So, a half-Filipino half-Nigerian was offended by something written in the Filipino language and called the staff and restaurant as “racist” against Black people.
> Sa nakablack na nakaupo sa 14 kulot ang buhok kamukha ni black jack.
It literally translates as: The one in black sitting on 14 curly hair look alike of black jack.
Proper English translation: The one wearing black, on table 14, with curly hair, who is a look alike of Blakdyak.
This is the customer's rant on social media:
> This behavior was exhibited by one of their staff members, who took it upon herself to make remarks about my appearance based on my racial background. As an individual of Nigerian and Filipino descent, I know I’m different. But was the note necessary?
Read the English translation again and answer these questions:
Was there a remark about his appearance?
How about if we add, “based on my racial background”?
Was it possible that the staff knew he is half-Nigerian and half-Filipino that the customer has to mention it and how he knows he is different?
Maybe what he was actually offended about was being compared to Blakdyak (in note as “black jack”)?
> Blakdyak was a Filipino actor, comedian and reggae singer. He was known as ‘The King of Pinoy Reggae’.
A question to you, dear reader:
a. Would you be offended if what you're wearing was described?
b. Would you be offended if your hair was described?
c. Would you be offended if you were described as a look a like of a celebrity? (Granted, that celebrity is/was not an a*hole.)
Including the customer's description is not needed especially if they have a table number system any way. However, we do not know what concept the restaurant have.
I, myself, have been to some restaurants which describes their customers.
In one restaurant, they don't have a table number system. It is also their concept to share tables with others. The best way to avoid confusion was to describe the customer.
They don't take names for privacy reasons. Not even nicknames. (A customer can later argue it is not their name. And if a staff gave the nickname, there's a chance of offense or similarly, argue it is not their name.)
In another restaurant, there was an addition, I was compared to some celebrity (I don't recall). My date and I had a fit of laughter after reading it.
Here's an example of one such description about me:
Filipino: 'Yung nakaitim na short black hair.
“'Yung nakaitim” = Wearing [something] black.
In English: The one in black with short black hair.
If it was written in Filipino as: “Yung maitim”, then it can be construed as racist. The word “maitim” in this context is referring to a person's skin color or dark tone.
So, going back to the original issue.
> Sa nakablack na nakaupo sa 14 kulot ang buhok kamukha ni black jack.
EN: The person in black sitting on [table] 14 with curly hair…
If it was written this way:
> Sa maitim na nakaupo sa 14 kulot ang buhok kamukha ni black jack.
EN: The black person…
Or, worse:
> Sa nakablack na kulay kanal na nakaupo sa 14 kulot ang buhok hindi ata nagsuklay kamukha ni black jack.
EN: The person in black, as black as a canal sitting on [table] 14 with curly hair that wasn't brushed…
See the huge difference?
The original note in Filipino:
never mentioned nor implied anything about the customer's skin color.
has nothing to do with the customer being a black person.
Even impossible that the note was referring to him being half-Nigerian and half-Filipino.
The Black Jack (Blakdyak) “remark” was a complement.
Now this foreigner, we're assuming he is a foreigner because he obviously misunderstood Tagalog and he missed the context, is doing everything to sue the restaurant and the staff.
I'm sorry man. It is very clear that you misunderstood the note, and took offense when there was nothing to be offended about.
I pity that restaurant and staff.
This case is no different from foreigners, in particular those from the USA, who saw #KKK in the #Philippines and were offended.
Some of them uploaded videos calling Filipinos racists.
Some of them also had the audacity to “educate” Filipinos.
What's wrong? Missed context… again.
KKK was a revolutionary group that fought against Western invaders, in particular, Spaniards. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the American KKK.
Or, that #Twitter incident wherein a #Ppop group tweeted, “Hello Negros!” And every Western person on Twitter called them “racist” and “educated” them.
Guess what? Missed context yet again!
That P-pop group landed on Negros island, so obviously they tweeted, “Hello Negros!”
When you are from mainland US, and you land in Hawaii, do you say, “Hello Japan!”? ROFLOL.
Only a ‘fraction’ (guesstimate) of “educators” apologised to them. There were even those who defended themselves by suggesting to rename Negros island because Negros is offensive to the people of Negros. Like, uh, they're foreigners who never visited Negros, not even the Philippines, and they knew the people of Negros were offended? Puh-lease.
Anyway. This new case? It's very similar.
Missed context.
Misunderstood language.
And a foreigner trying to “educate” a native he clearly misunderstood.