But Where Are You Really From?

[BoldonLad]

Civilisation. Those who are abused.

For example, We moved from "handicapped" to "disabled" from "retarded" to "learning disability". We moved from "coloured" to "black" (or "people of colour" in the USA). At school people would regularly use the word "spazz" or "spastic",

Let's go with "person of color". Originally people of non-white origin were referred to as "colored". This description could be seen on signage across the USA to segregate "colored" people from white people. it was used negatively. To take back ownership of the term, the US settled on "people of colour" as a term to use when referring to non-white communities. It developed from Martin Luther King who used the term "citizens of color".

In the UK we didn't really get "people of color" as a term, but the use of "coloured" tended to be negative, so again we have sought to change.

The issue with terms like "person of colour" or "BAME" is that it reinforces the notion of "us" and "them". White people against non-white people. Many groups and people that are not white, don't like being lumped under a single acronym which includes Indians, Pakistanis, Africans, Carribean, East Asian etc.

Why do we need all these acronyms or terms, they are all "people" why does that not suffice?

 

[mudsticks]

Why do we need all these acronyms or terms, they are all "people" why does that not suffice?

Maybe one day, when all people are treated equally, regardless of their skin colour or ethnicity we will no longer need to have these terms

Meanwhile we do have a problem with racism in our society
Pretending it doesn't happen by not talking about it, or not referring to it won't make it go away

If we don't have words to talk about this problem, and the people at the 'sharp end' of the problem, then we can't name or tackle the problem..

 

[winjim]

Why do we need all these acronyms or terms, they are all "people" why does that not suffice?

Well, you'd bollocks up your CKD-EPI equation for eGFR for starters.

 

[Deleted member 28]

Civilisation. Those who are abused.

For example, We moved from "handicapped" to "disabled" from "retarded" to "learning disability". We moved from "coloured" to "black" (or "people of colour" in the USA). At school people would regularly use the word "spazz" or "spastic",

Let's go with "person of color". Originally people of non-white origin were referred to as "colored". This description could be seen on signage across the USA to segregate "colored" people from white people. it was used negatively. To take back ownership of the term, the US settled on "people of colour" as a term to use when referring to non-white communities. It developed from Martin Luther King who used the term "citizens of color".

In the UK we didn't really get "people of color" as a term, but the use of "coloured" tended to be negative, so again we have sought to change.

The issue with terms like "person of colour" or "BAME" is that it reinforces the notion of "us" and "them". White people against non-white people. Many groups and people that are not white, don't like being lumped under a single acronym which includes Indians, Pakistanis, Africans, Carribean, East Asian etc.

Right then, so according to 'Civilisation' and 'those that are abused' these terms were created by themselves in order for the rest of 'us' to use, but then somewhere down the line the very people creating them decided they didn't like them?

Have I got this right?

 

[Deleted member 28]

The people who know best.

That'll be the 'offended on behalf of.....' brigade.

 

[matticus]

Originally people of non-white origin were referred to as "colored". This description could be seen on signage across the USA to segregate "colored" people from white people. it was used negatively. To take back ownership of the term, the US settled on "people of colour" as a term to use when referring to non-white communities. It developed from Martin Luther King who used the term "citizens of color".

In the UK we didn't really get "people of color" as a term, but the use of "coloured" tended to be negative, so again we have sought to change.

The issue with terms like "person of colour" or "BAME" is that it reinforces the notion of "us" and "them". White people against non-white people.

Does this not sound like some endless, Möbius strip of pointless change to you? Like the rarely mentioned Linguistic Ordeal of Sisyphus (for when the mountain was closed in snowy weather)?
Can't we just agree with what Martin Luther King suggested?? He seemed a good chap!

 

[Deleted member 28]

Maybe one day, when all people are treated equally, regardless of their skin colour or ethnicity we will no longer need to have these terms

Meanwhile we do have a problem with racism in our society
Pretending it doesn't happen by not talking about it, or not referring to it won't make it go away

If we don't have words to talk about this problem, and the people at the 'sharp end' of the problem, then we can't name or tackle the problem..

I think you're missing the point a bit, my point anyway, it's the terms that the very same people came up with that are now saying they're outdated or inappropriate or whatever the problem is that amuses me.

For example 'person of colour', what a complete nonsense and something to be mocked is now unacceptable apparently by the very same fools that came up with it in the first place!

BAME! what the f**k is that all about? ridiculous then as it is now and once again appears to have gone out of favour by the people who thought it up.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

I think you're missing the point a bit, my point anyway, it's the terms that the very same people came up with that are now saying they're outdated or inappropriate or whatever the problem is that amuses me.

'very same people' Who the hell are these mythical 'very same people'? Language evolves without the central scrutiniser(s). Some people express a stronger opinion regarding aspects of the evolution, but the evolution goes on regardless.

 

[Ian H]

I think you're missing the point a bit, my point anyway, it's the terms that the very same people came up with that are now saying they're outdated or inappropriate or whatever the problem is that amuses me.

For example 'person of colour', what a complete nonsense and something to be mocked is now unacceptable apparently by the very same fools that came up with it in the first place!

BAME! what the f**k is that all about? ridiculous then as it is now and once again appears to have gone out of favour by the people who thought it up.

It wasn't very long ago that it was acceptable to show notices reading 'No blacks or Irish'. This equality thing is still evolving. The main reason for such terms is to label those communities and groups disadvantaged by prejudice. Of course any term referring to a group or minority is going to be misused and abused. But most of us in everyday life don't need to use them - mostly we can just treat people as individuals.
Rather than decry and ridicule terminology, perhaps think how and why these terms come about.

 

[mudsticks]

'very same people' Who the hell are these mythical 'very same people'? Language evolves without the central scrutiniser(s). Some people express a stronger opinion regarding aspects of the evolution, but the evolution goes on regardless.

What you need to understand here is that Shep is our token, reactionary frother.

You know 'representation' n all that.. 🙄

Seemingly incapable of understanding concepts such as 'progress' 'context' 'nuance' or anything as troubling to the synapses as the evolution of language.


Aiui he thinks he's giving us all an original hot take with his 'dont care' 'won't care' gammony attitude, or by railing against pc gawn mad, wokerati liberals and their 'ridiculous' ways .

You can try engaging for sport it you like, but don't expect much by way of satisfactory outcome..

Of course there's more than a small chance that it's some lefty social workers alter ego, out to play just for kicks and giggles .. It's t'internet after all...

 

[Deleted member 28]

What you need to understand here is that Shep is our token, reactionary frother.

You know 'representation' n all that.. 🙄

Seemingly incapable of understanding concepts such as 'progress' 'context' 'nuance' or anything as troubling to the synapses as the evolution of language.


Aiui he thinks he's giving us all an original hot take with his 'dont care' 'won't care' gammony attitude, or by railing against pc gawn mad, wokerati liberals and their 'ridiculous' ways .

You can try engaging for sport it you like, but don't expect much by way of satisfactory outcome..

Of course there's more than a small chance that it's some lefty social workers alter ego, out to play just for kicks and giggles .. It's t'internet after all...

So still no explanation as to why the terms created by the very people in order to prevent offence are now deemed as offensive.

Or is it really a case of people who aren't in theses groups creating them for others?

 

[Deleted member 28]

It wasn't very long ago that it was acceptable to show notices reading 'No blacks or Irish'. This equality thing is still evolving. The main reason for such terms is to label those communities and groups disadvantaged by prejudice. Of course any term referring to a group or minority is going to be misused and abused. But most of us in everyday life don't need to use them - mostly we can just treat people as individuals.
Rather than decry and ridicule terminology, perhaps think how and why these terms come about.

'No blacks or Irish' obviously ceased to be displayed alongside the change in society, as already established, but I'm yet to receive an explanation as to why terms that were created by the very people being offended by the 'old' references now find them inappropriate?

 

[Deleted member 28]

'very same people' Who the hell are these mythical 'very same people'? Language evolves without the central scrutiniser(s). Some people express a stronger opinion regarding aspects of the evolution, but the evolution goes on regardless.

I don't think anyone is 'mythical' but they are apparently 'BAME' or 'persons of colour' or any other new term that's been invented to describe people who weren't happy with previous descriptive terms.

It's not me coming up with this pal.

 

[icowden]

I think you're missing the point a bit, my point anyway, it's the terms that the very same people came up with that are now saying they're outdated or inappropriate or whatever the problem is that amuses me.

Yes, because you don't do your research and make assumptions.

The term "BME" was coined in the 1970s and the "A" was added to include Asian people in the 90s. At that point in time, it was useful as an acronym to refer to non-white minorities. However over time, it has become less useful and sometimes misleading (e.g. the BAME community was disproportionately affected by COVID 19 - actually it was black and south Asian people only).

So as time has gone on (50 years) it has become apparent that an umbrella term like BAME may be stripping multiple ethnicities of their individuality and causing confusion. It continues the idea of "us" and "them". Thus it is better to refer to Black, Asian, South Asian, East Asian, Indian etc than to keep using BAME unless you are collating stats for example.

 

[Ian H]

'No blacks or Irish' obviously ceased to be displayed alongside the change in society, as already established, but I'm yet to receive an explanation as to why terms that were created by the very people being offended by the 'old' references now find them inappropriate?

Because they get misused and abused as I said.