ANONYMOUS writes an Op-Ed about the complexities between cultural appropriation and cultural appreciation and how these nuances manifested in an incident at the University of Southern California in 2020.

A few years ago in early September of 2020, a USC Professor got suspended from a business communications class he was teaching due to a concern from some of his students that he was using an English racial slur insensitively. In the communications class, the professor, Greg Patton, talked about the importance of pauses and filler words, such as “um” or “err” in English. In one of the examples he gave, he also talked about a common filler word in Chinese that he learned from many of his past students from China: “那个,” which can be transliterated into either “nèi gè” or “nà gè,” that sounds similar to a racial slur in English. Patton did not preface his students that the word he was going to use sounded very much like a racial slur, so many of his African American students were offended by their professors’ action and quickly reported this situation to the dean of the business school; however, many of his former students who came from China certified that his use of the word was not at all incorrect. 

This event has raised an issue that has largely been avoided in the past. That is: how do we balance equality and sensitivity between languages when a common word in one language sounds like a controversial and racist word in another language? Being a Chinese American myself, who uses the Chinese filler word “那个” on nearly a daily basis and also understands the taboo context of making such “sounds” in American society, I naturally felt a personal connection to this issue. I believe that Chinese speakers should not have to “change” themselves to be more considerate of another group because we have our own language that should be respected too. As long as “那个” is used properly, it should be allowed in use. In specific relation to the conflict between the USC professor and his students, I believe that the students too hastily jumped to conclusions without trying to understand the whole situation; if such actions continue, our society will turn into one where the accused are guilty before proven innocent. 

Given the then-context of Black Lives Matter movements and police brutality, I absolutely understand where the students in Professor Patton’s class are coming from. All across the world, there was a heightened awareness and sensitivity to any issue related to Black people. However, it would be ironic for one group to advocate for full equality and justice but at the same time completely deny equality and justice to another group. In the situation of the USC professor and his students, the African American students who felt offended by the professor’s proper use of the Chinese term wrote a concerned email to the college dean but completely overlooked the fact that this filler word is a part of the daily lives of many Chinese people. What these students have advocated for is the acknowledgment of their struggles at the expense of another language’s existence. A better option would have been to first talk to the professor and suggest that he offer a preface before he talked about the word. That way, it would prepare students for an otherwise offensive experience instead of instantly jumping to the conclusion that their professor is a racist. Even the American Association of University Professors expressed their concerns that the professor was not even given a fair hearing from a faculty body before being suspended. 

This language conflict also oddly reminded me of a similar issue a couple years further back when NBA player Jeremy Lin received a lot of backlash from another former NBA player, Kenyon Martin, over Lin’s choice of dreadlocks for hair. Martin, who is African American, was quick to call out Jeremy Lin for being “insensitive” to African American culture and “wanting to be Black” without taking the time to understand why Jeremy Lin chose to have dreadlocks before calling him out. Jeremy Lin expressed admiration for dreadlocks and said that he believed it is so great that America’s melting pot allowed people to cross cultural lines and show appreciation for each other’s cultures. The irony here was that Martin, who called out Jeremy Lin for his “insensitivity” to African American culture, also wears Chinese tattoos very explicitly on his arms. What we are presented with here is an inconsistency in standards. Jeremy Lin received criticism for choosing a hairstyle that is culturally important to Black people, but that same criticism never occurred for non-Chinese people who wear Chinese tattoos. Oftentimes, those people wearing Chinese tattoos also do not even know the correct meaning of those characters. 

The greater implication of all these situations is that our society is becoming one in which: 1) one group’s interests supersede another group’s; 2) people are not given a chance to explain themselves; and 3) you are guilty before proven innocent. In the case of the USC professor and his students, Professor Patton did not even receive a hearing in front of a faculty body and was suspended. The American Association of University Professors has stated that one suspension for a professor could have huge negative consequences on that professor’s future job prospects; Professor Patton was accused of insensitive remarks and punished when it could have simply been the students’ insensitivity to acknowledge the existence of another language. In this case, the concerns of the African American students in Patton’s class superseded those of both the professors and the wider Chinese community. 

Critics will say that some students have stayed after class and voiced their concerns to the professor, but he continued to use the term in his other classes, showing Professor Patton’s fault for failing to listen to his students’ concerns. While this action would be a proper response from the students, the professor stated that only one student had actually stayed after his last class to voice his/her concerns; as a result, a fair hearing would have been necessary to determine whether or not Professor Patton was at fault. If our centuries-old system still holds true to this day, Professor Patton should be innocent since there was not a sufficient hearing to prove his “guilt.” Instead, his future job prospects are at stake because of his improper suspension, and the insensitivity of some of his students.

The language dilemma between freedom of speech and insensitivity is one that is difficult to generalize for all situations. Even outside English and Chinese, there are many words that have one meaning in one language and a completely different meaning in another, and each situation would need to be decided based on each individual context. The way to balance every group’s interests and avoid conflict is for everyone to be considerate of others’ concerns and not to hastily jump to conclusions. The USC professor could have been a great inspiration to so many of his past students, but because of one misunderstanding, his whole future could be stained. If we are to avoid a future society that resembles one of the Salem Witch Trials in which all those accused are immediately guilty, we must all take the first step to humble ourselves, analyze the whole situation, and then decide on what action to take. So, if Jeremy Lin is not allowed to have dreadlocks for hair, should Kenyon Martin not be allowed to have tattoos? Personally, I think cultural appreciation is a beautiful thing that should be shared, as long as people have genuine intentions and do so in a respectful manner.