Forum Speaker Targets Hate Crime

In a workshop last night, the president of an anti-discrimination group addressed the issue of the disproportionate number of Asians targeted for hate crimes, and how the community should respond.

The forum, sponsored by the Asian American Association, attracted about two dozen participants to hear Shirley J. Su '92.

Su is co-founder and president of SafetyNet, an organization founded last year by Harvard graduates to combat anti-Asian hate crime by informing crime victims of their legal options.

Su, a third-year student at Harvard Law School, stressed the Asian community's need for advocacy.

"Asian-Americans are disproportionately targeted in the Boston and Massachusetts areas," she said. "In 1992, sixteen percent of hate crimes were against Asian-Americans, who only make up five percent of the population."

Hate crime is legally defined as a crime in which one uses force or the threat of force to interfere with any person exercising rights and privileges secured by federal or state constitution or law.

Discussing the extent of hate crime, Su said, "it may be surprising, but whites are often victims of hate crime."

Ghihee Suh '97, a SafetyNet volunteer, said there is a "false perception" that Asian-Americans are not the victims of hate crimes. "Asians never get in trouble,' that kind of thing," she said.

Su said that most hate crimes are not reported. "It is a common phenomenon for victims to blame themselves, especially if [they are] from a country without hate crime laws," she said.

Even when the police intervene in crime situations, they are not always aware that the incident is racially-based, she said.

"Police see teens in a street brawl and do not see the underlying reason," Su said.

Su said hate crimes can go unreported because foreign-speaking victims either don't understand their attackers or are unable to report the incident.

She cited one incident in which a Chinese-American initially failed to recognize a racially-motivated crime because "he heard his attackers screaming 'ducks' and 'goose' when in fact they were screaming 'fucking gooks."'

Su introduced several case studies of possible hate crimes involving verbal threats based on race.

Ultimately, she concluded that hate crime laws are "unclear" because they are vague on what constitutes "the threat of force."

"Things we would like to see classified as hate crime are not," she said. "Just threatening speech alone probably would not count as a hate crime."