Most active commenters
  • eythian(5)
  • buran77(3)
  • P-ala-din(3)

←back to thread

677 points saeedjabbar | 21 comments | | HN request time: 1.228s | source | bottom
Show context
ibudiallo ◴[] No.23544856[source]
I usually choose to believe in "the honest mistake". It happens, two people walk in, one of them is the CEO, you assume it is the one on the right. And then when you realize it is a mistake, you apologize. We are only human.

But when it happens over and over and over, you can't help but feel frustrated. You realize that people natural instinct is to think you are the subordinate. One second your are on stage at Techcrunch (I was in 2017), where you have clearly introduced yourself. You get off-stage, they greet your colleague and ask him the questions as if he was on stage.

I was often in the interview room waiting for my interviewer, only to have him show up, and tell me I must be in the wrong room. A simple "Hey are you XYZ?" could have avoided this frustration.

I've written an article about my experience working as a black developer, I'll post it here in the near future. You wouldn't believe how lonely it is. In my team of 150 people, we were two black people.

replies(15): >>23545199 #>>23545309 #>>23546055 #>>23546168 #>>23546426 #>>23548047 #>>23548134 #>>23548422 #>>23549653 #>>23549654 #>>23549765 #>>23550199 #>>23550203 #>>23550498 #>>23550535 #
js2 ◴[] No.23545309[source]
I am Jewish. This gives me no insight into what it is to be black in America. But it does give me some insight into what it is to be a minority in America. I have an inkling of your loneliness and you have my profound sympathy. I wish everyone could experience what it is to be a minority in some, any, aspect of their identity to the extent that it might provide them some empathy for others.

(I also never realized what it must feel like to be a Christian in America until I visited Israel for the first time and had a sense of being among "my people", which didn't really make any sense because I'm not Israeli, but at the same time it felt comforting being among so many Jews in a greater way than when I'm at temple.)

Of course, unless I announce I am Jewish, I know I'm not being judged by it. I can only imagine how difficult it is that whenever you are slighted, you don't know for certain whether it is due to being black. It must be very hard not to start assuming that it's always the reason.

I'll watch for your future post. I look forward to reading it.

replies(8): >>23546636 #>>23547109 #>>23548364 #>>23548452 #>>23548627 #>>23548834 #>>23548976 #>>23549933 #
freddie_mercury ◴[] No.23547109[source]
> I wish everyone could experience what it is to be a minority in some, any, aspect of their identity to the extent that it might provide them some empathy for others.

You would be surprised at how pervasive and long-lasting majority privilege can be. I live in Southeast Asia where foreigners are a very distinct minority and they experience all kinds of hardships. Difficulties making (local) friends, difficulties dealing with government bureaucracies, difficulties finding "their" food. Very few of them ever gain any empathy from it.

On one occasion I was at a bar talking with a German guy telling me about how there are some areas in Germany where you get off the train and it "doesn't even feel like Germany". All the immigrants dress differently, talk differently, eat different food. They don't even try to fit in!

Meanwhile, he hasn't learned the local language, has no local friends, lives in an apartment building that is mostly German expats. He actually said "I love my building because there are so many Germans." He doesn't even like the local food; I've never seen him eat it.

You'd think the entire experience would build empathy. "Hey, living in a foreign country as a minority is really tough. No wonder they like to hang out around their own people. I did it too!" But nope. Completely oblivious.

replies(9): >>23547821 #>>23548350 #>>23548602 #>>23548608 #>>23548713 #>>23548731 #>>23548804 #>>23549132 #>>23549596 #
brabel ◴[] No.23548713[source]
The very fact they find it necessary to use a different word to describe themselves, "expats", than what they call foreigners who live in their countries, "immigrants", shows that they do not at all consider themselves to be in any way similar.

I've lived as part of a minority in other countries for half of my life. I try as much as I can to blend in, not because I think they are superior, but because I want to learn from their culture. But I have no illusion they will ever treat me the same way they treat their own. I can speak the local language perfectly and lots of people will still address me in English (not the local language) just because I look foreign. The locals never invite for anything. It's quite frustrating. I don't even have people from my own culture to socialize with, so I am mostly alone with my wife (who has another culture as well). It's frustrating for sure, but we learn to rely only on our own and enjoy life like that.

replies(1): >>23549043 #
1. bmn__ ◴[] No.23549043[source]
> The very fact they find it necessary to use a different word to describe themselves, "expats", than what they call foreigners who live in their countries, "immigrants", shows that they do not at all consider themselves to be in any way similar.

I was taught these are two words for different concepts. An immigrant expects to take permanent residence in a foreign country, an expatriate – temporarily. The former doing it nearly always out of his own volition, while the latter could very well be sent for duty, to varying degrees.

I do not have any sympathy for immigrants refusing to integrate, but I don't think that an expatriate should necessarily come to be held to the same standard.

replies(5): >>23549146 #>>23549223 #>>23549353 #>>23549587 #>>23550790 #
2. javieranton ◴[] No.23549146[source]
Expat = white/pale skin immigrant. Racial entitlement continues to this day. Notice how only white people ever choose to consider themselves to be "expats"
replies(1): >>23550032 #
3. jacobush ◴[] No.23549223[source]
Both those you label as your "immigrants" and your "expats" ofter entertain the notion that they will eventuelly move back, but in reality often they don't.

Meanwhile, the "expat" gets a free pass for being a general douche.

4. toyg ◴[] No.23549353[source]
> I was taught these are two words for different concepts.

These are stories we tell ourselves to persuade us we're not "like them".

Unsurprisingly, it's a term invented by the British Empire, when people with no prospects in the motherland (like George Orwell) would move to the colonies to make their fortune but wouldn't dream for a second of ever "going native". The amount of time they ended up spending there, or whether they even came back at all, was irrelevant.

5. buran77 ◴[] No.23549587[source]
After living for many years in another country and being called an "immigrant", while hearing other foreigners being called "expats" I realized that people just create a mental rule for what each word means: coming from a rich country = expat, coming from a poor country = immigrant.

So an American permanently living in the UK will be considered an expat. A polish will be called an immigrant. Despite the actual definition of the word, "immigrant" has a negative nuance artificially attached to it so people use it to this effect.

In Europe I noticed that skin color makes less of a difference than "source country". Many British people will still treat African-American individuals as expats, and an Albanian as an immigrant, once they find out where they came from.

6. eythian ◴[] No.23550032[source]
That's certainly not my experience, as someone who relocated to a European capital for work. I work with people from all over with various skin colours, and pretty much everyone everyone self-identifies as an expat.

The main difference seems to be whether they're people moving there to make a new life in a new place, and the work is secondary vs. it's the work that gets them to move (and if you move for work, it's probable that you're being paid more, so have the luxury to have the option to move somewhere else in a comparatively short time.)

replies(1): >>23551481 #
7. P-ala-din ◴[] No.23550790[source]
> I do not have any sympathy for immigrants refusing to integrate?

what do you mean by integrate? are immigrants allowed to speak their native tongue, dress differently or act differently?

does Integration to you mean the complete erasure of their past identities? because that what the German in the pub seems to think.

replies(2): >>23552030 #>>23560559 #
8. buran77 ◴[] No.23551481{3}[source]
> everyone self-identifies as an expat

Of course they do. The question is how does everyone around you see you.

It does make a bit of a difference if the job lead to switching countries (mostly "expat"), or switching country lead to getting a job (mostly "immigrant"). But this detail is buried pretty deep, people will most likely first find out where you're from (by asking, or accent, etc.) and that will determine their first and longest lasting opinion.

Black Americans in the UK are considered expats while white Bosnians are considered immigrants.

replies(2): >>23551779 #>>23552162 #
9. eythian ◴[] No.23551779{4}[source]
I was addressing the original point which was "Notice how only white people ever choose to consider themselves to be "expats"", which in my experience is not true.

> people will most likely first find out where you're from (by asking, or accent, etc.) and that will determine their first and longest lasting opinion.

Perhaps. Where I live there are a lot of Turkish immigrants, for example (mostly they/their parents moved in the 60s/70s.) At the same time I work with people who are Turkish who moved here for work, often in the past several years. I suspect that given the situation, the latter would still be considered expats and the former immigrants.

replies(1): >>23552035 #
10. jiggunjer ◴[] No.23552030[source]
I think he refers to self isolation. Those immigrant communities mentioned tend to never marry any locals (not for lack supply, but because they reject western values) or attend local social events, despite speaking German.
11. buran77 ◴[] No.23552035{5}[source]
> there are a lot of Turkish immigrants

This exemplifies my point perfectly. Even though you go on to write that some were born in the country, they are still "Turkish immigrants" not "expats" or [that country's] citizens. Some may be considered expats by you now but walking down the street I can assure you people see "immigrants".

Say "British immigrants", or "US immigrants", or "German immigrants" and see how that rolls off the tongue. Now say "Polish immigrants", or "African immigrants", or "Mexican immigrants".

English has this distinct connotation for the word "immigrant" and it's associated with individuals overwhelmingly based on their country of origin (the poorer the country, the more "immigranty" the person).

I am a white male coming from a reasonably developed and civilized second world country (literal and figurative definitions apply) to follow a high end job. Yet the second I open my mouth I am very much an "immigrant" in the eyes of most locals.

replies(2): >>23558739 #>>23560941 #
12. joshuaissac ◴[] No.23552162{4}[source]
> It does make a bit of a difference if the job lead to switching countries (mostly "expat"), or switching country lead to getting a job (mostly "immigrant").

Does this distinction actually exist in how people use the words "expat" and "immigrant"? A lot of the time, immigrants will have accepted their job offers already before entering the country, and if they did not switch countries, they would have the same kind of job in their home country anyway (e.g. immigrant nurses recruited by the NHS).

The dictionary definition (OED) talks about the immigrant being a person who enters a country to live there permanently, but in reality, even those who enter with the intention of leaving after a few years are considered immigrants by everyone around them if they are from a third-world country.

replies(2): >>23553052 #>>23561011 #
13. newen ◴[] No.23553052{5}[source]
Yeah, you don't get a tourist visa and then get a job in a country. That's illegal in almost all countries. Usually, you get a job, get a work visa sponsored by the company, and then eventually get permanent residence, then citizenship.
replies(1): >>23561019 #
14. skissane ◴[] No.23558739{6}[source]
> English has this distinct connotation for the word "immigrant" and it's associated with individuals overwhelmingly based on their country of origin (the poorer the country, the more "immigranty" the person).

I was born in Australia, my mother was born in Scotland. In my mind, that makes me a second generation immigrant. I never thought of my mother, or her parents, as "expatriates".

A lot of Australians who immigrated from the UK and Ireland identified themselves as "immigrants" not "expatriates".

replies(1): >>23576266 #
15. bmn__ ◴[] No.23560559[source]
> what do you mean by integrate? […] what the German in the pub seems to think

Don't you have sociology classes or political education in school? I just looked up the word to make sure and it turns out its meaning is almost the same to what I remembered, and it certainly is not a complete erasure as you allude to.

Nice straw man, though. Man, must it be satisfying to topple it over!

replies(1): >>23564333 #
16. eythian ◴[] No.23560941{6}[source]
> This exemplifies my point perfectly. Even though you go on to write that some were born in the country, they are still "Turkish immigrants" not "expats" or [that country's] citizens. Some may be considered expats by you now but walking down the street I can assure you people see "immigrants".

Yes, they're definitely not expats by the definition I gave earlier - those who move for work. Considering second+ generation residents as immigrants was really a mis-edit on my part, though they are seen by "natives" here as immigrants, often.

But you're kinda focussing on a point I wasn't making - that (in my experience, where I am), it's not only white people who self-identify as expats. Russians, Bangladeshis, Kenyans, USians, etc. are all generally expats if they moved for work.

17. eythian ◴[] No.23561011{5}[source]
> Does this distinction actually exist in how people use the words "expat" and "immigrant"? A lot of the time, immigrants will have accepted their job offers already before entering the country, and if they did not switch countries, they would have the same kind of job in their home country anyway (e.g. immigrant nurses recruited by the NHS).

Right, but the point is people who are generally called expats get a job offer in another country, and move because of that job.

People who are generally called immigrants want to move, and so try to get a job in another country (or maybe don't, depends on the relationship between the two countries and the status of the person.)

The expat causality is (typically) "job -> move", the immigrant causality is (typically) "want to move -> job".

The actual ordering of when the move happens and when the job is got aren't that relevant.

Also notable that there are plenty of exceptions, grey areas, regional differences, etc. involved. Which is why I don't like sweeping statements like the one I was originally replying to, because they're invariably wrong in some situation.

18. eythian ◴[] No.23561019{6}[source]
It's not that uncommon to get a tourist visa to scope out a country, apply for a fixed term working visa to get a job, and then where possible transition that into residency and onwards. It's definitely not an easy path, but I know people who have done it.
19. P-ala-din ◴[] No.23564333{3}[source]
> Don't you have sociology classes or political education in school?

yes, I've had an overly technical education but I fail to see how that's relevant.

> I just looked up the word to make sure

I feel like you misread my argument. "seems to think" means that I don't agree with him. Some people, including the person that this thread-tree is about (in my opinion) use integration when they mean cultural erasure. (aka assimilation)

if people speaking/dressing differently in a train implies that they are not integrated (according to him). Than integration (according to him) implies that people do not speak/dress differently which I see as cultural erasure.

And from my own experience, I've been told by a Turkish friend that he received cold stares and was yelled at for speaking Turkish with his daughter in public transportation (out of concern for her integration). Although, it's a common technique for each parent to speak a single language when you want to raise a bilingual child.

and honestly, it's not that novel of an idea:

- "In fact, integration has become a code word in some circles for intolerance and discrimination" - The Emerging Monoculture: Assimilation and the "model Minority" De William E et al

- 'the older völkish notion of German national identity lurks behind calls for acculturation as a condition for social acceptance.In contemporary Germany, "integration" is a codeword for cultural assimilation, with a strong emphasis on learning the majority language and history.' - From the Bonn to the Berlin Republic: Germany at the Twentieth Anniversary of Unification. Jeffrey J. Anderson. Eric Langenbacher.

replies(1): >>23574776 #
20. P-ala-din ◴[] No.23574776{4}[source]
*then
21. brabel ◴[] No.23576266{7}[source]
Australia is different from most other rich countries now receiving immigrants (and "expats") because its mainstream culture (not the native culture, which would be aborigine) is itself founded by immigrants from the UK in the relatively recent past... and there has been continuous immigration from many parts of the world since then... I guess that's the reason Australians still see people coming to Australia from rich countries, including the US and European countries, as immigrants... it's not a dirty word over there, as the majority of Australians are only third or fourth generation at most and therefore consider themselves descendants of immigrants. It would be kind of absurd to think of their grand-grand-parents coming to live permanently in Australia as "expats" (though I don't doubt some of them coming today might call themselves that)!

But in rich countries that are old enough to have a population that already forgot they probably also came from elsewhere (populations have always moved around, replacing, killing, and/or mixing with the locals), recent waves of immigration are always from poor countries with a very different culture/language (so that they have trouble assimilating, getting jobs, contributing and so on... and many end up giving up and start to feel marginalized, causing some to appeal to crime) which made the word immigrant have a very negative connotation... hence the need for people from other rich countries to distinguish themselves from those poor people and call themselves something more respectable like "expats".