Current Events > Doesn't 'person of color' imply that a person is not normally of color

(+) Yeah! (+)

Otherwise they would just be you...know...a person.

Considering that humans originated in Africa, and were 'person's of color'.....

AND
the loss of pigmentation in Europe was unique to that population

we say 'person of color' and not 'person without color'

I would even go as far to argue that many white people are not without color at all, either. Many are red because you see blood through their skin, but there is definitely pigmentation among Europeans

---

it's an us vs. them thing

for some reason most terms related to race are kinda dumb

---

Choco posted...

for some reason most terms related to race are kinda dumb

yeah, but then what terms would you use instead?

Kaiganeer posted...

it's an us vs. them thing

agreed 100%

Which brings this conversation to corn, corn off the cob, HELLO?

---

The term doesn't need to be meaningful, it just needs to establish an "other", in order to achieve its desired purpose.

---

It's just another phase of the euphemism treadmill. Eventually POC will be declared offensive and we'll be told to say something else.

---

sutree posted...

It's just another phase of the euphemism treadmill. Eventually POC will be declared offensive and we'll be told to say something else.

Perhaps it isnt the language itself but the reason why it is used in the first place that is the problem

Winrawr posted...

Perhaps it isnt the language itself but the reason why it is used in the first place that is the problem

To identify non-white groups that similarly experience oppression and systematic racism not directed at white people?

---

Winrawr posted...

Perhaps it isnt the language itself but the reason why it is used in the first place that is the problem

Well, it's primarily used simply to refer to people that are non-white. Nobody, as far as I'm aware, uses it in a derogative manner.

---

Shezarr posted...

To identify non-white groups that similarly experience oppression and systematic racism not directed at white people?

No. To separate white people from non-white people. That is the purpose of the phrase.

BakonBitz posted...

Well, it's primarily used simply to refer to people that are non-white. Nobody, as far as I'm aware, uses it in a derogative manner.

you could easily do this by labeling white people as person's without color, instead.

Person of color is a stupid phrase

---

Winrawr posted...

you could easily do this by labeling white people as person's without color, instead.

Or, we could just stick with the terminology that already works and isn't considered offensive. It ain't broke, so stop trying to fix it.

---

KeeperOfShadows posted...

Or, we could just stick with the terminology that already works and isn't considered offensive. It ain't broke, so stop trying to fix it.

I'm offended bro. I'm so offended by it.

KeeperOfShadows posted...

Or, we could just stick with the terminology that already works

lmao this is literally the absolute worst way to stand up against racism

---

Guerrilla Soldier posted...

lmao this is literally the absolute worst way to stand up against racism

Good thing there's nothing racist about the term, then.

---

Yes it does.

Almost all woke inclusionary stuff implicitly signals whiteness as a "default" in a way that can be both inaccurate and counter-productive.

---

Ill call you whatever you call yourself.

Winrawr posted...

I would even go as far to argue that many white people are not without color at all, either. Many are red because you see blood through their skin, but there is definitely pigmentation among Europeans

Not to mention the distinctive red hue on the necks of some


---

Shezarr posted...

To identify non-white groups that similarly experience oppression and systematic racism not directed at white people?

But you also end up forgetting that whites were jerks to whites in the past.

Weve had anti-Italian-ism and anti-Irish-ism. You can place dumb Polish jokes in there too. (Think there is anti-Polish sentiment in the UK now).
---

I would agree anyway that "person of color" might be suspect, in much the same way "African American" used to (though I think African American was way more tone deaf). Any suggestions on what to use instead as an all-encompassing term? In order to promote change in the manner of speaking there needs to be an alternative presented.

Is it okay to use an all-encompassing term for people of different skin color than white, or not? I'm being genuine here, wondering if the term "minorities" could be construed differently.

---

Cuticrusader09 posted...

Weve had anti-Italian-ism and anti-Irish-ism.

not ever to even a fraction of the scale or systemic effect

---

It is a better way of saying Non-White that doesn't center whiteness.

---

BakonBitz posted...

I would agree anyway that "person of color" might be suspect, in much the same way "African American" used to (though I think African American was way more tone deaf). Any suggestions on what to use instead as an all-encompassing term? In order to promote change in the manner of speaking there needs to be an alternative presented.

Is it okay to use an all-encompassing term for people of different skin color than white, or not? I'm being genuine here, wondering if the term "minorities" could be construed differently.

I don't think it is ok. The term inherently separates white people from person's of disadvantage, when there are plenty of Caucasian people who experience disadvantages for being white (such as women now, and young white men who are expected to succeed in society), especially in other society's and times such as when Irish American's experienced prejudice.

The term also reeks of inherent us vs them. In the end, it creates an expectation that white people cannot expect prejudice, which lowers aid to them. It attempts generalize disadvantaged persons (minorities) into one group, as if their problems can all be blamed upon one thing: white society. It's a very narcissitic, blanket perspective

And black and white people aren't actually black and white. We all know what people are talking about.

---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

And black and white people aren't actually black and white. We all know what people are talking about.

Another issue with the term. Very very dark people experience far more prejudice than lighter skinned dark people. POC implies they are all the same

Straight white cis men vs everyone else basically. Including white in POC, Straight in LGBTQ+, would be the inclusive thing to do, eh?

---

Winrawr posted...

Another issue with the term. Very very dark people experience far more prejudice than lighter skinned dark people. POC implies they are all the same

Which is fine if it's covering common things PoC deal with. When you want to get more in depth, then is when you start breaking it down more and going into the differing experiences of PoC. But you can't do that everytime you bring up social issues. Sometimes you just need to zoom out and focus on the big picture for the conversation. If someone refuses to see more depth when you press them, then yeah, that's telling.


---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Which is fine if it's covering common things PoC deal with. When you want to get more in depth, then is when you start breaking it down more and going into the differing experiences of PoC. But you can't do that everytime you bring up social issues. Sometimes you just need to zoom out and focus on the big picture for the conversation. If someone refuses to see more depth when you press them, then yeah, that's telling.

People don't talk in-depth about social issues unless they are in academics. It is a topic that is way too complicated for the average American to understand. It's why phrases like Black Lives Matter are misunderstood.

Winrawr posted...

People don't talk in-depth about social issues unless they are in academics. It is a topic that is way too complicated for the average American to understand. It's why phrases like Black Lives Matter are misunderstood.

It's only misunderstood by around half of America. I think some politics can directly associate with morals and through learning morals, you gain an understanding of certain politics better. Schooling can help you with some aspects, but a lot of it is also a willingness to accept the information in the right away and to just naturally mature by learning from your surroundings and your ability to continuesly reevaluate your perspective and theories. Schooling doesn't really help with politics if you were raised to be stubborn about what you already think. You'll just manipulate whatever you learn to adjust to your current understanding

---