5 ms·

Why isn't "people of color" as offensive as "colored people"?

by memish 5y ago

jefftk 5y ago
Why isn't "cream of coconut" the same thing as "coconut cream"? It's common for similar phrasings to have very different meanings (or, in this case, connotations)
Kye 5y ago
Not zmgsabst, but: It's like calling someone a homosexual. The phrasing reduces someone to that characteristic. People of color emphasizes they're whole people with a characteristic. Also be aware there is no more unity of thought among people of color than there is among other demographics, so this is just one person's understanding based on listening to comrades of color. There's also history in geography. What's offensive to people in one city, county, state, country, etc won't hit the same everywhere. In the UK, a fag is a cigarette, and queer was the more popular pejorative. I don't have a good view on how terms for ethnicity/race/etc evolved elsewhere, but there's probably lots of variety.
- jefftk 5y ago
  > The phrasing reduces someone to that characteristic. People of color emphasizes they're whole people with a characteristic. If it were just that you would see a lot more pushback against phrasing like "LGBTQ+ people", "Black people", etc. I think it's mostly the history: this is one of many terms we have moved away from, and using an obsolete term marks you as likely having obsolete views.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  They are all still divisive terms by their very nature. And by intention, in most cases.
Clubber 5y ago
>Why isn't "people of color" as offensive as "colored people"? Great question. I was surprised when "people of color" came into the lexicon given the history of its similar sounding term. I wonder who decides what is offensive and what isn't? Who gave "people of color" a pass while being so close to the other?
StevePerkins 5y ago
There are at least a dozen or so common insult words, that at one point in time or another were medical terminology for mental retardation. Whenever you have a term for something sensitive or disadvantaged, there's a tendency to rapidly cycle terms. Attempting to "outrun" the baggage is easier than solving it.
- thegrimmest 5y ago
  I mean, there is also the option of politely refusing to have the definitions of words changed from under our feet. I have no trouble using the word "retarded" to indicate a mental deficit. Why do you? Why does anyone? So what if some people used it as an insult? Why do they get to control the narrative?
  - etchalon 5y ago
    Because language is a collective action. Definitions evolve with usage. That's just how language works.
    - thegrimmest 5y ago
      That's one way of looking at it. Language can also be looked at as a communication protocol - a way of transferring thoughts and ideas from one mind to another. With this perspective, it is extremely important for all users of the protocol to agree on the definitions of the primitives (words). If they don't, they're basically forking the protocol, forcing overhead to clarify terms on every interaction with people who speak a different version. It's also not how all language works - French for instance has a prescriptive dictionary. Many useful languages do in fact.
      - etchalon 5y ago
        That's not "one way of looking at it". It's literally how language works. Words are wholly invented things, whose meaning is completely derived from usage and context. We make up sequences of sounds and over time we get each other to accept what ideas those sequences of sounds represent. Yes, the Académie Française exists, but fun fact … it's reactive to usage. And it's by no means an absolute authority on the language as it's used colloquially.
tobylane 5y ago
I’ve heard it said people with disabilities is better than disabled people because you should put people first, rather than define them by what’s different. I’m not American or a minority, and coloured people has been a bad phrase all my life. We’ve stopped using BAME apparently.
rootusrootus 5y ago
I would guess it comes down to context. The NAACP still exists.
blackshaw 5y ago
People wanted a generic word that collectively refers to all people who aren't white. They didn't want to use "non-white" because they wanted a positive word that emphasises what people are rather than what they're not. And they didn't want to use "colored" because that word has too much historical baggage (at least in the US.) So "people of color" was born.

Why isn't "people of color" as offensive as "colored people"?

by memish 5y ago

Why isn't "people of color" as offensive as "colored people"?

Why isn't "cream of coconut" the same thing as "coconut cream"? It's common for similar phrasings to have very different meanings (or, in this case, connotations)

Kye 5y ago

Not zmgsabst, but: It's like calling someone a homosexual. The phrasing reduces someone to that characteristic. People of color emphasizes they're whole people with a characteristic. Also be aware there is no more unity of thought among people of color than there is among other demographics, so this is just one person's understanding based on listening to comrades of color. There's also history in geography. What's offensive to people in one city, county, state, country, etc won't hit the same everywhere. In the UK, a fag is a cigarette, and queer was the more popular pejorative. I don't have a good view on how terms for ethnicity/race/etc evolved elsewhere, but there's probably lots of variety.

jefftk 5y ago
> The phrasing reduces someone to that characteristic. People of color emphasizes they're whole people with a characteristic. If it were just that you would see a lot more pushback against phrasing like "LGBTQ+ people", "Black people", etc. I think it's mostly the history: this is one of many terms we have moved away from, and using an obsolete term marks you as likely having obsolete views.
throwawayboise 5y ago
They are all still divisive terms by their very nature. And by intention, in most cases.

Clubber 5y ago

>Why isn't "people of color" as offensive as "colored people"? Great question. I was surprised when "people of color" came into the lexicon given the history of its similar sounding term. I wonder who decides what is offensive and what isn't? Who gave "people of color" a pass while being so close to the other?

StevePerkins 5y ago

There are at least a dozen or so common insult words, that at one point in time or another were medical terminology for mental retardation. Whenever you have a term for something sensitive or disadvantaged, there's a tendency to rapidly cycle terms. Attempting to "outrun" the baggage is easier than solving it.

thegrimmest 5y ago
I mean, there is also the option of politely refusing to have the definitions of words changed from under our feet. I have no trouble using the word "retarded" to indicate a mental deficit. Why do you? Why does anyone? So what if some people used it as an insult? Why do they get to control the narrative?
- etchalon 5y ago
  Because language is a collective action. Definitions evolve with usage. That's just how language works.
  - thegrimmest 5y ago
    That's one way of looking at it. Language can also be looked at as a communication protocol - a way of transferring thoughts and ideas from one mind to another. With this perspective, it is extremely important for all users of the protocol to agree on the definitions of the primitives (words). If they don't, they're basically forking the protocol, forcing overhead to clarify terms on every interaction with people who speak a different version. It's also not how all language works - French for instance has a prescriptive dictionary. Many useful languages do in fact.
    - etchalon 5y ago
      That's not "one way of looking at it". It's literally how language works. Words are wholly invented things, whose meaning is completely derived from usage and context. We make up sequences of sounds and over time we get each other to accept what ideas those sequences of sounds represent. Yes, the Académie Française exists, but fun fact … it's reactive to usage. And it's by no means an absolute authority on the language as it's used colloquially.

tobylane 5y ago

I’ve heard it said people with disabilities is better than disabled people because you should put people first, rather than define them by what’s different. I’m not American or a minority, and coloured people has been a bad phrase all my life. We’ve stopped using BAME apparently.

rootusrootus 5y ago

I would guess it comes down to context. The NAACP still exists.

blackshaw 5y ago

People wanted a generic word that collectively refers to all people who aren't white. They didn't want to use "non-white" because they wanted a positive word that emphasises what people are rather than what they're not. And they didn't want to use "colored" because that word has too much historical baggage (at least in the US.) So "people of color" was born.