And it’s pet peeve of mine to read phrases like “racist bandwagon” or “cry racism” or “play the race card” which goes a long way to covering up a real problem in America that is actually deadly. If you don’t mind my saying so, only white people are annoyed by people taking the possibilty of racist behavior seriously.
A lot history is on the side of saying that the most likely explanation for the disownment – which the paterfamilias doesn’t dispute – was and is racism. Neither of us knows the real story, but she could very well be remembering accurately and her father could very well be trying to protect his business by making up an excuse.
So is it (in your opinion) too much to ask for any supporting evidence as to her claim? Or do you contend all verbal accusations of racism as sufficient without any burden of proof?
A couple of days ago a decision was made to exclude food policies and politics discussion from the forum because of the excessive moderation demands. Even though this thread is civil, I am now including racism, disability, religion, sexual orientation, discrimination, and food poisoning in the exclusion list. Thank you for your understanding. Please focus the discussion strictly on the business impact on the restaurant from the announcement.
