Racial discrimination in service encounters requires corroboration to expose

Evidence

The next morning my colleague calls. Relieved to find me at last, she confirms that she did indeed call at the time we had agreed on and had insisted that someone under my name must be staying in the hotel. Suspecting misconduct on the part of the hotel, she had refused to take no for an answer, recognizing what she referred to as the “same old white chauvinism”; and probably realizing also that the operator had picked upon her Indian background identifiable from her voice. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1489

Categorization

• XREF: The colleague detecting ‘white chauvinism’ by voice echoes how accents and names were used as racial markers in the Milgrom law-merchant chapter and in the midwife’s tale about who gets counted. — connects to: Banning racial data collection protects private discrimination from scrutiny — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race: Reflections on…, 1767; Proving discrimination requires showing manifest acts, not just prejudiced officials’ beliefs — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 1691
• SEED: Angle: the double-burden of proof in racial discrimination — victims need a second witness simply to establish that a routine service failure was racially motivated.