|
-
"Person of colour"
Can anyone please tell me why it is acceptable to refer to someone as "a person of colour" but not as "a coloured person"? To me, they both mean the same.
Who actually decreed that the latter should be classed as racist yet the former could be a freely used description?
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
-
Originally Posted by duncet
Can anyone please tell me why it is acceptable to refer to someone as "a person of colour" but not as "a coloured person"? To me, they both mean the same.
Who actually decreed that the latter should be classed as racist yet the former could be a freely used description?
wouldnt know either!is it black or coloured as well ,most of us come from post war generational upbringings as well and all the pc seems to overlap into what is and isnt acceptable. so take each person as as you find them with open heart and mutual trust till proven otherwise,all bleed red at the end of the day,our actions define our being.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by duncet
Can anyone please tell me why it is acceptable to refer to someone as "a person of colour" but not as "a coloured person"? To me, they both mean the same.
Who actually decreed that the latter should be classed as racist yet the former could be a freely used description?
Suppose it depends who you ask.
When in S Africa (back in the early '70's), I found that 'coloured' as in Cape Coloureds, referred to half-caste types, i.e. a cross between whites and blacks. Whereas nowadays in the UK, a 'person of colour' is presumably anyone non-white, inc someone who may be 100% black.
On Yer Bike!
www.20splentyforus.co.uk
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Don't know definitively. But I think 'person of colour' embraces all non-white people. Black, Latino, Asian etc. Although white is a colour. 'Coloured' for some hails back to the segregation in America, where there were 'coloured' washrooms and 'coloured' schools.
Then again, as PNP says, 'coloured' seems acceptable to some in South Africa. Some ethnic minorities don't like 'BAME'.
It isn't always easy to keep up with what terms people embrace, and what they find offensive. I've got elderly relatives that still say 'P**i'. I try to explain it's offensive, but they say it's only an abbreviation, like 'Brit'.
Bit of a minefield. I just figure when in doubt, don't say it.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
It's probably better to plead the fifth as the terms used are developing and subtle errors are pounced upon by a rabid snowflake media and their sheep.
It was only recently I was called a racist t**d on here for condemning the clear exploitation of someone.
We live in strange times.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Styx liked this post
-
Originally Posted by duncet
Can anyone please tell me why it is acceptable to refer to someone as "a person of colour" but not as "a coloured person"? To me, they both mean the same.
Who actually decreed that the latter should be classed as racist yet the former could be a freely used description?
'Person of color' is an American expression.
'Coloured person' Brit expression with bad historic links to racism.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Let's just get it clear no matter what you say or what you do if you are white you are naturally a racist. No matter what you do or say someone is insulted or appalled, normally someone the same colour as you.
If we were all labelled GREEN I suppose the Dark Greens would always moan about the Light Greens.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
The term 'coloured' harks back to the days of segregation, and it also implies that white is the norm, although only about 12% of the world's population is caucasian.
I do tend to agree with the OP that 'person of colour (or color)' is not much better, because it still emphasises a 'them and us' attitude.
Personally, I think it's better to use a descriptive term that identifies a person's racial origins if this is necessary, e.g. 'African American', 'Afro-Carribean', 'Asian' etc. I say' if this is necessary' because a reference to a person's skin colour in a conversation is often totally irrelevant.
In too many cases, a description of skin colour is used in a pejorative way.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 4 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Lamparilla
The term 'coloured' harks back to the days of segregation, and it also implies that white is the norm, although only about 12% of the world's population is caucasian.
I do tend to agree with the OP that 'person of colour (or color)' is not much better, because it still emphasises a 'them and us' attitude.
Personally, I think it's better to use a descriptive term that identifies a person's racial origins if this is necessary, e.g. 'African American', 'Afro-Carribean', 'Asian' etc. I say' if this is necessary' because a reference to a person's skin colour in a conversation is often totally irrelevant.
In too many cases, a description of skin colour is used in a pejorative way.
Wouldn't it be a retrograde step to label people with terms such as African-English, Indian English, Belgian-English, Dutch-English ?
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
Wouldn't it be a retrograde step to label people with terms such as African-English or Indian English.
It would be 'British'.
British Asian or African or American depending on the person choosing that title as their identity.
Otherwise 'ethnic' or 'Black' is not offensive.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Hamble
It would be 'British'.
British Asian or African or American depending on the person choosing that title as their identity.
Otherwise 'ethnic' or 'Black' is not offensive.
British American?
aren't we just creating division, most people have gone beyond thinking that a person can't be British because "they don't look like one"
Everyone has a family history, why should some be more important than others.
All backgrounds matter surely?
Some very unassuming people have great stories to tell surely it shouldn't be based on the colour of their skin whether we hear them or not.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
If you are not particularly bothered about colour then why mention it at all. .
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 3 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
Wouldn't it be a retrograde step to label people with terms such as African-English, Indian English, Belgian-English, Dutch-English ?
I'm not sure that 'label' is a helpful term, because that's not what I meant.
Let's say you went to a meeting and you were particularly impressed by someone who made some very good points, but you didn't know his/her name. If you were talking to others who had been at the same meeting, you might say "I really thought that Asian guy had some good ideas". In that context, it's just a descriptive term, not a label, and is akin to saying "That guy in the red and white striped jumper" or whatever.
A noticeable characteristic of someone's appearance is their skin colour or the racial group they come from, just as their clothing or hairstyle might be if the majority of others in a group are visually different - it's just an identifier. The problem comes when people use it in a pejorative way.
As I said above, in many cases ethicity or skin colour are totally irrelevant to a discussion, especially if they are being used to label people.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 2 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
British American?
aren't we just creating division, most people have gone beyond thinking that a person can't be British because "they don't look like one"
Everyone has a family history, why should some be more important than others.
All backgrounds matter surely?
Some very unassuming people have great stories to tell surely it shouldn't be based on the colour of their skin whether we hear them or not.
Working in multicultural settings I have found that double barrel loyalty is a self identifying title and not one that I would choose unless requested to record on paper as such.
Consequently I have met people who chose to list Nationality as British American and British Pakistani etc.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
What were missing is a view from the very people to whom these terms might be applied.
Not the people who appoint themselves as arbiters they are often out of touch and seeking to get attention for themselves.
They are the real micro-aggressors seeking to create division.
Our slowly stumbling society has made great strides in recent years and mostly by people working things out.
Parading a few older people before the court of me-edia snowflakes is counterproductive.
How often do you hear older people genuinely concerned about what language is acceptable as it "changes all the time"
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
|
Search Qlocal (powered by google)
Privacy & Cookie Policy
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Booking.com
Supporting Local Business
Be Seen - Advertise on Qlocal
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
UK,
UK News,
|