Is the term "racism" being stretched too far, applied to too many things?

[Tonguez]

I've got no problem with extending the concept of Racism to include prejudice and bigotry towards a persons Ancestral Origins, Ethnicity, Melanin levels, Nationality and even Culture, trying to argue that the word is being wrongly applied 'because race doesn't exist' avoids the issue that prejudice does exist and in many cultures has become ingrained.

Thats why I don't think accidental racism is a thing. Ignorance is no excuse for actions and statements that whilst appearing innocent are in fact based in segregation of the "Other". There was an incident a few years back of an American Athlete who was specifically described as a "Black American Woman Runner" when she won. The question was why describe her "Blackness" as being in anyway connected to her winning a Running race.

Thats different though to the Guy wearing Lederhosen which is probably innocent, but a bit iffy in the case of the Swede in a Kimono - especially if its one of those short sexy Kimonos Not that I'm going to call out what a person wears unless it is completely offensive

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

A few months ago Benedict Cumberbatch was accused of being racist when he used the expression "people of colour". A while ago that was considered a very neutral term, but things have changed and BC hadn't realised. Does that make him racist, even accidentally?

Hm. News to me.

But the thing is, language evolves, and in this area, it has been evolving very quickly, and not everyone gets the memo...or even agrees with it. You may have noticed I refer to myself as "black"- I never liked the term "African-American." I won't use it, and I often (gently) correct others who call me that. The only time I'm "African-American" is when I'm checking boxes on state or institutional documents, and don't have a choice.

 

[Ryujin]

I've got no problem with extending the concept of Racism to include prejudice and bigotry towards a persons Ancestral Origins, Ethnicity, Melanin levels, Nationality and even Culture, trying to argue that the word is being wrongly applied 'because race doesn't exist' avoids the issue that prejudice does exist and in many cultures has become ingrained.

Thats why I don't think accidental racism is a thing. Ignorance is no excuse for actions and statements that whilst appearing innocent are in fact based in segregation of the "Other". There was an incident a few years back of an American Athlete who was specifically described as a "Black American Woman Runner" when she won. The question was why describe her "Blackness" as being in anyway connected to her winning a Running race.

Thats different though to the Guy wearing Lederhosen which is probably innocent, but a bit iffy in the case of the Swede in a Kimono - especially if its one of those short sexy Kimonos Not that I'm going to call out what a person wears unless it is completely offensive

Hardly, when in the same quote I pointed out that the term "bigotry" is more often the correct one to use.

 

[JWO]

It's probably worth me mentioning that I'm a white guy in the UK so my experiences and opinions are seen through that lens.

A few months ago Benedict Cumberbatch was accused of being racist when he used the expression "people of colour". A while ago that was considered a very neutral term, but things have changed and BC hadn't realised. Does that make him racist, even accidentally?

He actually said 'coloured people' rather than 'people of colour'. As I understand it, 'people of colour' is currently the accepted term for anyone who isn't white, whereas 'coloured people' is a definite (and obvious) no-no. His slip up was an incidence of racism (even inadvertently), but he learned from it, apologised (seemingly genuinely) and moved on. It seemed like everyone was happy about what had happened but then you got the usual anti-PC brigade squawkers coming out and complaining about how he was being censored. I'm so over those guys!

I actually do subscribe to the idea that there has to have some kind of systemic power balance involved for something to be considered racism (see also, sexism). As someone further up the thread mentioned, language evolves and we have a better understanding nowadays of the fact that there are inherent power balances in the world that unfairly benefit certain groups of people (white people) at the expense of others (everyone else). The word has to take this into account.

 

[Morrus]

I meant to say "dressed in antebellum attire" because I was trying to pick something definitely "white," but then I balked and went with specific characters. (Not that anyone would recognize those two specific characters without being told.) And what about the other two examples in that paragraph?

Bullgrit

You're talking nationality rather than ethnicity? There are black Germans, of course, and - albeit a very small number - white Japanese people.

 

[Janx]

It's probably worth me mentioning that I'm a white guy in the UK so my experiences and opinions are seen through that lens.



He actually said 'coloured people' rather than 'people of colour'. As I understand it, 'people of colour' is currently the accepted term for anyone who isn't white, whereas 'coloured people' is a definite (and obvious) no-no. His slip up was an incidence of racism (even inadvertently), but he learned from it, apologised (seemingly genuinely) and moved on. It seemed like everyone was happy about what had happened but then you got the usual anti-PC brigade squawkers coming out and complaining about how he was being censored. I'm so over those guys!

Hang on, what exactly is the difference between "colored people" and "people of color" besides the word "of" as a separator and the order of two words?

To get offended by a variation of speech using simple words is ridiculous. Obviously, there could be some rearrangement of words that changes the meaning, but it's pretty obvious both variations means "people who aren't white"

This strikes me more as Outragism. If he's not being mean to not-white people, not trying to use a recognized offensive term, this should not have been an issue.

 

[Tonguez]

Hang on, what exactly is the difference between "colored people" and "people of color" besides the word "of" as a separator and the order of two words?

To get offended by a variation of speech using simple words is ridiculous. Obviously, there could be some rearrangement of words that changes the meaning, but it's pretty obvious both variations means "people who aren't white"

This strikes me more as Outragism. If he's not being mean to not-white people, not trying to use a recognized offensive term, this should not have been an issue.

"People of colour" emphasises that they are people first of whom their colour is an incidental feature, whereas "Coloured people" presents the non-white colour as an identifying label as one would with "French people" or "Chinese people" or "Stupid people".

Its the same reason why "People with disabilities" is preferred to "Disabled People"

 

[Bullgrit]

I think she simply used a word that she didn't know the meaning of, I don't think she was (otherwise) stupid.

She had probably heard someone else use the word in context- since she DID use it in a common manner- but without understanding that the speaker meant the context to be offensive.

She probably thought she did know the meaning of the word because she had heard it used in a context that suggested to her, "a cacophony of varied overwhelming sounds." I mean, look at her hand gestures and how she was saying that Lady Gaga's voice is usually drowned out by her usual accompanying music.

I'm sure we've all learned a new word by hearing it used, only to later find out, oops, we didn't actually understand the word as we thought.

The "person of color" vs. "colored person" thing -- really, how can one be acceptable and the other be offensive? They are the same thing. Even the NAACP uses "colored person".

These are things that I don't see how they can be called racism. A verbal mistake, an embarrassing error, sure. But *racism*? That's like calling eating a burger, "murder." When you apply a serious word to a minor gaff, you weaken the serious word. You make it silly.

I sometimes wonder:
Are some folks trying to make racism seem more prevalent by identifying so much little stuff as racist.
or
Are some folks trying to make racism seem overblown by identifying so much little stuff as racist.

I think this world would be a lot happier if we only took offense when someone actually intended offense.

Bullgrit

 

[Janx]

"People of colour" emphasises that they are people first of whom their colour is an incidental feature, whereas "Coloured people" presents the non-white colour as an identifying label as one would with "French people" or "Chinese people" or "Stupid people".

Its the same reason why "People with disabilities" is preferred to "Disabled People"

I would bet only half of the human population parses meaning from language so finely. This kind of linguistic subtext is what fuels anti-PC behavior and resentment because it tries to finger somebody as a racist or insensitive by looking for offense where none was intended.

How about we just eliminate adjectives from the language all together? No descriptors. Nobody's to be described as human, male, black, gay, chinese,disabled, happy or whatever anymore because I find such distinction offensive.

 

[JWO]

Hang on, what exactly is the difference between "colored people" and "people of color" besides the word "of" as a separator and the order of two words?

To get offended by a variation of speech using simple words is ridiculous. Obviously, there could be some rearrangement of words that changes the meaning, but it's pretty obvious both variations means "people who aren't white"

This strikes me more as Outragism. If he's not being mean to not-white people, not trying to use a recognized offensive term, this should not have been an issue.

As I understand it 'coloured people' has a history of being used in discriminatory, racist contexts, a term used by white people against black people. 'People of colour' is a term that was specifically created by the people it is used to describe, supposedly because it's preferable to the term 'non-white' as 'non-white' suggests that white people are the default people and any variations from that are in some way abnormal. 'People of colour' describes people by what they are rather than what they aren't.

I don't think anyone was outraged by what he said. It was only an issue in the sense that his gaffe was pointed out, he recognised it as such and apologised and then moved on. The only people who were outraged were the people who then jumped in and claimed that it was 'political correctness gone mad', that he was being censored, etc.

I'm white so it's not really my position to tell people of colour how they should be referring to themselves. I'd much rather sit back and listen and correct myself when I make mistakes.