vidic blood & sand
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 4,134
I had no idea that it is now considered racist to refer to black people as coloured. When I was a kid it was considered respectful. Now it's racist?
I had no idea that it is now considered racist to refer to black people as coloured. When I was a kid it was considered respectful. Now it's racist?
In this modern age, it's all about what new terms people who don't even belong to that specific group think is offensive rather than what the actual potentially effected person thinks is offensive. I have been called things which society thinks are offensive to me but I don't actually find offensive at all and a lot of people share this thought.
Judging an action depending on its outcome and intention has completely gone out of the window and has been replaced by assumption as well which does not help.
It was never respectful because the term didn't originate from a respectful place.
And the fact that you said when were a kid should probably inform you why it might be out of date.
Why is one deemed more politically correct than the other? Genuine question so I don't feck up
well this is it. It's fine to teach the new generation on the politically correct ways but it's ludicrous to criticize people who accidentally use the wrong term out of habit, so long as they don't mean it with any malice of course.It's person-first language.
It's becoming an increasingly prevalent discussion in other areas of life too, not just with race. There was a big push recently, for example, to stop saying 'disabled person' and instead say 'person with a disability'.
On a purely personal level, as a first generation Ethiopian in the UK, it's not something that bothers me. Coloured person, person of colour, black...for me it's still about the intent behind the words. I've interacted with extremely 'politically correct' people, who knew all the buzzwords and latest terminology but treated me in a patronising way. I've also interacted with people - usually from older generations - who have used terms that are no longer deemed 'correct' but did so with clearly good intent.
Not all posters lives in England probably.Coloured has been a racist term in England for at least 20 years, and probably much longer than that. How out of touch are some of you?
I'd say almost no one likes it. When we played football for fun the losers would go in goal and have the ball kicked hard straight at them. Same in handball. I remember a lot of team mates being scared of going to goal during practise.Little girls don’t like having the ball kicked at them hard? Mostly true, but some don’t mind and there’s an argument that some little boys don’t like it either.
I don’t actually think he meant anything malicious with his comments but the way he worded them has really shown him up to be a bit of a dinosaur, the girls not wanting balls kicked at them in particular
well this is it. It's fine to teach the new generation on the politically correct ways but it's ludicrous to criticize people who accidentally use the wrong term out of habit, so long as they don't mean it with any malice of course.
BAME seems to lump together a bunch of random ethnicities which have no connection to each other beyond being not white. It's little wonder it's not being embraced by people caught by it tbf.'Coloured' just sounds wrong. My grandad uses it and I tell him quite often that it's not okay anymore.
You'd think the FA would be more on top of diversity and inclusive terms.
As a side - I was told recently in a diversity meeting at work that we should avoid the term BAME.
Meh I’ve never minded it, my lad’s the same. They say goalkeepers are a different breedI'd say almost no one likes it. When we played football for fun the losers would go in goal and have the ball kicked hard straight at them. Same in handball. I remember a lot of team mates being scared of going to goal during practise.
What do you say instead?I remember a year or so back I described a character in a movie as black and my black friend told me it was racist to say black and the correct way is coloured... so I just don’t bother saying either now.
Nothing, I just avoid using skin colour to describe a character now and find other ways to tell the person who I’m talking about.What do you say instead?
Very unfortunate brain freeze on my part!Replacing his last name with a homophobic slur is doing nothing to help the issue here. Reported.
Have you read all of the quotes? Doesn’t sound like you have'Of colour' and 'coloured' literally mean the same thing. It's like saying 'of Spain' or 'Spanish'.
So clearly the literal meaning of implying that non-white people have 'colour' isn't offensive. How about the context in which he used it? Was that derogatory? I don't think so.
This is dumb shit. You used to hear 'coloured' a lot growing up, back when it was unacceptable to say black. Changing people's use of language is difficult, he shouldn't be fired for it.
Perhaps people should just be called what they are whether it's Black, Asian, Indian or just 'ethnic minorities'. Clearly people can't keep up with these terms proliferated by the identity politics crowd (BAME and people of colour).
I had no idea that it is now considered racist to refer to black people as coloured. When I was a kid it was considered respectful. Now it's racist?
Genuine question:
Is it ok to say black players?
If not, what should we be saying?
I don't think Greg Clarke using the term "coloured" makes him a racist. Language is ephemeral, now more than ever, so I understand why someone of his age might slip up. "Coloured" has been an iffy term in the UK for a while but we're not all up to speed, and the context Clarke said it in indicated that he was aware of how female footballers and BAME footballers are held back in the game. So while I think it's a terrible error of judgement that he deserves to be told about, I don't think it suggests anything about his character.
But what definitely exposed some prejudices he has, and what he should probably be punished for, was the line about the make-up of their IT staff being Asian rather than Afro-Caribbean "because they've got different career interests". You only have to look about a millimetre beneath the surface of that little quip to find all sorts of hideous stereotypes that have held back both Asians and people of African descent for decades, maybe centuries. I think he can be forgiven for the "coloured" remark because we all slip up sometimes, but not that second one.
'Of colour' and 'coloured' literally mean the same thing. It's like saying 'of Spain' or 'Spanish'.
So clearly the literal meaning of implying that non-white people have 'colour' isn't offensive. How about the context in which he used it? Was that derogatory? I don't think so.
This is dumb shit. You used to hear 'coloured' a lot growing up, back when it was unacceptable to say black. Changing people's use of language is difficult, he shouldn't be fired for it.
Perhaps people should just be called what they are whether it's Black, Asian, Indian or just 'ethnic minorities'. Clearly people can't keep up with these terms proliferated by the identity politics crowd (BAME and people of colour).
Is it factual though? He shouldn't be throwing stereotypes about in his position but there's often some truth in stereotypes.
A similar comment would be the make-up of NHS nurses is mainly women rather than men because they have different career interests. A factual statement?
So if the FA happens to have a few people of South Asian descent in its IT department, clearly the whole subcontinent sees IT as their career of choice?Is it factual though? He shouldn't be throwing stereotypes about in his position but there's often some truth in stereotypes.
A similar comment would be the make-up of NHS nurses is mainly women rather than men because they have different career interests. A factual statement?
Genuine question:
Is it ok to say black players?
If not, what should we be saying?
Stating that NHS nurses are mostly women would be a factual statement. Stating it's because "they have different career interests" isn't, as that's an opinion. One that ignores all the other reasons a given profession may lack diversity.
So if the FA happens to have a few people of South Asian descent in its IT department, clearly the whole subcontinent sees IT as their career of choice?
And you say he shouldn't 'be throwing stereotypes about', but what, it;s fine cos 'there's often some truth in stereotypes'. You are contradicting yourself unless you're saying that only those in the public eye shouldn't say them.
Or maybe he just holds dated, bigoted views. This is the guy who dismissed institutional racism as 'fluff', remember. He should have gotten the axe for that.Does it? We don't know. He's clearly seen something to throw out the stereotype. Do you not think there's some truth in stereotypes? It's just the human brain parameterising it's environment.
e.g. gypsies are trouble. Now...not all gypsies are trouble but you can guarantee you don't want them turning up in your local area trying to tarmac your drive.
This seems a very sensible and well balanced summary.It's person-first language.
It's becoming an increasingly prevalent discussion in other areas of life too, not just with race. There was a big push recently, for example, to stop saying 'disabled person' and instead say 'person with a disability'.
On a purely personal level, as a first generation Ethiopian in the UK, it's not something that bothers me. Coloured person, person of colour, black...for me it's still about the intent behind the words. I've interacted with extremely 'politically correct' people, who knew all the buzzwords and latest terminology but treated me in a patronising way. I've also interacted with people - usually from older generations - who have used terms that are no longer deemed 'correct' but did so with clearly good intent.