You may have heard of the stink over an incident at a Philadelphia Starbucks. It’s all over the news and opinion pages. If not, it’s summarized here.
“Mau-Mauing” is a term popularized by Tom Wolfe in his 1970 essay, “Mau-mauing the Flak Catchers”. The article is about intimidation tactics used against public employees, whose jobs have essentially been reduced to taking abuse.
I have absolutely no doubt that racism continues to be a factor the United States in the 21st century. No doubt at all. Is this particular incident an instance of that racism or of mau-mauing? I’m undecided. Many private businesses in the United States reserve their tables and restroom facilities for the use of their customers. Were the two men involved asked to leave because they were black or because they weren’t customers? Who’s at fault here, the Starbucks employee for making the 911 call, Starbucks, or the two men? Everybody? Nobody?
Tough one without really knowing the details. If the guys really were obnoxious, then it is their fault. If not, then a combination of everyone else.
Steve
Neither the 911 call nor the video seem to indicate racism, either on the part of the Starbucks employee or the police. Which is the most racist: setting a different standard for blacks, not setting a different standard for blacks, or assuming that the only possible explanation for the events is race?
There’s another layer of this, what’s Starbucks policy? If the official statements of the company are to be believed, the policy on taking up tables or using the restroom was made on a by-store basis. The new policy, apparently, is that anybody can remain in a Starbucks store as long as they care to with the tables and restrooms freely available. It will be interesting to see how that policy works out, particularly in cities with large number of homeless.
Most businesses have such policies, regardless of any racial or other personal characteristics. It’s a common sense, in deference to their paying customers.
The common sense solution would have been for the offenders to have the decency to spend a dollar on some product. Case closed. That a material portion of the nation has more than the most casual passing interest in the issue makes one ask “what kind of society do we want to live in.â€
Another layer is whether such policies are enforced uniformly. I suspect that a clean cut person could enter most places and use a restroom without making a purchase, without comment. I’ve done so myself, though I usually try to make a small purchase but can recall a few times of need when I had no cash or card on me.
My husband was once walking into a Starbucks when a seemingly homeless woman with a child was being turned away (trying to use the restroom.) He quietly slipped her $20 and suggested that she make a purchase and use the facilities, which they did.
Coffee places are marketed as offices away from offices. People go to Starbucks and don’t buy coffee all the time. It’s not an issue. That’s why Starbucks isn’t bothering to defend it. That’s why a white woman filmed it. She knew what was happening. Same with the white guy who showed up to meet the two guys.
CStanley points out what I think we all know if we stop being politically correct. If the two guys were white, and assuming as I noted before that they weren’t being obnoxious, this just doesn’t happen. Maybe the Starbucks person doesn’t call. Maybe the police don’t haul them away. I have day in restaurants waiting for people and nothing happened. Even used the bathroom. Bet almost everyone who comments here has done so.
Again, to be clear, if they were obnoxious, threatening, very loud, etc, they got what they deserved.
Steve
Haven’t followed the story, but someone on NPR was telling the reporter that it is widely understood that the bathrooms at Starbucks are available to everyone without a purchase. Didn’t catch who she was, where she was from and anything that would make me confident that she knew anything about this store or location, and wasn’t simply expressing Millennial willing reality to comport with their belief system. Of course, Starbucks is a Millennial brand, so there is some truth to that.
I have seen where the manager clarified what happened, but she must have a different definition of clarify. She did say that the No Loitering policy was for part of Philadelphia, and it was a corporate policy. She also gave a few examples of what she had done in the past, but it did not answer any of the questions here.
I have no idea whether it was racist or not, but some of the “dumb-assed shit” people do amazes me. A lot of non-racists do racist shit.
@Dave Schuler
… assuming that the only possible explanation for the events is race …
Get with the program, Not assuming that everything is racist is racist.
@CStanley
I will only say that I went to a Catholic high school in New Orleans (not Metairie or the Westbank). With your high school, graduation year, and a few other details, I could track you down quickly.
At the closing for my house, I told one of the people where I went to school, and within a few minutes, we established that he knew of my mother. Luckily, I was on my best behavior.
If the two guys were white, and assuming as I noted before that they weren’t being obnoxious, this just doesn’t happen.
Well you are injected race when I did not, Steve. Not saying that’s not a factor at all but for instance the woman and child that my husband encountered were white and it’s not a stretch to imagine a lot of the white vagrants you see on the streets getting turned away. When racial predudices enter into those decisions it’s terrible, but I think it’s wrong to assume that this is what most mangers or business owners are doing.
@TB- Yes I realize the risks of exposing identity. I mainly wondered if we were contemporaries at all.
CStanley,
I’m sure that white homeless people are being discriminated against. But those two guys weren’t homeless, and they didn’t appear homeless. Well-groomed white people do not end up being cuffed for vagrancy.
Fair enough, MM- I haven’t followed this incident enough to know if racial discrimination was likely and I was commenting more generally about whether such an assumption should be presumed.
@CStanley
You are younger, but aren’t all women?
That’s right, TB. Thinner, too.
Hard to say without being there – all I can really say is that I probably would have acted differently had I been the manager or the guys waiting.