Pillsbury Cowboys and Indians
During a recent interview with Pillsbury at a DIVERSITY career fair in San Francisco, I thought I might have accidentally stumbled onto a John Wayne movie set in Sweetwater, Texas. In the middle of my interview, I asked my interviewer about the pro bono work at Pillsbury. He proudly responded by saying Pillsbury helped "Indians" with family law. I assumed he meant actual Indians--people from India, the country. Silly me. As he continued, repeatedly saying Pillsbury worked with "Indians," he finally said "When the tribes have a dispute with the federal government." Shocked, I first thought I had been transported from a diversity career fair in Northern California to the Hillbilly Firm "Get 'Er Done" Convention. Needless to say, I was offended and grew anxious. My great grandmother was half Cherokee. But I kept my cool. Saying something would mean pointing out the absent mindedness at best and racial prejudice at worst, of the person who decides if I get a callback. Plus, maybe he just made an honest mistake or had difficulty pronouncing the word "American," to place as a prefix to all his Indian talk. After the interview, I thought about notifying everyone I could think of to let them know some partner had slipped through the cracks and that they should put him back in the barn with the horses and cows, lock the doors this time, and make sure he doesn't escape again. I waited on it, and ultimately decided I would talk to someone in the firm's diversity committee if granted a callback, or alternatively email the recruiting manager if given the good ole' fashioned you're not good enough for us rejection letter. The letter came. My first of the recruitment season. I emailed the recruiting manager, whom I will call Buffy. Buffy apologized for my grief in her reply email and asked me for my phone number and a good time for a member of the diversity committee to call me to discuss the matter. I did not reply to the email in the morning as I was in a rush to get to school and work on my journal. During my journal working hours, my phone rang from a San Francisco phone number. I answered with a pleasant yet professional, "hello." The caller's response was, "Is this Jeff?" I told him it was me and he went into a forced thank you speech for letting him, as a partner on the diversity committee, know of my concerns. He said he valued my suggestion that interviewers be trained in using language that respects people's backgrounds and sensitivities. 7th grade me says, "Duh! Do I get a consultation bonus as a parting gift?" It was a diversity career fair, but I guess the Dough Boys missed the memo, busy eating their cookies. He then went on to say that he talked to my interviewer who was surprised I was upset and that he did not at all notice my adverse response to his language problem during the interview. My Diversity Dough Boy Apologizer said "If you were upset, you sure fooled him. He's always been committed to promoting diversity." I am not kidding. This is a real quote. In retrospect, I'm thinking I should have turned the back of my resume into a sign and begun marching around the interview room protesting the socio-political consequences of European colonialism and the oppression of American Indians since the European invasion. Or alternatively, begun crying in somber remembrance of the Trail of Tears and the White Man's oppression of my ancestors. Shortly after Dough Boy's compliment of my acting skills, I hung up. Seriously, who calls a complete stranger in the middle of the day, doesn't ask if it's a good time, questions the person's integrity, then accidentally forgets to ever actually apologize for insensitive comments? In short, even if Pillsbury asked me to join them next summer, I would have to shoot my metaphorical arrow at their ass (I mean offer). I don't work well without air conditioning and call me Paris, but barns just aren't my thing. My only surprise is that my not so cuddly Interviewer Dough Boy did not connect my Outlaw membership to all the great work Pillsbury does for all the queers and homos in this country.
(12) Comments
Dear Diversity Boy:
Do you really take offense that an interviewer referred to his firm's pro bono work for "Indians" rather than "American Indians"? I'm surprised that you don't complain of his failure to use the more P.C. phrase "Native Americans." But that's neither here nor there.
From context -- i.e., your interviewers mention of "tribes" in dispute with the "federal government" -- it was obvious to you what he meant when he said "Indian." This is a distinction without difference and doesn't even remotely suggest "racial prejudice" on the part of your interviewer. Rather than an intellectual on a crusade to cure English usage of what you view as politically incorrect language, you sound like a naive and insecure law student engaged in a slow-motion temper tantrum. In reality, you were unable to secure a callback interview at what practitioners agree is (generously) a medicore law firm. You really are making much ado about nothing.
Thank you for the psychoanalysis, guest. I'm not sure what I would do without your deep insight into my motivations, not to mention your clarification of the mediocrity of Pillsbury. Peace Be Upon Us.
DiversityBoy - My guess is that but for the diversity job fair, you'd have had no opportunity to talk to Pillsbury in the first instance. Your post reeks of TTT 2L desparation and today the reality began to sink in, you have sunk a lot of cash on what will soon be a worthless piece of paper.
You received your first of many rejection letters. If you were actually smart, you would have gone to a good school or had good grades and you would not have had to rely on some BS genetic trait (that is wholly unrelated to your ability or skills) to land an interview with Pillsbury. Look at the bright side though, you're not stupid because of the trait that landed you at the diversity job fair, you're just stupid.
Wow. Are you serious? Native Americans—if you prefer—often refer to themselves as Indians. I would have figured you to know this, what, being 1/32 Cherokee and all. Just another example of p.c. culture and faux outrage run amuck. Perhaps you need more worldly experiences before judging others.
See American Heritage Dictionary, Usage Note: Indian (http://www.bartleby.com/61/16/I0101600.html)
Assuming that he had reached the Indies, Columbus called the people on the islands his ships visited “indios,” or “Indians,” and the misnomer has stuck ever since. It is natural that people have proposed alternative names, whether to avoid confusion between the inhabitants of America and India or to indicate respect for the original occupants of the American continents. Thus Native American has become widely established in American English, being acceptable in all contemporary contexts and preferred in many. However, the acceptance of Native American has not brought about the demise of Indian, despite persistent criticism. Unlike Negro, which was quickly stigmatized once black became preferred, Indian never fell out of favor with a large segment of the American population. It is firmly rooted in English in such common terms as Plains Indian, French and Indian War, and Indian Territory as well as in numerous plant and place names. In locutions of this kind there is no possibility of substitution. •The charge that Indian is an offensive term—hopelessly tainted by the ignorant or romantic stereotypes of popular American culture—can be answered, at least in part, by pointing to the continuing use of this term among American Indians themselves. Indeed, Indian authors and those sympathetic to Indian causes often prefer it for its unpretentious familiarity as well as its emotional impact, as in this passage from the Kiowa writer N. Scott Momaday's memoir The Names (1976): “It was about this time that [my mother] began to see herself as an Indian. That dim native heritage became a fascination and a cause for her.”
whoa. ever heard of paragraph breaks?
DiversityBoy,
Wow, guest three's comment reeks of elitism and the sort of attitude that gives so many reason to be repulsed by the words lawyer and attorney. This commentator has probably never been outside of Greenwich, Conn. and the little, dim bubble that is often out of touch with any reality beyond fish forks and swimming pools. Talk about judging. Also, according to my calculations, Diversity Boy would be 1/16th, his g-parent would have been 1/4, his arent 1/8, him 1/16 Cherokee. Come on elitist (math can be fun)! Dividing by two is so hard, isn't it.?
You make a good point Diversity Boy. Indian is not appropriate, especially at a diversity career fair. At least Native American would be an attempt to be sensitive to one's background. American Indian is the least ambiguous and least offensive way to describe Native Americans. My American Indian friends always refer to themselves as such or Native American. To them, Indian is offensive and ignorant sounding.
There are a lot of words that can be used to describe me, as a black woman, but not all are appropriate. But then again, I guess I got into a top law school because I'm black, right elitist commentators?
Why are people so mean on here?
I'm sorry Diversity Boy, but I have to say that you are making much ado about nothing. As a woman of color and staunch diversity supporter, I am very sensitive to cultural insensitivity. But the example you gave is not such a case.
The fact of the matter is not all Native Americans agree on what they want to be called. My co-worker formerly worked for an Indian tribe and she insists that all of the people in that particular tribe referred to themselves exclusively as Indians. Not Native American and not American Indian. That was their preference.
Who are you to insist that the entire group be referred to by the one term you deem politically correct? Do you also get offended when people use the term Black instead of African American or Black American?
The SF legal community is VERY small.
You better hope that the people involved in this incident do not out you to their peers for trying to defame a perfectly fine law firm all because you are too ignorant to know that some Native Americans prefer to be called Indians.
I'm thinking that sort of black listing would be illegal. Perhaps Diversity Boy hyperbolizes the situation, but it is a perfectly legitimate concern.
First of all, I disagree that this is a "legitimate concern." But, if it were legitimate, the appropriate response is to go the recruiting coordinator and then drop it NOT write a treatise on ATL accusing the firm of being culturally insensitive.
And "black listing" is a strong word (though I don't think it's illegal). What I envision is Pillsbury associate X mentioning to friend at firm Y, "Yeah, we had this total jerk trying to get a job at Pillsbury, we didn't hire him because he did Z." Friend at firm Y happens to sit on the hiring committee at firm Y and when Diversity Boy's resume comes up, friend casually recommends that the firm not waste its time.
Very plausible.
People can have different opinions. This post is not objectively good or bad. It's merely a different perspective. I value tolerance and conversation. I think this post elicited some over reactions. Kudos to the people who didn't resort to insults.