• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"people of color" is OK while "colored people" is found racist

TheParser said:
Immigrants learning English often want to know why "colored person" is offensive, but "person of color" is fine.

It is next to impossible to give them an explanation except: Just memorize the rule.
Click to expand...

I suspect that 'colored people' is a term during a period of racial stratification that was used by the stratifiers and served to identify those who were stratified. So it has a negative connotation.

I don't believe that 'people of color' is limited to Blacks, but includes any group that isn't white.
 
Lursa said:
Not everyone receives 'the memo.'

For example, I would not have known that 'oriental' had become un-pc or offensive, except that I read it on an Internet forum about a decade ago. It was a term I grew up with. It holds no negative connotations for me at all and to this day, I dont know why it's considered offensive.

I also dont care. Now that I know, I use Asian or if I know, a more specific descriptor *if I need to categorize at all.* Why unnecessarily cause offense or division?

OTOH I do know others, all older than myself, that use terms that today are considered offensive and they dont realize it. I've politely told a few people that "Eye-talian" is frowned upon and they really had no idea. It's all they knew and it also held no negative connotations towards Italians. But...you really wouldnt want to use it in public in N. NJ where I grew up. :)
Click to expand...

I have used 'oriental' but only by occident.
 
PoppyCock said:
What's up with "African American"? If you feel a need to hyphenate your name, should not the country you were born and raised in, be first?
Click to expand...

Irish-American, Italian-American. Its pretty common.
 
j brown's body said:
I suspect that 'colored people' is a term during a period of racial stratification that was used by the stratifiers and served to identify those who were stratified. So it has a negative connotation.

I don't believe that 'people of color' is limited to Blacks, but includes any group that isn't white.
Click to expand...

White is a color, besides no one is actually "white" except maybe albinos with no hint of a tan.
 
Irredentist said:
No, it doesn't. Speech codes governing personal interaction in specific environments do exactly nothing to threaten political speech, or democratic institutions. If anything, speech codes facilitate liberal democracy, by encouraging discussion to be civil and rational, instead of juvenile. That is, after all, the fundamental basis of this very forum. Civility a must.
Click to expand...
Your view lowers the threshold on exceptions to freedom of expression and thereby erodes freedom of expression, the very cornerstone of liberal democracy.
 
Angel said:
Your view lowers the threshold on exceptions to freedom of expression and thereby erodes freedom of expression, the very cornerstone of liberal democracy.
Click to expand...

Liberal democracy is not dependent on our right to insult one another. In fact insulting one another is detrimental to liberal democracy, because successful democracy fundamentally depends on civil and rational discourse.
 
Irredentist said:
Liberal democracy is not dependent on our right to insult one another. In fact insulting one another is detrimental to liberal democracy, because successful democracy fundamentally depends on civil and rational discourse.
Click to expand...
Zi3Nucz.jpg

mwfWhmI.jpg

wc7JJgK.jpg
 
Angel said:
Zi3Nucz.jpg

mwfWhmI.jpg

wc7JJgK.jpg
Click to expand...

Notice how all of these men successfully get their point across without insulting the person who they are talking to. Their arguments are civil and rational, because they understand that is the proper way to have a discussion.
 
Irredentist said:
Notice how all of these men successfully get their point across without insulting the person who they are talking to. Their arguments are civil and rational, because they understand that is the proper way to have a discussion.
Click to expand...
Notice what they are saying?
 
Angel said:
Notice what they are saying?
Click to expand...

I do, and I also realize that just because you tell someone something they disagree with, it doesn't mean you have to be insulting when you do it. In fact it's better if you don't, as these men well understand.
 
Irredentist said:
I do, and I also realize that just because you tell someone something they disagree with, it doesn't mean you have to be insulting when you do it. In fact it's better if you don't, as these men well understand.
Click to expand...
Speech is sacred to liberal democracy and to lower the threshold on exceptions to freedom of speech is to erode freedom of speech. Your view erodes freedom of speech in the name of hurt feelings. A dangerous view. As these men quoted in my post warn, dangerous to the liberty on which our political culture is based. Your view enjoys a certain faddish currency today, to be sure, but it's just that, a cultural fad. It'll pass. It must pass.
 
Last edited:
Angel said:
Speech is sacred to liberal democracy and to lower the threshold on exceptions to freedom of speech is to erode freedom of speech. Your view erodes freedom of speech in the name of hurt feelings. A dangerous view. As these men quoted in my post warn, dangerous to the liberty on which our political culture is based. Your view enjoys a certain faddish currency today, to be sure, but it's just that, a cultural fad. It'll pass. It must pass.
Click to expand...

It's not a fad, it's a broadly accepted cultural norm. When you're in public, or a professional environment, you are expected to conform your speech to certain standards. This is not just to prevent hurt feelings, but also because rudeness prevents productive discussion, which is important for a functioning society, especially a democracy. This is a view based in logic, and as such, it won't fade away easily
 
AlbqOwl said:
Non-age-challenged is a description of a person young enough to not be able to claim conditioning via an earlier era. An 80-year-old might be somewhat forgiven for referring to 'colored people.' The student currently caught in the viciousness of modern political correctness has no such cover.
Click to expand...

Onoes what will you ever dooooooo?!
 
AlbqOwl said:
Non-age-challenged is a description of a person young enough to not be able to claim conditioning via an earlier era. An 80-year-old might be somewhat forgiven for referring to 'colored people.' The student currently caught in the viciousness of modern political correctness has no such cover.
Click to expand...

If I hear an eighty year old saying "colored people", that means that they were born at the outset of WW2 and their figure of speech might be malevolent or benevolent, depending on how they were raised.
If I hear a sixty year old using the term "colored people", there's almost no doubt in my mind that they were raised in a bigoted family. And that's because by the time they'd reached the Age of Reason, civil rights was already accepted as a force for good in this great nation of ours.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
If I hear an eighty year old saying "colored people", that means that they were born at the outset of WW2 and their figure of speech might be malevolent or benevolent, depending on how they were raised.
If I hear a sixty year old using the term "colored people", there's almost no doubt in my mind that they were raised in a bigoted family. And that's because by the time they'd reached the Age of Reason, civil rights was already accepted as a force for good in this great nation of ours.
Click to expand...

I think you must not know many eighty or sixty year olds maybe?

I have never used the term 'colored' probably because the black people I know refer to themselves most as black people if they refer to their race at all. Most don't refer to their race at all. But if 'colored' is so offensive, how come the No. 1 advocacy group for black people is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?
 
AlbqOwl said:
I think you must not know many eighty or sixty year olds maybe?

If 'colored' is so offensive, how come the No. 1 advocacy group for black people is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?
Click to expand...

I think you didn't actually read my post.
I said, if I hear an eighty year old say the term, it might be malevolent, OR BENEVOLENT.

Did you catch that last part this time????

I am sixty-three years old, so don't make me laugh by telling me I don't know many eighty and sixty year olds.
By the way, you might have also missed this factoid:

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)[a] is a civil rights organization in the United States, formed in 1909 as a bi-racial endeavor to advance justice for African Americans by a group including W. E. B. Du Bois, Mary White Ovington and Moorfield Storey.
Mary White Ovington and Moorfield Storey were white. W.E.B. duBois was black.

Did you catch that??? 1909.
Nineteen Hundred Nine, Nineteen Aught Nine.

And although you don't bother to read my posts, and although you're so absorbed and obsessed with your agenda, and although you see anything and everything I write as

LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST

In my humble opinion, my sneering little friend, if one uses the term "colored people" today, it's about the same as using the term "negro". If you're my age, it makes you look like a doddering dotard or a fool, or it makes you look like someone who is carrying an agenda.

I'm Italian, and while I probably wouldn't take too much offense at being called a goomba, if you referred to me as a "papist garlic eater" or a dago, there'd be little doubt as to your agenda.
"Dago" would just make me laugh, and then I'd get in your grille and ask what part of New York or Italy you're from.
"Papist Garlic Eater" would identify you as a redneck Baptist from the Deep South or a frail WASP from New England.

Stop with the playing dumb and amateur gaslighting attempts, you're not good at them.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
If I hear an eighty year old saying "colored people", that means that they were born at the outset of WW2 and their figure of speech might be malevolent or benevolent, depending on how they were raised.
If I hear a sixty year old using the term "colored people", there's almost no doubt in my mind that they were raised in a bigoted family. And that's because by the time they'd reached the Age of Reason, civil rights was already accepted as a force for good in this great nation of ours.
Click to expand...

At that time, that you're referring to, how did non-bigoted people/families refer to African-Americans?
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
I think you didn't actually read my post.
I said, if I hear an eighty year old say the term, it might be malevolent, OR BENEVOLENT.

Did you catch that last part this time????

I am sixty-three years old, so don't make me laugh by telling me I don't know many eighty and sixty year olds.
By the way, you might have also missed this factoid:

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)[a] is a civil rights organization in the United States, formed in 1909 as a bi-racial endeavor to advance justice for African Americans by a group including W. E. B. Du Bois, Mary White Ovington and Moorfield Storey.
Mary White Ovington and Moorfield Storey were white. W.E.B. duBois was black.

Did you catch that??? 1909.
Nineteen Hundred Nine, Nineteen Aught Nine.

And although you don't bother to read my posts, and although you're so absorbed and obsessed with your agenda, and although you see anything and everything I write as

LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST LEFTIST

In my humble opinion, my sneering little friend, if one uses the term "colored people" today, it's about the same as using the term "negro". If you're my age, it makes you look like a doddering dotard or a fool, or it makes you look like someone who is carrying an agenda.

I'm Italian, and while I probably wouldn't take too much offense at being called a goomba, if you referred to me as a "papist garlic eater" or a dago, there'd be little doubt as to your agenda.
"Dago" would just make me laugh, and then I'd get in your grille and ask what part of New York or Italy you're from.
"Papist Garlic Eater" would identify you as a redneck Baptist from the Deep South or a frail WASP from New England.

Stop with the playing dumb and amateur gaslighting attempts, you're not good at them.
Click to expand...

My goodness you read a lot into what I post and my goodness, the personal insults. Many organizations change their name when it is appropriate to do so. But oh well. But since you make it almost impossible to have a civil discussion, do have a good night.
 
justabubba said:
WATCH: School board meeting on racist threats erupts after trustee calls students ‘colored’
Click to expand...

Danielle Ford...
I don't think she meant any harm, but I also think she's probably something of a bimbo, despite the fact that she did not lapse into "you know", or "like" or "whatever".

But there is a dearth of material online about Danielle Ford, until you find THIS from The Nevada Current

Ford is a "creative video marketing strategist", former teen mom and high school dropout who’s active in Cub Scouts and parent-teacher organizations. According to campaign finance reports she is mostly self-funded, having donated $7,000 of her $11,500 in monetary contributions received since the primary.
Click to expand...

WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA................
Only in ****ing Nevada do you find a HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT rising to the level of SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER.

I HOPE!

And then when you stop to think about it, a high school dropout who was also a "creative video marketing strategist"???
In Las Vegas???????????

Sorry folks, pile on me if you feel you must but when I look at her, knowing she is a high school dropout and knowing she wrote down "creative video marketing strategist" on her resume...IN LAS VEGAS, it adds up to:

She made porno videos and sold them on the internet.
And if she wasn't IN them, she financed them, possibly with money from being a stripper, because high school dropouts in Vegas are usually strippers.

And this is what happens when a probable former stripper, high school dropout and errrrr----COUGH!!! a "creative video marketing strategist" gets on the school board in Las Vegas, Nevada.

You get dumb bimbos saying "colored people". That's what you get.
 
AlbqOwl said:
My goodness you read a lot into what I post and my goodness, the personal insults. Many organizations change their name when it is appropriate to do so. But oh well. But since you make it almost impossible to have a civil discussion, do have a good night.
Click to expand...

Which insults? Show me the insults.
 
Lursa said:
At that time, that you're referring to, how did non-bigoted people/families refer to African-Americans?
Click to expand...

I made mention of people born in two different time periods, are you referring to people born in 1941 or 1961?
 
Lursa said:
At that time, that you're referring to, how did non-bigoted people/families refer to African-Americans?
Click to expand...

Assuming you bolded for a reason, (sorry for missing that!) :) people born in the Sixties used either "black" or "Afro-American" but some still used "negro" although that began to fall out of use by around 1967 or so if I remember correctly. A person BORN IN 1961 would have probably begun to use "Afro-American" but that too fell out of use by the mid-1970's or so.

No, it was not a clear-cut and well defined thing. But for sure, "colored people" had fallen out of use by the mid-1960's except way down South.

By the way, I am not a politically correct person for the most part.
I grew up with "negro" being perfectly acceptable, so in my own youth it wasn't until black people started looking at me funny or laughing that I realized, "oh, is that not the term anymore?"

"No, we're black people"....."Okay...black people".

Afro-American sounded weird to my ears until I ran across the term "Afro-Cuban" and realized that the etymology was actually pretty well founded. Black people in the Caribbean, especially Cuba, were indeed "Afro-Cuban", so it made sense that black people in America were Afro-American.
 
j brown's body said:
I don't believe that 'people of color' is limited to Blacks, but includes any group that isn't white.
Click to expand...


Very insightful.

The Los Angeles Times recently carried an op-ed by an African American lady who objected to the term "people of color," for -- she opined -- it does not refer specifically to her ethnicity.




P.S. Kindly check post #29 in this thread.
 
Last edited:
TheParser said:
Very insightful.

The Los Angeles Times recently carried an op-ed by an African American lady who objected to the term "people of color," for -- she opined -- it does not refer specifically to her ethnicity.




P.S. Kindly check post #29 in this thread.
Click to expand...

Oh well, a single individual got their op-ed published, but I doubt it will move the needle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom