Autumn

I would personally avoid the term “people/persons of colour” myself. I understand where both of you are coming from, but I recognise that a word can carry historical baggage with it even if in the use of the word the speaker never meant to convey that baggage

I’m loath to believe that black people who use ‘POC’ are typically oblivious to the his…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
Autumn, i am pretty sure we will just go round and round on the merry go round. So I will pass except to acknowledge that yes Colored and POC is virtually identical. POC adopts the language and spirit of Colored.

If you’re under the impression that black activists who use the term ‘POC’ are actually saying ‘coloured’ literally,…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:

Autumn you wrote that i was perpetuating the connotations of Colored. I denied it.

But it’s a matter of actions. You are adding ‘coloured’ to ‘People of Colour’ when that’s not what the term in its current iteration means (if any iteration ever meant that), then dismissing a term some people who fit under that acronym find…[Read more]

i am not perpetuating anything. Lucky if there are 37 humans who know my opinion.

This isn’t about knowing your opinion. It’s about overriding what a word means with something you want to insert into it—something that isn’t there if it ever was.

You want Privileged/Nonprivileged? That is better than White and POC.

It isn’t because it’s n…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:

I am not making it about what White people think. History does that. Current events do that. And the term itself stupidly and incredibly perpetuates the second class and subordinate connotations of Colored.

You are perpetuating the connotations of ‘colored’, here in this thread. Millions of other people have been able to use…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:

The intentions in adding PO were good i assume. But that does not rectify the mistake.

This carries the presumption of a mistake as opposed to a conscientious decision. None of the terminology around skin colour ever made much sense. Though colour is not the worst descriptive here seeing as ‘white’ skin in European populations…[Read more]

Davis wrote:

We owe most of these people an enormous amount of gratitude for helping advance humanism. That is why many on that list have become abysmal disappointments. I agree the author has gone a little overboard in the article but his general conclusion is quite fair. It’s rich how some of these guys have called out religions for unfair d…

[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:

People of color is just an ugly expansion of the former racist label, Coloreds; it is a euphemism or apology for pigment that offends Whites. And it is strictly from the vantage or perspective of Whites who only see color in others and not in themselves.

BIPOC and POC are preferred and self-adopted terms for many individuals and…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:

These goddamn white atheist pseudo intellectuals on their high hobby horses won’t even take their coffee black!

At a minimum, some of them are definitely expecting to be given a little sugar.

jakelafort wrote:

COLORFULS….COLOR-CHALLENGED…BLANDS…INSIPIDS

One of the changes in terminology over recent decades has been increased emphasis on personhood. Much of terminology has been adapted to explicitly use either the term ‘person’ or ‘people’.  The ‘people’ in ‘people of colour’ emphasizes that we are talking about people. The ‘colou…[Read more]

It’s raised as an issue in just about every sport including team sports—rugby in particular. Though the specific issue raised with rugby was safety rather than advantage. Ordinarily it doesn’t dominate headlines when the point of contention is team sports, perhaps because it’s not as useful as a wedge issue.

Also, the numerous states in the US t…[Read more]