It must be exhausting to go through life imputing malice to every awkward human encounter.
Lady Susan Hussey was lady-in-waiting to Queen Elizabeth II and was appointed lady of the household by King Charles. She is also 83 years old and liable to say things that don’t wholly satisfy modern sensibilities. And so it was that she came to ask a black domestic-abuse campaigner, Ngozi Fulani, at an event at Buckingham Palace “which part of Africa” she came from.
The Times of London reports:
Writing on Twitter, Fulani said she replied: “Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s”, to which the aide is alleged to have said: “I knew we’d get there in the end. You’re Caribbean.”
The exchange ended with Fulani saying: “No lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.”
A Buckingham Palace spokesperson said the comments were “unacceptable and deeply regrettable”:
In the meantime, the individual concerned would like to express her profound apologies for the hurt caused and has stepped aside from her honorary role with immediate effect. All members of the household are being reminded of the diversity and inclusivity policies which they are required to uphold at all times.
Fulani, meanwhile, had this to say:
I just stood at the edge of the room, smiled and engaged briefly with who spoke to me until I could leave. My children and grandchildren were proud though, in my parents’ time black people were only allowed into those spaces to serve. Kind of glad my folks were not around to witness this violation.
I let my guard down. Never again. It was such a struggle to stay in a space that you were violated in. I think it is essential to acknowledge that trauma has occurred and being invited and then insulted has caused much damage.
In Fulani’s interpretation, Hussey’s remarks reveal implicit racism and represent a “violation” capable of inducing “trauma.” Another possible interpretation, of course, is that Hussey was genuinely interested in Fulani’s heritage, clues about which were evident in certain characteristics (her name, for instance), and was unwittingly tactless in how she asked about it.
Choosing the least charitable — and, frankly, least plausible — interpretation, Fulani reports being overwhelmed by negative emotions. Meanwhile, as evidenced by her stepping down, Hussey was deeply humiliated.
Had Fulani chosen the more charitable interpretation, at worst, she might have felt irritated. (Not “traumatized.”) Moreover, had Fulani given Hussey the benefit of the doubt, both women would have emerged from the encounter emotionally unscathed.
Is it presumptuous to assume, based on a characteristic, where a person is from? Sure. But is it also inherently malicious? Of course not.
Living as a Scot in America, people sometimes detect my accent and ask, “Which part of Ireland are you from?” I explain that I’m Scottish — at which point they usually apologize for the error — but that if you go back far enough, then, on my dad’s side, my family was indeed Irish and came from county Roscommon. Even if they’re especially ignorant — I have a Scottish friend who emigrated to America and was congratulated by a native for his excellent command of English! — it would still be quite a leap to assume xenophobia. It would also probably leave me feeling awful.
It must be exhausting to go through life imputing malice to every awkward human encounter. And especially from old people who are particularly prone to tactlessness. If you’re offended, why not let it go or at least tell the person? If Fulani had done so, I think the likeliest outcome would have been Hussey’s embarrassed and instantaneous apology.