Some people might have been more willing to walk out because of the conflict and the environment, or simply because they didn’t care much for the clothes, but this woman did like the store. Her opinion of it shifted entirely because of their bigoted views. I think that’s a good thing. Many people (sometimes myself included) will shop at stores that engage in unethical manufacturing practices simply because they like the clothes enough to outweigh their moral outrage. If a store you liked engaged in racism would you still shop there? This woman wouldn’t, but I’m sure a lot of us would. It’s like, would you date a really attractive person even if they made racist comments occasionally? We all want to say no. We all hope we would do what is right but the challenge is to do what is right when push comes to shove. It’s hard, but I don’t buy the whole ‘I don’t like conflict’ excuse. I don’t really know many people who ‘like’ conflict. I doubt the woman in the video liked conflict but she got over it. We are just afraid. Afraid of getting caught in the crossfire, afraid of being treated like so many black people are treated, afraid of embarrassment, etc.
  - Jillian C. York 5:15 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Elaine, I think that’s a great point. I know that I too shop at a lot of stores that do things I find ethically questionable, but I will not shop at Abercrombie & Fitch (for example) because of their racist t-shirts (and because they sell thongs made for young girls). Of course, neither is *right* but I almost think that many people are more likely to shop at a store that practices racism than they are to shop at one that uses sweatshops in developing countries.
  - heather 6:47 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    yeah elaine, i definitely see your point. i think my reaction was from the gut. like they’re going back to shopping, wait what, no! but it makes sense, because all was okay.
- md 10:48 pm on November 26, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Yes, I’m surprised you are the first to comment about the “dressed down” look to include natural black hair.
Standing Up Against Racism: An Experiment « A possie in Aussie 5:58 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

[...] Standing Up Against Racism: An Experiment Jump to Comments Standing Up Against Racism: An Experiment. [...]
Huzzah 7:30 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

It bothered me too that the experimenters decided that the “dressed down” condition should involve natural-looking hair, and the “dressed up” condition should involve straightened hair. This clip also didn’t mention whether they found a significant difference in responses between the dressed up and dressed down conditions.

Overall, I think this was a great project – and at the very least, all of the shoppers who heard that it was an experiment will probably feel more confident speaking up about discrimination in future situations.
- Elaine 8:09 pm on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  You know, when I really consider the whole hair thing, I find it doesn’t bother me as much as it seems to bother everyone else. In Western culture, “dressing up” usually involves doing something to our physical appearance, mainly our hair and face, that alters it from the way it appears naturally. For black women, who usually have curly hair, that may mean straightening it, as it does for many white women who also have curly hair. I have naturally straight hair, so when I dress up I usually to curl it. Make-up isn’t natural either. Wearing heels and a dress isn’t exactly natural as well. So if I was going to depict a white woman dressed down, I would do so by making her hair undone and giving her a make-up free face, just like they did for this black woman. There is no doubt in my mind that initially the desire black women have for long straight hair (and the attraction to it that many black men seem to have acquired) was a socially imposed desire to appear more less ethnic. That is completely unfair and totally racist. But what I am saying is that most people (women in particular) have the same socially imposed desire to appear a certain way, and that maybe in this situation it doesn’t have to do with race. Maybe they just thought ‘hey, she should look casual so let’s not do her hair.’ Just like if I were going casual (I am a white woman) I would not do my hair either.
  
  I hope this made sense. I’m having trouble articulating what I mean.
  - Liz 2:44 am on November 14, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    You have to understand that wearing your hair natural doesn’t mean wearing it “undone”. Though her hair wasn’t straightened, it was styled in a natural style known as a “twist out”, which takes time (typically a few hours) and effort to achieve. If her hair was matted and unkepmt, that would be one thing. But it wasn’t.
    
    Here’s a video showing the process of creating the twist out
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y53p7zoJPY0
Victoria 7:31 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

I’ve actually have jumped into a situation similar to this one before. It was not quite as blatant but certainly equally dehumanizing. The way I grew up, though, stepping up and saying something to someone about their ignorant and disgusting comments was fairly common. I don’t have a fear of confrontation whatsoever. I’m known to this day to have a “mouth on me”.

In this situation, I would have come close to losing it because the saleswoman kept going on and on with that sense of indignation with the other guy to back her up. And I would have been in tears as the woman in the pink/red dress was. It touches on something extremely deep for me. I agree with Jillian and Erika’s comments above that perhaps as a white person what I’m feeling is not a “relation” to the situation as a POC, but nearly all of my friends and even some of my family are “of color” and I know how much this hurts them – I’ve seen it. We’ve talked about it. It’s such a nasty thing to do to someone. You don’t need to be “of color” to understand that part and be affected by it, even if in a different way.

One thing I noticed though, after the lady who cried found out that it was all a set-up she said, “I’m so glad that wasn’t real.” And I was thinking… uhhh…yes, that most certainly is “real”. It’s just that most people aren’t as brazen as the salesperson was about it. But I’ve been followed around stores when I shop with my black cousins or friends. I’ve worked in retail where my coworkers thought that mostly black people shoplift and would get all nervous when they entered the store. I’ve never had a problem calling them on their shit… I live for it.
Tiago 10:05 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

I think the main reason people did not intervene is not at all that they agree with the store manager’s attitude, far from it… I think people can definitely know what is right and what is wrong, but they just don’t have the power to stand up for it, it’s much more important for them to go with the flow of things, because they are too afraid of being left alone if they don’t… which is the cause for nearly all human misery, in my opinion… when we are miserable and don’t really like to live, I bet 100% of the time it’s because we repress something that we can feel clearly in ourselves and we choose to act out something that we think will preserve our membership in whatever group we find ourselves in… it may not be obvious at first, but I bet that set-up is always in there, in some form… so people will sooner send Jews to death camps, if they can do it together as a nation, than save someone’s life or even save the world, if it means they might have to pay the price in exile…
I personally think the only way people can “wake up” and acquire the ability to, at least to some degree, just “follow their heart” is really if their status quo is somehow ripped apart by some random event that no one can control or trigger, because then people have no one to blame and nothing to lose so there is no motivation to protect, nothing to hang on to… again, it may not be obvious at first, but I bet that set-up is always there in some form when this sort of change happens to an individual… which would mean that it’s nearly impossible to have this change happen to all society at once, all the more so because the minute a new status quo has set in, the same fierce desire to maintain it, whatever it may be, will develop again and so people might do even the same terrible things again to themselves and to one another in the name of their sense of collectiveness… So I guess what I’m saying is that basically this is like a primal element of human nature, and we can’t change it, we just have to wait and hope for those individuals that are around us to somehow find their own way to wake up and be free… I really think that’s what’s at the heart of this matter at the upmarket retail store… This is what I always see in situations like this, it’s like you can read it in people’s faces, what is going on through their heads… just pure terror…
L 10:40 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

in no way would i want to defend that mans statement. i had a boss once who talked to me about abortion under the assumption that i would be against it bc well what normal person wouldnt be (in her opinion). Her, being my boss and me being totally non confrontational just said uhhuh. its such a forced situation, but if he wasnt likely to stand up during the event it may also be hard to now stand up to the saleswoman talking to him with the implicit assumption that he feels the way she does- he may want to go on with his day. i wish we could have heard why he said that. it is disconcerting that in order to avoid conflict someone may choose to act in a way that betrays their beliefs and reinforces the wrong ones.
Kai 11:39 pm on November 4, 2009 | # | Reply

Two things stood out to me:
1. The woman who started crying seemed to dance around the word “racist” and seemed terrified of saying it. She instead opted to label the woman’s behaviour as “disturbing” and repeat that she found her unbelievable. It was CLEAR that she thought the behaviour was racist, so it drove me up a wall that she refused to come out and say it. Our culture’s become so obsessed with the notion that accusing someone of doing/saying something racist is like accusing them of being a pedophile or satanist or something that now everyone is afraid to utter the word in case the discussion turns into the “I’m not racist” argument (which is un-win-able) instead of the “what you just said/did ws racist” one. People want to pretend that they are never ever ever RACIST, because RACISM IS BAD, which ignores the fact that even the most liberal and progressive of us, no matter how hard we try, can and do screw up and say something stupid. It’s like the way people react when they’re accused of being ignorant – everyone is ignorant about something (actually, a great majority of the things there are to know!).

2. From the comments:
Daaayuumm… That Joaquin Phoenix wannabe said, “She probably played the black card right?”….3:05 what a chump! Sounded like a lil bitch saying it too.

Way to express your disgust at racism in the most sexist way possible.

I’d like to think that I would speak up if I heard enough to be sure of what was going on (I think many people probably thought “There’s no WAY what seems to be going on is actually going on, I must be misunderstanding”), but if for whatever I didn’t, I would certainly be telling all my friends, blogging about it, and calling a corporate number to complain. But then, the mere fact that I read this blog probably already puts me in a group that would be more likely to be aware / try to intervene.
- bobsfrankenbeans 12:26 am on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Dude… what’s wrong with satanists?
- karinova 3:48 am on November 6, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  @ Kai:
  Re: point #1… I had a different take on that.
  For some reason, I come off as fairly assertive. Truth is I’m painfully shy; I’ve just tried to train myself to bear the unpleasant sensations of shyness. It kinda works, but it takes effort. However, shy or not, I have limited patience for foolishness. So I’ve learned to get my point across via indirect means, like that series of increasingly awesome facial expressions she did. I have a pretty sweet wtf-you-sicken-me face (good for protest when your voice is unreliable) but she totally wins.
  
  I’m pretty sure she was trying to a) express her disapproval and b) get the “saleswoman” to Come Right Out and Say It, hoping that either 1) she’d hear those words coming out of her own mouth and be dismayed, or 2) the rules of polite modern society would kick in and shame her into remembering to keep her crap to herself. I’ve done this. You know, disbelievingly asking for clarification, because “you couldn’t really be saying…?” At that point they usually start falling all over themselves to backpedal, at least for appearance’s sake. However, in this case, the actor was cagey and refused to back down. Which: sometimes they do that. (And in those cases, unfortunately, I often do end up in tears. Angry, frustrated, appalled tears, but tears nonetheless.)
Raksha 5:33 am on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply

There’s another possible reason people aren’t speaking up that has nothing to do with tacit agreement with racism or group dynamics or whathaveyou: concern for personal safety. In this situation, I would not have said a single word because in the past I have had my personal safety threatened for doing just that in similar circumstances. I’m a very small, disabled woman and I could in no way defend myself if someone attacked me. I’m not about to go confronting someone if I can possibly avoid it.

That said, I would have written a pissy letter to the store management and never shopped there again. It’s sad.
adam 9:46 am on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply

Three things:

ONE = News shows no longer respect journalism (The cheap, social reality/commentary turn in Television news was covered in a Front Line episode)

TWO = Why do social psychology have ethics boards and not televised media before they do things like this? Would this stunt have been permitted if it was in fact a social experiment? I doubt it. So while public research has so many contraints on gathering peer reviewed statistics, the media has so little to interfere with thier production of capital.

THREE = As others noted, its interesting how many of the white people are relieved after they found out this was only a staged incident. Its as if it is all better because they actually don’t have to confront the staunch truth of “shopping while black” in America.
Sabriel 9:20 pm on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply

I can’t believe that this has been up all day and nobody as mentioned Solomon Asch. The Solomon Asch conformity experiments are classic social pyschology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments

If people in a group aren’t willing to speak up about something innocent like the comparative length of two black lines, it’s really no surprize that most people will stay silent when confronted with something as loaded as racism.

All it took to break conformity in the Asch studies was one person (usually an actor) who verbally disagreed with the magority. The person who disagreed didn’t even have to be right- it would still create the window needed for other people to voice their dissent. The woman who spoke up and walked out broke the conformity and created a window for other people to get involved by following her out of the store.

That doesn’t mean that race isn’t a significant factor here. Part of white privilege is the privilege to stay silent and ignore racism because it’s not going to effect you. Unlike the Asch experiment, this field study was socially loaded. There may be a racial in-group/out-group effect that makes it more likely that a person of color will intervene.
- Sabriel 9:27 pm on November 5, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Okay. Lisa mentioned Solomon Asch. People should click the “conformity” link in the original post.
Thaddeus 7:39 pm on November 7, 2009 | # | Reply

“I’m sorry, but by sheer DEFINITION of the word racism, white people (at least in the United States context) cannot experience racism. Racism is prejudice + power, not simply prejudice.”

Racism = prejudice + power certainly in NOT the way the term is defined in common parlance. Nor is it an agreed upon definition in academic circles.
- bobsfrankenbeans 12:17 am on November 8, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Actually the definition of racism is-
  
  Main Entry: rac·ism
  Pronunciation: \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
  Function: noun
  Date: 1933
  
  1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
  2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
  
  — rac·ist \-sist also -shist\ noun or adjective
  … according to marriam-webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism)
  
  Even with your definition there is this issue of the term ‘power.’ When one is outnumbered in any social situation they are deemed powerless- so no matter what the traits of those involved- racism exists everywhere and has one true form, repeated again and again from one group to another…to define it based on ones skin color, ethnicity, religion, etc. is just furthering the racist banter.
  
  While it may be normal for the human brain to categorize things in order to make sense of the world, our constant stereotyping and generalizing is what truly threatens our society. To group any individuals together and assign them traits, good or bad, only further divides us as a whole. Leading to further misunderstanding, mistrust, and mistreatment.
  
  Why is there this attack on white people? The whole of them…. All.
  
  Doesn’t all of this talk just feed the monster, so to speak?
  
  I’m rambling here… and I apologize for that, but… I am more interested in the categorization of racism here. Whites are racist because they are the majority? and POC are racist because they are the minority? What about the gays, trans, mixed, “passing,” etc. people? The people who exist on the edges of these large groups of people?
  
  They develop sub groups that are prejudiced against those larger groups who mistreat and discriminate them… and those groups backlash…. so in the end is the lesson that we are innately discriminatory creatures?
  
  Is the otherness of the other so strong?
Sunny Dark 4:27 pm on November 8, 2009 | # | Reply

I make it a point to always step in. ALWAYS. Maybe it’s a Toronto thing but I raised to help people who need help. And it’s sad to see the bystander effect. But then again, I am a social worker so I’m used to all kinds of shenanigans.

Great show. I’ve seen a few episodes. The one with the two homosexual guys in a local bar is incredible.
Dylan 11:13 pm on November 9, 2009 | # | Reply

I think people don’t intervene because they are worried about how they’ll loo kin front of people. People sometimes think that avoiding or ignoring a situation is the easy way out and that it removes them from the situation, but it doesn’t. I definitely would have stood up for the woman and said something because anybody has a right to shop wherever they would like.

Jillian C. York makes a good point about how it would be much worse if it was a black teenager or man. I’d be interested to see how different the reactions would have been from the other customers.

This experiment was incredible and really made an impact on me.
Elle 12:02 am on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply

I am surprised there was not much comment on the particular part of the vid that discussed dressing the actress “up” and “down”, where dressing up equals having straightened out flat ironed hair and dressing down means a curly/natural hairstyle. Even the shows “valiant effort” to show racism and prejudice included racism and prejudice!

Perhaps this bit was small compared to the reveal of the entire video, but the irony of it struck me enough to comment, as no one else has (that I noticed)
a 1:22 pm on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply

wait, so having natural hair means you’re “dressing down”?
Thaddeus 1:32 pm on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply

“Your point makes sense, but I maintain that white people in the United States cannot be victims of racism.”

So if someone (in the U.S.) were to see a white person and make assumptions about that person’s upbringing, ethics, capabilities, etc based entirely on said white person’s skin color and treat them accordingly (perhaps even negatively) it would NOT be racism?

If a “POC” uses the term “cracker” as a pejorative then it is NOT racist?

What would you call it then?
- Jillian C. York 1:34 pm on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Bigotry, racial bigotry. Prejudice. It’s still wrong, and you can call it what you want, but I follow the definition of racism that defines racism as prejudice + power. I see your point; that by the standard definition of racism (dictionary definition, rather), bigoted acts like the one you describe might seem like they’re not wrong. I disagree.
Thaddeus 3:21 pm on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply

While I disagree with the definition that Jillian is using (how exactly does “racial bigotry not equal racism?), I do think that it is worth mentioning that she isn’t coming up with this definition out of nowhere.

One of my anthropology professors at the University of Florida used that definition as well. In my earlier post I said that it was not an “agreed upon” definition in academia, but it certainly IS one that some anthropologists and sociologists use.
Leah 11:47 pm on November 10, 2009 | # | Reply

I’m currently an Anthropology student, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen it written down anywhere that is prejudice + power is sole definition of racism, even in a United States context. And it certainly isn’t the capital D Definition that we’ve explored in anthropology classes, either. True, it IS a definition used by some to explain racism in a sociological context, but the concept and actuality of racism isn’t that simple or black and white (no pun intended). As with anything sociological, it cannot be boiled down to such a precise, single definition.

Racism is the ideological belief that all members of a certain racial group posses qualities or characteristics that distinguish them as inferior or superior to those of other races, and often is defined by or displayed in the form of antagonism, discrimination or prejudice aimed at someone as a result of that particular ideology.

In practice, racism is the excuse used to exert power over another person or group. When you use another person color or (socially identified/categorized) ‘race’ as a reason to deny them any sort of human right or social equality, you are deeming them powerless. That is what is meant by prejudice + power. That said, racial bigotry used to exert power over someone in any context where that person is thus rendered a victim is an act of racism.
- Leah 12:25 am on November 11, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  My point here is: to say that white people in the US cannot under absolutely any circumstances experience racism simply because if they DO find themselves in situations where they are denied rights, equality, justice, or experience any other social or physical injury, they are ‘only’ experiencing racial bigotry would be undermining the victimization of any person who suffers these things because of their skin color. It makes about as much sense as when someone refers to “reverse racism,” because racism is an ideology, not a characteristic of a certain race. You do not have to fit into a category of a certain race to be racist, and you do not have to fit into a category of a certain race to be a victim of racism.
- bobsfrankenbeans 2:17 am on November 11, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Anthropologically speaking, race doesn’t exist…
  - bobsfrankenbeans 2:18 am on November 11, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    or… in another word… word.
  - Leah 5:01 am on November 11, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Well, anthropologically speaking, race really does exist. But only insofar as God does.
    
    It’s a social construct.
au napptural 1:31 am on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply

First to all the derailers, stop it. We’re not talking about shopping while black in an ‘anthropological’ sense. Additionally, it is downright trivializing to the suffering of millions of POC when people say that crap. Next, I wonder why this didn’t get the trigger warning? I was most certainly affected. Finally, good catch on the reaction of the white woman being valued (by other white patrons) more than the reaction of POC. They see that as a mass race card playing. Sigh. And to the person who said it was because she was more vocal, perhaps she was more vocal because she knew she could count on support or at least not being next in the harassment line. All the POC that spoke out did so at great personal risk. Based on the sales woman’s behavior, they couldn’t put it past her to have them thrown out or even call the police. The white woman was clearly secure in her privilege, pointing out she was more casually dressed then the woman, becoming loud very quickly., and physically intervening with no fear of retribution. Not to take away from her great reaction, but I respect a marginalized body taking risks more than a privileged one sharing her umbrella.
Oh and when is someone going to notice natural hair was part of being “dressed down”? Because only Eurocentric hair is business-like or upscale. Ugh.
- Elaine 5:02 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  Okay, so then what would you like us privileged white people to do? Honestly I am a little sick of this. I pride myself on being pretty certain that I would stand up for someone in this situation, but I guess that’s just me rubbing my ‘privilege’ in her face? So I shouldn’t stand up for her then? Is nothing ever good enough?
  
  And a trigger warning? Seriously? You said it should have a trigger warning because you were ‘most certainly affected.’ So now everything should have a trigger warning if it makes you feel any emotion of any kind? I was most certainly affected by it but that probably doesn’t matter to you because I’m white and I can’t really know what it’s like and thus my sympathy is really just me rubbing my privilege in your face once again and I should just be a racist because that clearly makes you more comfortable.
  
  I’m sorry, but I am sick of being stuck in this rock/hard place situation whenever anyone talks about race. I am not racist in any way and am willing to stand up against people who are, but that is never good enough. I am also sick of being told that I can’t relate at all to any discrimination. I have been discriminated against for being a woman, for being Jewish, for having tattoos, for being naturally skinny, for being blonde, for being an american in a foreign country and yes, even for being white by many black people. I’m not saying that it compares to the extreme level of historical discrimination that has happened to black people, but when comparing individual experience I can relate more than you think. Try being a Jew in the midwest and you will re-evaluate your belittling of my opinion.
  - Jillian C. York 5:09 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Elaine, why do you “pride yourself” on your knowledge that you would stand up in this situation? I mean, surely you would be doing the right thing, but shouldn’t that just be a natural reaction against racism?
    
    Stop with your derailing already…Being an American in a foreign country, being blonde, and being skinny?
    
    http://www.derailingfordummies.com/
    - Elaine 5:14 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
      
      Way to ignore all of the other things I listed. Yeah, Jews have never been historically discriminated against.
      
      And I pride myself on that because I know many people wouldn’t do that, even if they weren’t necessarily racist. I think standing up for your beliefs is important, and harder to do than just believing in the right thing.
  - Elaine 5:11 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Add being bisexual to that list. Forgot about that. I’m not saying that black people as a whole have not suffered TREMENDOUSLY. I am saying that not every black person as an individual has suffered BEYOND COMPARE in relation to everyone else. What I am saying is that I can sympathize, even empathize more than a little bit, and I wish you wouldn’t just look at me and say ’she’s white, so she’s privileged.’ That, to me is racist. ‘White’ is just one insignificant facet of me as a person, and there is a lot more than just that. Looking at that woman in the video and saying she is ’secure in her privilege’ is looking at her and saying that all she is is white. You don’t know what else this woman has suffered for in her life, and you ignore that because she is white. That is racist.
- Jillian C. York 5:06 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  I think trigger warnings generally apply to things that might cause someone to harm his or herself.
- bobsfrankenbeans 11:35 pm on November 17, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  seriously? derailing what exactly? anthropology and sociology are two facets of the bull shit we tell ourselves, about ourselves… I’m actually glad to hear that you were offended by such ‘trivial crap,’ as it proves that you clearly aren’t suffering from anything worse.
au napptural 2:19 am on November 18, 2009 | # | Reply

The derailing continues. Honestly, people get it together. I was saying all the people detracting from the discussion of the video and the real racism that happens every day with idiotic and trite commentary on how “race is a social construct” or “anthropologically does or doesn’t exist” need help. Are you so self absorbed you can’t discuss what is actually happening in the video because it doesn’t have to do with your particular marginalization? The focus shouldn’t always be “oh, whites suffer too”.

Elaine, if you are sick of the oppressed telling you how they’d prefer to be treated, I’m certainly sick of people telling me how I should feel. I wonder if you even caught how you tried to belittle my stance and trivialize my feelings on this issue or if you do this so often you have ceased to notice. Please get over yourself. Any negative reactions you have experienced as a woman, for being Jewish, for having tattoos, for being naturally skinny, for being blonde, for being an american in a foreign country and yes, even for being white, first don’t have anything to do with this discussion. No, it’s not time to compare oppressions, or try to “relate”. It’s time to STFU and listen. No empty phrases about how you know this doesn’t equal the historical dicrimination of blacks, because clearly if you thought that you never would’ve gone into your self-serving tirade. You don’t have an edge in this conversation, you don’t even understand it. So rather than trying to return the focus to yourself, just be quiet and allow the affected to express what they are going through.

This is probably going to go in one of your ears and out the other, but as a POC who deals with white ‘anti-racists’ often, I must say just because you have anti-racist sentiment doesn’t mean you aren’t still engaging your privilege. Really do try to listen to the issues of POC and learn how we would like to be treated in these situations. To try and superimpose your thoughts on how we should be treated on us is another expression of privilege. And speaking of which, I was observing (in my earlier comment) how the other white patrons responded to the siren call of one of their own, but ignored call of racism from POC. I also said the leader was secure in her activism because she was white and thus safe from the treatment the black woman was receiving. I didn’t say she was rubbing her privilege in anyone’s face, but if you read Racism 101 you’ll see that’s how unearned privilege works. It’s there and unless you work to mitigate it will be a prominent feature in these interactions.
Side point- because one part of your identity is othered doesn’t automatically bequeath you consciousness. In other words, white female plus bisexual, Jewish, etc. still equals privileged

Also thanks to Jillian C.York for pointing out yet another person expecting praise for what should be a natural response. If you intervened in a rape, would you want praise? Or would you be more concerned with the victim?

Finally, I made the trigger observation because I note almost everything with any kind of sexual or violent content oh here has it but none of the race related items do. They could really use the labels because anyone who has suffered traumatic racial experience would be triggered by these posts. But good effort in trying to belittle and discredit my feelings on this bobsfrankenbeans and Elaine. Why are here if all you want to do is refocus the issue on yourselves? Try StormFront instead.
Leah 5:23 am on November 18, 2009 | # | Reply

au napptural, the anthropological commentary was not meant to trivialize or belittle. If you read up further, they are direct responses to the argument made earlier regarding the capacity for white people to experience racism, which then diverged into an argument regarding the actual definition of racism. As for derailing, that’s what conversations do, especially about things like the video. And that’s a good thing, because a.) I think these things are relevant due to the fact that b.) discussions about intricate and deep-seated social issues that still exist (and that people need to be made aware of) are incapable of staying on course in a one dimensional way. And there’s no reason they should, because these things are intricate and deep seated for a reason.

I wouldn’t call deconstructing social issues in an anthropological or sociological sense is ‘trite.’ That’s what sociology is. If you had actually read the context of these comments you would see that they weren’t negative jabs at anybody or meant to demean or belittle anything concerning the OT. But sorry if it has distracted you.
Leah 5:28 am on November 18, 2009 | # | Reply

Excuse me, I meant to say that “as for derailing, these lines of thought are more like tangents, and that’s what conversations do: they tangent…”

My apologies on my lack of editing.
- nakedthoughts 11:30 am on November 19, 2009 | # | Reply
  
  I think it becomes problematic when tangents on these issues all look the SAME ALL THE TIME and stop the conversation of the issue.
  - Leah 1:32 pm on November 19, 2009 | # | Reply
    
    Now you are continuing the tangent by discussing the appropriateness of tangents.
Tanya 9:21 am on November 18, 2009 | # | Reply

For the purpose of eliminating/alleviating situations like the one shown in this video. The YWCA started a movement called Stand Against Racism. The goal is to raise awareness that racism still exists in our communities and that it cannot be ignored or tolerated. Our objective is to bring organizations and individuals together, who believe like we do, that united we can eliminate racism. To learn more or to get involved visit http://www.standagainstracism.org/.