6 ms·

> Donald Barthelme in particular praised you for writing about things readers had never heard before between Black and white characters. It's bizarre to me tha

by gred 2y ago

> Donald Barthelme in particular praised you for writing about things readers had never heard before between Black and white characters. It's bizarre to me that in certain circles some Colors are capitalized, while other colors are not.

boplicity 2y ago
It may be bizarre for you, but it is often a reasoned and thoughtful use of the word, meaningful in the context of a complex and consistent consideration of the general meaning and usage of words. I encourage you to consider and understand the perspectives of those who do capitalize the word. This serves as an introduction to some people's thinking: https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php Note, the standard practice to capitalize ethnic groups: For example jewish would be considered incorrect. There are those who consider Black to be an ethnic group, hence, capitalizing it encompasses a way to "describe the people, culture, art and communities" that make up the ethnic group. In which case, it's not a color, exactly, which I think is what you may be missing, when you consider why some capitalize the word. Case in point: We already capitalize many other groups that are often associated with "color." Color, of course, being a construct we often see as "real," when in fact it is a cultural interpretation. > After all, she pointed out, “We already capitalize Asian, Hispanic, African American and Native American.”
- Dudhbbh3343 2y ago
  You and your link make reasonable arguments for capitalizing black, but I don't see any justification (other than to be contrary to supremacist groups) for not doing the same for white, which leaves it inconsistent with the naming of all other racial/ethnic groups.
  - hotdogscout 2y ago
    Leftist activists circles have grievances with white people and this is a small token of revenge. Depersonifying white people. Asians don't get internally consistent treatment because of intersectionality. Are we really pretending it's a coincidence all the time? This naivety is rightfully never applied to right wing bigotry. I'm not white myself but I'm genuinely confused as to why this kind of blatant ethnic antagonization is so normalized in western elites and extremely taboo to point out.
    - lanternfish 2y ago
      The actual critique - which is articulated in many places - is that "white" isn't an ethnic group with an actual cultural or racial lineage. Instead, "white" was created and exists as the dual to "colored" - a shifting category encompassing many ethnicities that describes their position in a set of power structures, historically colonialism. Consider that "whiteness" has changed considerably over the usage of the term, with many ethnicities (irish, italian) shifting into it as their position in American society (the cultural superpower of the time) changed. To consider this further, shift the power structures and see how whiteness changes. Who is considered "white" in the historic USSR and contemporary ex-bloc states is radically different than the usage in America at the same time. This is even more complicated in places like Central or South America, India, and parts of Asia. I guarantee that - if you weren't versed with local power dynamics and colorism history - you wouldn't be able to classify who on the street is generally considered "white" in Buenos Aires.
      - colourizer 2y ago
        [flagged]
      - hotdogscout 2y ago
        The shift in labels and categories applies to all ethnicities, not just whites, even in the US. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule All of the definitions are contested and subject to localities, not just whiteness. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263722423_Not_black_but_Habasha_Ethiopian_and_Eritrean_immigrants_in_American_society https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263722423_Not_black... >is that "white" isn't an ethnic group with an actual cultural or racial lineage. None of them are. There's more genetic diversity in sub Saharan Africa than in any other place on earth. People from Asia and people from Africa don't identify as black or asian as a consistent racial lineage.They're also a western ad hoc hodge podge just as much as whiteness is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people None of your explanations single out white people as an especially fake identity inconsistent with asian or black.
  - ryanlbrown 2y ago
    You're right, they kind of assume the reader knows what they are thinking. My guess is that it is because white isn't used for comradery except if you are extreme, whereas it is normal to do so for non-white groups, so they are trying to delegitimize the extreme group. Whether it is the effective course of action given the goal is an interesting question.
  - Cthulhu_ 2y ago
    It's a complicated matter and I'm not the right person to make any statements about it, but on the one side, we have white sub-groups like Irish or Italian. On the other, grouping all Black sub-groups under one moniker seems overly abstract as well. That said, it works for the debate of racism etc in the US, which affects people of color, not so much the various white groups.
    - lanternfish 2y ago
      It's also due to the unique conditions under which the Black identity was formed - that is forced colocation, separation from history, and systemic coidentification. Anyone who traces their history back to slavery, which many Black Americans can, basically has to stop there creating one pretty large "sub-group". There's a case to be made - and some theorists do - that black and Black are different identities in America, the second directly corresponding to that shared loss of history.
    - Dudhbbh3343 2y ago
      > have white sub-groups like Irish or Italian Right, but are those sub-groups still all that relevant in the context of race in America? It's been a long time since Irish-Americans have been treated differently than British-Americans, for example. I would say grouping all white sub-groups together makes as much sense as grouping all black or Asian sub-groups together because generally racial dynamics today are viewed as occurring between White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, and Native American groups. Further granularity is rarely considered in informal language.
  - boplicity 2y ago
    There's no unified group of white people who want to be called White as opposed to white. Though, maybe I'm wrong? Is there such a group?
    - estebank 2y ago
      There is such a group, but they usually pair "White" with some other word that implies superiority.
      - boplicity 2y ago
        Ha -- I think in that case capitalization makes sense -- especially when the words are paired -- as this at least does some work to make the group identifiably separate from those who do not at all identify with them.
- Chris2048 2y ago
  from your link, first paragraph: "For many people, Black reflects a shared sense of identity and community. White carries a different set of meanings; capitalizing the word in this context risks following the lead of white supremacists." I don't find that thoughtful. The argument further erodes when they also capitalize "Asian", which is described as "groups that include myriad ethnic identities united by shared race and geography and, to some degree, culture" - How does that not apply equally to "white" also?
  - colourizer 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - egeozcan 2y ago
    I, a Turkish migrant living in Europe, think of a specific culture when I read "Black", and skin color when I read "black" (in the context of talking about people of course), and White doesn't tell me anything. Many people from West Turkey also consider themselves as "white" but this is only in comparison to the average skin color of people from East Turkey.
    - wmil 2y ago
      It's a mistake to internationalize it, the terms are usually used in the American context. Black usually means the descendant of slaves. When Obama was starting his political career there was some debate in the Black community about if he really counted as Black, since he didn't really have much contact with the Black community until his 20s and his history is quite different. White typically means descendants of various waves of settlers with limited ties to any specific European country. Generally they can trace their lineage to a mix of early and later arrivals. With a strong bias towards northern Europe. Hispanic generally meant Mexican, Cuban, or Puerto Rican. Which were fairly geographically distinct communities in the 90s so one word for all three didn't cause much confusion.
      - drewcoo 2y ago
        > Hispanic generally meant Mexican, Cuban, or Puerto Rican. Hispanic is a newer term, minted during my lifetime. I know older people who used to be white until they were relabeled as Hispanic. https://daily.jstor.org/where-did-the-term-hispanic-come-from/ https://daily.jstor.org/where-did-the-term-hispanic-come-fro... https://www.history.com/news/hispanic-latino-latinx-chicano-background https://www.history.com/news/hispanic-latino-latinx-chicano-...
- rpmisms 2y ago
  Capitalizing one and not the others is racist. There is no monolithic white, black, or brown experience, and to pretend otherwise is racist. It's a stupid microaggression
  - account42 2y ago
    This kind of anti-white racism is everywhere in western media. It's in advertising. It's in the news reporting. It's in the hiring practices.
    - rpmisms 2y ago
      Ironically, all this will end up doing is make more people racist again.
  - Cthulhu_ 2y ago
    "You're the real racists" is a fallacy; it's ultimately not about appearance but oppression.
    - rpmisms 2y ago
      It's not "you're the real racists", but rather "this is racist". Which it is.
- someuser2345 2y ago
  It seems to me that this practice is just another example of putting white people on a pedestal. If all other racial groups have "a shared sense of identity and community", then it implies that being white is the default; that the world is split into white and not-white.
  - ThrowawayIP 2y ago
    You should read the CJR link. The "shared sense of identity and community" is being descendants of the victims of the slave trade and not the color of their skin.
    - someuser2345 2y ago
      That's a strange definition, because it excludes the majority of the world's dark skinned population. If only the descendants of slaves brought to the Americas can claim to be Black, then there are no Black people in Africa. Hell, even Barack Obama can't claim to be Black, since he is a child of immigrants, not slaves.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      Can you explain how that works for each other grouping that is capitalized, but is not also true for white people?
    - stronglikedan 2y ago
      > descendants of the victims of the slave trade The Irish were white.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Independent of the stated rationale, I think the primary function is as an ideological test and signal: Does one hold that all the diverse peoples of Africa can be considered with a shared group identity, which deserves acknowledgement and respect, and do you simultaneously hold that white people of Europe can be grouped together, but that grouping is undeserving of the same validity and respect. If someone is willing to engage in this Act of cognitive dissonance, they can be considered part of the political in-group or at least sufficiently compliant to be trusted. It is absolutely an example of the liberal racism that Powell is talking about and straight out of 1984.
evrimoztamur 2y ago
Black and White is such a revolutionary PC game, I can agree to that!
7734128 2y ago
It is certainly hateful. A conscious choice that most publishing houses made in the summer of 2020, with a wide verity of delusional explanations.
on_the_train 2y ago
It's blatantly racist. Just imagine the opposite and the resulting uproar
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

by gred 2y ago

boplicity 2y ago

It may be bizarre for you, but it is often a reasoned and thoughtful use of the word, meaningful in the context of a complex and consistent consideration of the general meaning and usage of words. I encourage you to consider and understand the perspectives of those who do capitalize the word. This serves as an introduction to some people's thinking: https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-black-styleguide.php Note, the standard practice to capitalize ethnic groups: For example jewish would be considered incorrect. There are those who consider Black to be an ethnic group, hence, capitalizing it encompasses a way to "describe the people, culture, art and communities" that make up the ethnic group. In which case, it's not a color, exactly, which I think is what you may be missing, when you consider why some capitalize the word. Case in point: We already capitalize many other groups that are often associated with "color." Color, of course, being a construct we often see as "real," when in fact it is a cultural interpretation. > After all, she pointed out, “We already capitalize Asian, Hispanic, African American and Native American.”

Dudhbbh3343 2y ago
You and your link make reasonable arguments for capitalizing black, but I don't see any justification (other than to be contrary to supremacist groups) for not doing the same for white, which leaves it inconsistent with the naming of all other racial/ethnic groups.
- hotdogscout 2y ago
  Leftist activists circles have grievances with white people and this is a small token of revenge. Depersonifying white people. Asians don't get internally consistent treatment because of intersectionality. Are we really pretending it's a coincidence all the time? This naivety is rightfully never applied to right wing bigotry. I'm not white myself but I'm genuinely confused as to why this kind of blatant ethnic antagonization is so normalized in western elites and extremely taboo to point out.
  - lanternfish 2y ago
    The actual critique - which is articulated in many places - is that "white" isn't an ethnic group with an actual cultural or racial lineage. Instead, "white" was created and exists as the dual to "colored" - a shifting category encompassing many ethnicities that describes their position in a set of power structures, historically colonialism. Consider that "whiteness" has changed considerably over the usage of the term, with many ethnicities (irish, italian) shifting into it as their position in American society (the cultural superpower of the time) changed. To consider this further, shift the power structures and see how whiteness changes. Who is considered "white" in the historic USSR and contemporary ex-bloc states is radically different than the usage in America at the same time. This is even more complicated in places like Central or South America, India, and parts of Asia. I guarantee that - if you weren't versed with local power dynamics and colorism history - you wouldn't be able to classify who on the street is generally considered "white" in Buenos Aires.
    - colourizer 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - hotdogscout 2y ago
      The shift in labels and categories applies to all ethnicities, not just whites, even in the US. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule All of the definitions are contested and subject to localities, not just whiteness. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263722423_Not_black_but_Habasha_Ethiopian_and_Eritrean_immigrants_in_American_society https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263722423_Not_black... >is that "white" isn't an ethnic group with an actual cultural or racial lineage. None of them are. There's more genetic diversity in sub Saharan Africa than in any other place on earth. People from Asia and people from Africa don't identify as black or asian as a consistent racial lineage.They're also a western ad hoc hodge podge just as much as whiteness is. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people None of your explanations single out white people as an especially fake identity inconsistent with asian or black.
- ryanlbrown 2y ago
  You're right, they kind of assume the reader knows what they are thinking. My guess is that it is because white isn't used for comradery except if you are extreme, whereas it is normal to do so for non-white groups, so they are trying to delegitimize the extreme group. Whether it is the effective course of action given the goal is an interesting question.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  It's a complicated matter and I'm not the right person to make any statements about it, but on the one side, we have white sub-groups like Irish or Italian. On the other, grouping all Black sub-groups under one moniker seems overly abstract as well. That said, it works for the debate of racism etc in the US, which affects people of color, not so much the various white groups.
  - lanternfish 2y ago
    It's also due to the unique conditions under which the Black identity was formed - that is forced colocation, separation from history, and systemic coidentification. Anyone who traces their history back to slavery, which many Black Americans can, basically has to stop there creating one pretty large "sub-group". There's a case to be made - and some theorists do - that black and Black are different identities in America, the second directly corresponding to that shared loss of history.
  - Dudhbbh3343 2y ago
    > have white sub-groups like Irish or Italian Right, but are those sub-groups still all that relevant in the context of race in America? It's been a long time since Irish-Americans have been treated differently than British-Americans, for example. I would say grouping all white sub-groups together makes as much sense as grouping all black or Asian sub-groups together because generally racial dynamics today are viewed as occurring between White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, and Native American groups. Further granularity is rarely considered in informal language.
- boplicity 2y ago
  There's no unified group of white people who want to be called White as opposed to white. Though, maybe I'm wrong? Is there such a group?
  - estebank 2y ago
    There is such a group, but they usually pair "White" with some other word that implies superiority.
    - boplicity 2y ago
      Ha -- I think in that case capitalization makes sense -- especially when the words are paired -- as this at least does some work to make the group identifiably separate from those who do not at all identify with them.
Chris2048 2y ago
from your link, first paragraph: "For many people, Black reflects a shared sense of identity and community. White carries a different set of meanings; capitalizing the word in this context risks following the lead of white supremacists." I don't find that thoughtful. The argument further erodes when they also capitalize "Asian", which is described as "groups that include myriad ethnic identities united by shared race and geography and, to some degree, culture" - How does that not apply equally to "white" also?
- colourizer 2y ago
  [flagged]
- egeozcan 2y ago
  I, a Turkish migrant living in Europe, think of a specific culture when I read "Black", and skin color when I read "black" (in the context of talking about people of course), and White doesn't tell me anything. Many people from West Turkey also consider themselves as "white" but this is only in comparison to the average skin color of people from East Turkey.
  - wmil 2y ago
    It's a mistake to internationalize it, the terms are usually used in the American context. Black usually means the descendant of slaves. When Obama was starting his political career there was some debate in the Black community about if he really counted as Black, since he didn't really have much contact with the Black community until his 20s and his history is quite different. White typically means descendants of various waves of settlers with limited ties to any specific European country. Generally they can trace their lineage to a mix of early and later arrivals. With a strong bias towards northern Europe. Hispanic generally meant Mexican, Cuban, or Puerto Rican. Which were fairly geographically distinct communities in the 90s so one word for all three didn't cause much confusion.
    - drewcoo 2y ago
      > Hispanic generally meant Mexican, Cuban, or Puerto Rican. Hispanic is a newer term, minted during my lifetime. I know older people who used to be white until they were relabeled as Hispanic. https://daily.jstor.org/where-did-the-term-hispanic-come-from/ https://daily.jstor.org/where-did-the-term-hispanic-come-fro... https://www.history.com/news/hispanic-latino-latinx-chicano-background https://www.history.com/news/hispanic-latino-latinx-chicano-...
rpmisms 2y ago
Capitalizing one and not the others is racist. There is no monolithic white, black, or brown experience, and to pretend otherwise is racist. It's a stupid microaggression
- account42 2y ago
  This kind of anti-white racism is everywhere in western media. It's in advertising. It's in the news reporting. It's in the hiring practices.
  - rpmisms 2y ago
    Ironically, all this will end up doing is make more people racist again.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  "You're the real racists" is a fallacy; it's ultimately not about appearance but oppression.
  - rpmisms 2y ago
    It's not "you're the real racists", but rather "this is racist". Which it is.
someuser2345 2y ago
It seems to me that this practice is just another example of putting white people on a pedestal. If all other racial groups have "a shared sense of identity and community", then it implies that being white is the default; that the world is split into white and not-white.
- ThrowawayIP 2y ago
  You should read the CJR link. The "shared sense of identity and community" is being descendants of the victims of the slave trade and not the color of their skin.
  - someuser2345 2y ago
    That's a strange definition, because it excludes the majority of the world's dark skinned population. If only the descendants of slaves brought to the Americas can claim to be Black, then there are no Black people in Africa. Hell, even Barack Obama can't claim to be Black, since he is a child of immigrants, not slaves.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Can you explain how that works for each other grouping that is capitalized, but is not also true for white people?
  - stronglikedan 2y ago
    > descendants of the victims of the slave trade The Irish were white.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Independent of the stated rationale, I think the primary function is as an ideological test and signal: Does one hold that all the diverse peoples of Africa can be considered with a shared group identity, which deserves acknowledgement and respect, and do you simultaneously hold that white people of Europe can be grouped together, but that grouping is undeserving of the same validity and respect. If someone is willing to engage in this Act of cognitive dissonance, they can be considered part of the political in-group or at least sufficiently compliant to be trusted. It is absolutely an example of the liberal racism that Powell is talking about and straight out of 1984.

evrimoztamur 2y ago

Black and White is such a revolutionary PC game, I can agree to that!

7734128 2y ago

It is certainly hateful. A conscious choice that most publishing houses made in the summer of 2020, with a wide verity of delusional explanations.

on_the_train 2y ago

It's blatantly racist. Just imagine the opposite and the resulting uproar

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]