Someone trying to explain a racist incident may be angry, hesitant, muddled or simply tired of explaining. What responsibility does the person listening have? There is a temptation to make the speaker do all the work: establish the facts, find the right words, remain reasonable, convince us that something serious has happened. Only then will we give the matter our full attention.
That is a considerable burden to place on someone asking for help.
The Council of Europe reports that experts have recommended police training in Belgium on hate speech and hate crime. The reported recommendation gives us reason to consider what we expect such training to achieve. Recognising relevant offences matters. So does the judgement involved in hearing an account without letting assumptions about the speaker settle the matter before it has been examined.
We can agree that racism is wrong and still be impatient with the person describing it. We can regard ourselves as fair while finding someone’s anger more troubling than whatever prompted it. Good intentions leave plenty of room for that sort of failure.
There is a complication here which deserves more than a passing acknowledgement. Listening seriously cannot mean accepting every allegation as established fact. Nor should every offensive remark automatically become a police matter. Fairness requires evidence, proportion and room to question an account. Those requirements protect everyone.
But questioning an account takes attention. Dismissing it can take almost none. Confusing the two allows indifference to pass for sound judgement.
For police, training should help make that distinction usable in the difficult circumstances of actual work. The recommendation alone cannot tell us whether it will do so, or what else may be needed.
For the rest of us, there is something closer to home to consider. When a colleague, neighbour or family member describes prejudice, how quickly do we reach for an innocent explanation on behalf of someone we have never met? Perhaps that explanation will prove correct. We could still let the person finish.
Nobody should have to deliver a polished account of an ugly experience before we are willing to hear it properly. Establishing what happened may take time. Giving someone enough attention to begin should not.