In November 2022, a story hit the headlines in the UK about an exchange that took place at the new Queen Consort’s reception at Buckingham Palace. Lady Susan Hussey – a senior member of the Royal Household embarked upon what could only be described as an interrogation of one of the reception guests, Ngozi Fulani, founder of Sistah Space – Britain’s leading domestic abuse charity for Black women.
Ms. Fulani, a British national, was subjected to a line of questioning that was frustratingly both ambiguous and pointed as well as accusatory in tone. The exchange, which Ms. Fulani shared on the Sistah Space Twitter account, went as follows:
SH:Oh, I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
Upon first glance, most may not see the problematic nature of this exchange. Is it not completely reasonable to ask someone where they are from? Of course, it is, however, this exchange and others like it are far from reasonable and the issue lies within the context, tone and nuances of them.
So to set the scene, Ms. Ngozi is a guest at this reception, manners and etiquette alone would dictate to a person of seniority within the Royal Household such as Lady Hussey – a lady-in-waiting of the late Queen Elizabeth II for many years no less, that grilling an invited guest in this manner is an absolute faux pas and unacceptable. To be clear, the issue is not in asking Ms. Fulani where she is from, the problem arises when Hussey refuses to accept Ms. Fulani’s perfectly reasonable answer. For the intents and purposes of a professional social gathering, to which you have been invited due to your professional background, it is completely expected and acceptable that when asked “Where are you from?” to reply with the name of your organization. When the question is then slightly changed to “Where do you come from?” again it is normal, natural even, to respond with where your organization is geographically based. And now this is where the exchange quickly descends into an exercise in racist microaggression from Hussey.
Hussey now refuses to accept Ms. Fulani’s answers, she is now fully embarked on a fishing expedition, looking for her “white whale”. She feels an entitlement to the answer that she finds acceptable, which satisfies her need for clarity – clarity on what? Where this woman with Black skin, sipping tea in the Palace comes from. The question is not “Where are you from?” it is actually “Why are you Black?” It is as simple as that, the only defining, observable feature of Ms. Fulani, that is driving Hussey’s borderline obsessive occupation with knowing where she is from, is Ms. Fulani’s skin color, her Blackness.
Hussey’s sense of entitlement and assumed access could easily be put down to her life of considerable class privilege or even her age. However, this type of microaggression does not just exist in a vacuum at Palace receptions and dinners among elderly women, it is everywhere throughout the UK. It exists in job interviews, at bus stops, down the local pub, business networking events, in staffrooms, and boardrooms to name just a few. And again, the microaggression lies not with the question itself but with what is within it. Hussey’s refusal to accept two entirely reasonable answers from Ms. Fulani and the subsequent inquisition to the point of Hussey passively accusing Ms. Fulani of being both dishonest and obstructive in deliberately withholding information – information that frankly has nothing to do with Hussey, nor is Ms. Fulani obligated to share with her, that is the issue. The attitude of insisting that people of the global majority “owe” white people, who see themselves as “natives” to the UK, an in-depth genealogy to explain why they exist in a predominately white space, is not only entitled and rude but also rather insensitive. Bearing in mind that a vast majority of the African and Caribbean diaspora that live in the UK are here as a direct result of the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism, to corner someone in an overwhelmingly white-occupied space and cross-examine them about their heritage – a heritage rooted in displacement, torture, discrimination, and violence – that most white British people have and continue to benefit from, is not only overstepping a huge boundary but also extremely discourteous.
So where does this sense of entitlement come from and why is it a bad thing? For the last 4–5 centuries Britain has proudly and loudly proclaimed its “greatness” around the globe by means of colonialism, but to be candid colonialism is an elegant euphonism for human trafficking, theft, rape, torture, and murder – the Union Jack did not gain the moniker “The Butcher’s Apron” without good reason. History, however, is as they say “written by the victors” so what has been taught about colonialism and “what made Britain Great” is that it was a series of noble battles and savvy decisions made by our former monarchs and governments. This whitewashing of history has allowed for generations of white British people, who consider themselves to be the true “natives” to accumulate a sense of superiority that is evident even within the Working Men’s Clubs of Stoke-on-Trent much less within the walls of the very establishment that directly descends from colonialism. Entitlement and privilege have much less to do with wealth and class than they do with ingroup bias and stereotypes. The fact that a person who is so well respected and known for their incredible contribution to society that they are invited to be a guest at a Palace reception, can still be so easily othered and treated as an impostor purely based on their skin color is a sobering and illuminating indictment of how Black people are treated across British society, regardless of their level of education, class, profession, or wealth.
Another issue with the not-so-innocuous question of “where are you really from?” like most racial microaggressions is the faux ignorance and innocence. This allows the aggressor to place their victim in a place of abject discomfort and also leaves no perceivable way out of the conversation. When the victim protests or states their discomfort, they are painted as overly sensitive at best and aggressive at worst. All the while, the actual aggressor feigns ignorance and innocence and incredibly places themselves as victim. This is very often through the use of white-women tears. White women have become extremely adept at weaponizing their perceived femininity as opposed to Black women in a white supremacist society. Tropes such as the “strong Black woman” are actually perpetuated by white women, not as an acknowledgment of the struggles and adversity that Black women face – a system that white women helped create and uphold – but as a way of removing the humanity from the Black woman along with anyone’s responsibility to support or protect them, protection that white women have enjoyed for centuries and continue to do so at the expense of Black women. This particular aspect of microaggression is so deeply ingrained into the very fabric of society that even Black people may find themselves engaging in, particularly Black men. It’s not surprising that this exchange took place between two women: Hussey’s surety of this tried and tested microaggression drove her tenacity in the exchange; this along with her privilege and sense of entitlement is indeed a heady combination, almost intoxicating, it leaves no room for introspection or self-awareness.
However, a lack of introspection and self-awareness is not an excuse for problematic behavior. It was quite infuriating to see the Duke of Sussex come out to vehemently defend Hussey and actually draw a parallel to the unacceptable campaign of racially motivated abuse that his wife has been subject to. This was again an example of white people, particularly white women being rescued and offered “an out” in place of correction and accountability. However well-meaning that his defense of Hussey – the godmother of his brother Prince William – Prince Harry has arguably, inadvertently, undermined much of the good work that he has previously done, in terms of illuminating racially problematic behavior, on a global scale. It is a sobering and discouraging apprehension that even anti-racist allies can still revert to the age-old systems of white supremacist behaviors when they feel it is advantageous to do so. Worse still is the horrific abuse and public vilification that Ms. Fulani has since been subjected to. She did not do anything wrong, at all. Yet her character has been attacked, she has been painted as the aggressor, as disingenuous and as problematic. To be completely clear – Hussey was the aggressor, her actions were unacceptable and she must be the one to bear the consequences, and she did, to an extent, she has stepped down from her role within the Royal Household and suffered an amount of public embarrassment. However, the status quo in this dynamic of white aggressor/Black victim is that the Black victim must also bear some responsibility and blame. Ms. Fulani must be made to shoulder some of the burden because Black people cannot be blameless victims, they must be accountable in some way for their victimhood. This is what white supremacy, bias, structural racism, and white privilege dictate. The illogical fallacy of it is patently clear, however, as long as microaggressions are allowed to go unchallenged by wider society, this will not change.
White society has a responsibility to hold itself to account, as things stand it is the only way for this kind of injustice and inequality to end. Similarly, to the call for men to hold themselves and each other accountable for violence against women by men, the first response cannot be defense, it has to be honest introspection and self-assessment of how one’s own thoughts, behaviors, and actions may support such problematic issues and therefore become complicit in them. If one is not challenging and actively working to change inequality, the fact is that they are a part of the problem. If one looks to deny, deflect, and defend racism on any level, they are complicit in the perpetration and perpetuation of it. Authentic introspection is often uncomfortable, no individual truly enjoys the undesirable parts of themselves being reflected back at them, however, it is in this discomfort that the impetus to make tangible change comes from. Society has a collective responsibility to the eradication of racism, however, that does not absolve one from their individual responsibility.
The exchange between Hussey and Ms. Fulani can serve as an example to all of the nature of microaggressions, the preceding media coverage and the parallels of how Hussey – the white aggressor was treated as opposed to Ms. Fulani – the Black victim is proof that when it comes to racism, there is no such thing as an innocuous question.