Anti-Hindu Bias on Campus: A Practical Safety Plan

If you have been threatened, followed, assaulted, or mocked because you are Hindu – or because someone assumed that you were – your first question may be whether the incident was serious enough to report. That is the wrong burden to place on yourself. You do not need to settle its legal classification before you seek safety, preserve the facts, and tell the university what happened.

A useful response follows a clear order: get out of danger, record what you directly observed, find confidential or trusted support, make a written report, and ask for specific protections. The same process also helps Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist students when an incident targets more than one Dharmic identity or when an attacker confuses those identities.

Key takeaways

• If danger is immediate, move toward a populated or secured place and contact campus security or local emergency services. Do not remain nearby merely to collect evidence.
• Write down the exact words and actions, time, location, identity markers targeted, witness information, and evidence available. Separate what you personally observed from what someone else told you.
• Report every dimension of the incident. An attack can be anti-Sikh in its physical target and anti-Hindu in its language at the same time.
• Ask for a report or case number, a named contact, immediate safety measures, available support services, and the date of the next update.
• If you are organizing with other students, demand measurable changes: responsible officials, implementation dates, response times, location-specific prevention, and anonymized incident data.

Recognize when disagreement has become identity-based intimidation

Not every criticism of Hindu beliefs, an Indian government, or a political movement is anti-Hindu bias. Universities must remain places where religious and political claims can be questioned. The line is crossed when a person is threatened, degraded, excluded, stalked, assaulted, or denied equal participation because of an actual or perceived Hindu identity.

Look at conduct and context rather than trying to infer an offender’s private beliefs. Indicators worth documenting include:

• Using Hindu as an insult, threat, or degrading label directed at a person.
• Targeting a tilak, mala, rudraksha, religious clothing, image, shrine, temple, or other visible expression of faith.
• Pressuring a student to hide an identity marker or stop attending a class, event, residence, or student organization.
• Using a geopolitical dispute as a pretext to intimidate an individual student who has no responsibility for the contested conduct.
• Directing hostility at someone perceived to be Hindu, even when that perception is mistaken.
• Targeting several identities in one incident, such as attacking a Sikh article of faith while also using Hindu as a slur.

The last distinction is not theoretical. In the February 7, 2025 assault near MacQuarrie Hall at San Jose State University, a visibly observant Sikh student was reportedly forced to the ground by several assailants who tore off his turban; witnesses also indicated that the attackers used Hindu as a slur. Calling the conduct anti-Sikh recognizes the student and the religious article physically attacked. Calling its language anti-Hindu records the identity the assailants reportedly weaponized. Neither description cancels the other.

This precision matters because an intake form that allows only one category can erase part of a multi-target incident. If that happens to you, state the additional dimension in the narrative, ask that it be added to the record, and keep the written request. Do not allow an administrator’s software limitation to become the final description of your experience.

The wider risk cannot be dismissed as a single campus dispute. The California Civil Rights Department’s 2024 statewide anti-hate hotline figures classified 23.3 percent of reported religion-based incidents as anti-Hindu, compared with 36.9 percent anti-Jewish and 14.6 percent anti-Muslim. California’s 2025 hate-crime reporting also indicated four consecutive years of increases in anti-Hindu incidents. These figures describe reports and trends; they do not prove the motive in any individual case. Their practical value is narrower and important: universities in California should already have a plan for recognizing and responding to anti-Hindu bias.

What to do during and immediately after an incident

Your safety takes precedence over gathering the perfect video or confronting the offender. Evidence can support a later investigation, but remaining within reach of an assailant can turn harassment into injury.

1. Leave the danger zone. Move toward an occupied building, staffed desk, security post, open business, or group of people. If you cannot leave safely, use the campus emergency system or contact local emergency services.
2. Describe the immediate risk plainly. Say whether an assault is occurring, anyone has a weapon, the person is following you, medical help is needed, or the assailant is still nearby. Give your exact location before explaining the history.
3. Seek medical attention when there has been physical contact, injury, breathing difficulty, loss of consciousness, or severe distress. Medical care comes before photographs or paperwork.
4. Preserve what already exists. Keep threatening messages, emails, damaged property, photographs, relevant video, and the original files. Do not edit media or add annotations to the only copy. Note where campus or nearby cameras may have captured the event so investigators can seek footage before ordinary retention systems overwrite it.
5. Write a private first-person account as soon as you safely can. Record the sequence, exact words you remember, descriptions, direction of travel, time, place, and actions you took. Mark uncertain details as uncertain rather than filling gaps.
6. Ask witnesses for contact details, but do not pressure them to agree with your interpretation. A witness who records only what was seen or heard is often more useful than one who adopts a broad label without supporting facts.

Keep the initial record private while you decide how to report. Posting names, faces, residence information, or unverified allegations can expose you and others to retaliation, online harassment, or legal complications. If public attention later becomes necessary, remove personal details and obtain informed consent from the affected student first. A student organization does not own a survivor’s story merely because the incident affects the community.

You may also want confidential support before making a formal complaint. Ask whether a counselor, chaplain, advocate, or community liaison is confidential before sharing details; campus roles differ, and some employees may have reporting responsibilities. A trusted friend can accompany you to meetings, help you take notes, and reduce the chance that important questions are forgotten.

Build a report that campus officials can act on

A strong report is a factual chronology followed by clear requests. You can describe suspected bias without claiming knowledge you do not have. For example: I am reporting an assault in which my religious article was targeted and Hindu was used as a slur. I am asking the university to record both dimensions, address my immediate safety, and investigate the conduct.

Include facts that can be checked

• Your name and a safe way to contact you, or the reporting options available if you need to begin confidentially.
• The date, approximate time, exact location, and route before and after the incident.
• A chronological description of actions and words, including the exact identity-based language you remember.
• The religious or cultural marker targeted, such as a turban, tilak, mala, rudraksha, clothing, event, prayer practice, or sacred image.
• Descriptions of the people involved and whether you know them to be students, employees, visitors, or unknown persons. Do not convert an assumption into a fact.
• Witness names and contact details, camera locations, messages, photographs, medical records, damaged items, and any earlier related incident numbers.
• The effect on your access to education: missed classes, avoidance of a building, inability to attend an event, fear of returning to a residence, or interruption of campus employment.

The distinction between observation and inference protects your credibility. Write that you heard the word Hindu used during the threat if that is what happened. If you believe the motive was anti-Hindu because of that language, identify it as your assessment and ask investigators to examine it. Do not add an offender’s presumed religion, nationality, political affiliation, or organizational membership unless you have a factual basis for doing so.

Ask for decisions, not just sympathy

End the report with concrete requests that match the risk. Depending on the incident, those requests may include:

• Written confirmation that the report was received and a report or case number.
• The name and contact details of the person responsible for follow-up.
• A safety assessment covering the location, time of day, access route, visitor access, and possibility of repeat contact.
• Interim measures that allow you to continue attending classes, living on campus, working, worshipping, and participating in student life.
• Access to counseling, confidential reporting information, chaplaincy, or a culturally literate community liaison.
• Preservation and review of available video, access-control records, messages, or other evidence.
• Correction of the incident classification if the intake system omitted anti-Hindu, anti-Sikh, or another relevant dimension.
• A date for the next status update, even if the investigation will not be complete by then.

Send the report to the office that matches the problem. Ongoing danger or suspected criminal conduct belongs with campus safety or local emergency services. Student-affairs, civil-rights, equal-opportunity, housing, or academic administrators may address discrimination, access, conduct, and interim support within their areas. Counseling or chaplaincy can support you but may not have authority to investigate. When you are unsure, send the factual report to the primary safety and student-affairs channels and ask each recipient to identify the responsible office.

Federal frameworks may also matter, but they are not labels a student must prove before being heard. Title VI can become relevant when discriminatory treatment is connected to actual or perceived ancestry, ethnicity, or national origin, while the Clery Act can affect crime reporting and campus safety communications where its coverage requirements are met. Whether either law applies depends on the facts. If you need advice about legal rights, deadlines, confidentiality, or an outside complaint, consult a qualified civil-rights lawyer or legal-support organization rather than relying solely on a campus explanation.

After every meeting, send a short written record of what was discussed, what was promised, who owns each action, and when you expect the next update. Keep copies outside an account you could lose after graduation or a change in enrollment. If an official description is inaccurate, request a correction in writing and preserve both versions.

What a credible campus response should look like

A campus has not solved the problem merely because it issued a general statement opposing hate. You should be able to see who is responsible, which risks are being addressed, how affected students can obtain help, and how the institution will determine whether conditions improve.

• Accurate acknowledgement: Officials should identify every supported dimension of bias without erasing the person directly targeted or declaring unverified facts to be settled.
• Immediate, culturally competent support: Students should have rapid access to counseling, clear information about confidential options, and liaisons who understand turbans, tilak, rudraksha, malas, prayer practices, and other articles of faith.
• Protection of campus participation: Policies should expressly protect religious head coverings, marks, beads, clothing, and observances in classrooms, laboratories, housing, athletics, clubs, and other co-curricular settings.
• Location-specific prevention: Administrators should examine lighting, sightlines, blue-light access, camera coverage, patrol patterns, building entrances, event access, and after-hours visitor management where the incident occurred. Camera use and access records need clear privacy and retention governance.
• Scenario-based education: Faculty, staff, security personnel, and students need examples involving anti-Hindu and anti-Sikh conduct, harassment of visible symbols, bystander action, and the misuse of geopolitical arguments against individual students. A generic statement about inclusion does not teach someone what to recognize or where to refer it.
• Multi-target reporting: The incident system should allow more than one religious or identity category and retain the narrative needed to understand overlap.
• Cross-functional coordination: Campus police, student affairs, legal counsel, counseling services, faculty leadership, and relevant external authorities should know their roles before the next incident. Tabletop exercises can expose gaps that remain invisible in a written policy.
• Community partnership: Hindu temples, Sikh gurdwaras, Jain and Buddhist organizations, and interfaith councils can improve cultural literacy and survivor referrals. They should support affected students, not replace the university’s responsibility to protect access to education.

If you belong to a student organization, convert these principles into a one-page request. Start with verified facts and label unresolved claims. Limit the first round to three immediate priorities, name the office that should own each one, and ask for an implementation date. Then request measures that reveal performance: the interval between an incident and its reporting, the time required to connect a student with services, repeat incidents by location and time of day, and climate-survey results disaggregated by religion while protecting privacy.

This approach also strengthens Dharmic solidarity. Hindu students can insist that an attack on a Sikh turban be named as anti-Sikh. Sikh students can acknowledge when Hindu is used as a weapon of abuse. Jain and Buddhist students should not have to wait until their own symbols are targeted before reporting gaps that affect visibly Dharmic communities. Solidarity is most credible when it preserves each tradition’s identity while confronting the conduct they face in common.

If an incident has already happened, open a private record now: write the chronology, preserve the evidence, identify one trusted supporter, and send the report through the appropriate safety and student-affairs channels. If you are working preventively, ask your campus for named owners and dates before the next semester, event, or late-night gathering places students in the same conditions. Safety improves when concern is converted into a record, a responsible person, and a change that can be verified.

References

• CoHNA – CYAN Condemns Hinduphobic Assault at San Jose State University