Cocktails and Records

Such a simple question, such big issues. For much of my working life I have had to deal with the inevitable ‘ethnicity’ questions which are a fact of life for anyone who deals with statistical monitoring in the public sector, or indeed for any organisation who cares about who their users are.

For despite what various members of the general public think, it is actually useful for organisations to know who their users are - the age groups they fall into, the areas they live, whether they have a disability or not, and yes, their ethnic or cultural background. It gives you an indication of whether your products or services are appealing to all of the different people who live in this country - which, if you’re receiving your funding from the tax payer, is the responsible thing to do.

Yes, the categories for ethnicity that are forced upon us from central government are crude, presumptuous and tiresome. They expect people to fall neatly into categories like White (British, Irish, ‘Other’), Black (Caribbean, African, ‘Other’), Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, ‘other’), Chinese, ‘Mixed’, ‘Other’ etc. etc. and don’t separate ‘ethnic identity’ from ‘cultural identity’ (e.g. people born in another country, but who consider themselves to be British).

But people can always write in their own description and, even if they’re limited and not as precise as we would like, the categories do have their uses. They allow you to compare your organisations data to the national average for example.

Still in the organisations I’ve worked for,  users routinely take matters into their own hands, crossing out the standard government classifications and writing in their own versions. Typical responses I’ve seen over the years include:

1. crossing out British and writing in English, Welsh, Scottish
2. crossing out British and writing in Yorkshire, Essex etc.
3. crossing out British and writing in Londoner, Glaswegian etc.
4. crossing out everything except ‘White’ and annotating it e.g. I’m not British, I’m a London, a white Londoner, one of a dying breed.
5. the life story. e.g. my mother was Russian, my father is Spanish, his mum lived in Malaysia etc.
6. the novelty response e.g. ‘I live in my own little world, but it’s alright, they know me there.’
7. the indignant response e.g. ‘I do not like filling in ethnicity - we are all human beings, whatever creed, colour or race’
8. the paranoid torrent of abuse e.g. ‘*£$&% you! I will not be spied on by you or anyone else’

As I go through the responses, I’m always alternately fascinated / disturbed about, not just what the responses say about how people feel about national identity, but being asked about it. No one ever complains about questions asking whether they have a disability or not, or even if they live locally, but there is something about the ethnicity question which just touches a nerve with people. And it can’t just be the limiting tick-box categories.

Tags: half-baked conjecture

This entry was posted on Friday, August 15th, 2008 at 1:32 pm and is filed under Random. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.