D
Deleted member 28
Guest
Obviously, Black with Yellow.đź’ŞWith stonewashed drainpipes and a Fred Perry....
Obviously, Black with Yellow.đź’ŞWith stonewashed drainpipes and a Fred Perry....
Of course goes without saying,although I prefer you now you've shaved your tash offObviously, Black with Yellow.đź’Ş
Top button fastened though.Of course goes without saying,although I prefer you now you've shaved your tash off
View attachment 506
Arguably its value is in its unfamiliarity or unexpectedness - it jars, I would suggest, because as white people we are not accustomed to thinking of ourselves as a minority, as the phrase obliges us to do in order to make sense of it. 'Non-white' describes, empirically, the same thing (I think) but frames it as if white were the norm, and everything else the deviation.I must admit to never hearing the phrase "global majority heritage" before this thread. AIUI it's meant to be an improvement upon the acronyms BAME and BIPOC in that it removes the potentially dismissive description of people as minorities, but at the moment I don't see how it is an improvement or more appropriate.
I usually hesitate to get involved in discussions on racism (or sexism) because I am aware that my comments can be dismissed as coming from my position as one of the privileged groups, but it seems to me as if it is part of the trend to need a simple word or phrase to describe what is quite a complicated concept and can cause more problems than it solves. If it is a majority then, by definition, the opposite, "white European heritage" is now a minority, and it more clearly more divisively places people into one of two categories, robbing or watering down many of them of their individuality of heritage.
I suppose that in time I will get used to this phrase, just as I have changed my phraseology over the years to move with the current, more enlightened conventions, and to avoid the impression of offending people, but as yet it seems just a piece of window dressing that does little or nothing to really progress the matter of racist attitudes or behaviours.
In a similar vein, I understand the comments of the first black mayor of Bristol when talking about the not guilty verdict on the Colston statue four "More power to them as individuals,” Rees said. “I hope they have good lives and all the rest of it, but what happened to them in court really has very little to do with what we are trying to get done in the city. My business in Bristol is about holding the city together and tackling racism. Whatever happened to the individuals who pulled the statue down has very little to do with the drive to tackle race and class inequality in the city.”
I agree about the inappropriateness of the 'non-white' categorisation, and I think that anyone who does not see and understand that 'white' people are well in the minority in the world must be very blinkered indeed, but I believe that this search for a catch-all phrase is simplistic window-dressing for a very complex issue, probably driven by the apparent need for catchy phrases in today's age of internet and social media communications where nuanced arguments are relatively rare and involve too much concentration.Arguably its value is in its unfamiliarity or unexpectedness - it jars, I would suggest, because as white people we are not accustomed to thinking of ourselves as a minority, as the phrase obliges us to do in order to make sense of it. 'Non-white' describes, empirically, the same thing (I think) but frames it as if white were the norm, and everything else the deviation.
Was anyone proposing it as a catch-all? I'd argue that it was used in a particular context, with a particular purpose, and/or to particular effect. The purpose or effect could be pleasurable (irritating Shep), rhetorical (using words to make people, even momentarily, see something differently), political (insisting on the primacy of a perspective that has history been subordinate), and so on...I agree about the inappropriateness of the 'non-white' categorisation, and I think that anyone who does not see and understand that 'white' people are well in the minority in the world must be very blinkered indeed, but I believe that this search for a catch-all phrase is simplistic window-dressing for a very complex issue, probably driven by the apparent need for catchy phrases in today's age of internet and social media communications where nuanced arguments are relatively rare and involve too much concentration.
Yeah Shep should stop walking on eggshells.
In the minority, numberswise yesI agree about the inappropriateness of the 'non-white' categorisation, and I think that anyone who does not see and understand that 'white' people are well in the minority in the world must be very blinkered indeed, but I believe that this search for a catch-all phrase is simplistic window-dressing for a very complex issue, probably driven by the apparent need for catchy phrases in today's age of internet and social media communications where nuanced arguments are relatively rare and involve too much concentration.
I am not talking about its use in a post in this thread, but about the quick research into a term I had not seen before, but which is clearly gaining ground. Of course it is catch-all, in that it is specifically designed to include all those who are the non-white majority, and emphasise that they are the majority.Was anyone proposing it as a catch-all? I'd argue that it was used in a particular context, with a particular purpose, and/or to particular effect. The purpose or effect could be pleasurable (irritating Shep), rhetorical (using words to make people, even momentarily, see something differently), political (insisting on the primacy of a perspective that has history been subordinate), and so on...
It's almost as if life's a bit more complicated than some would like to see it.
I am not a person of colour and therefore no expert on racism.... We are a product of our environment and through some critical thinking and self examination we may come to realise what we hold as the truth is in fact in conflict with wider society...
That's an interesting post!I am a person of mostly working class urban heritage. I grew up in the late 60s and the 70s when Black Power and Women's Lib and and every-day life revolution were in the air.
I read a bit of Angela Davies and got an idea that social class was the root of exploitation. I feel and always have that I've got more in common with most Black people than most middle class people,
You for real, I'm attempting to take the piss!