veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003 Posts: 17644 Location: USA
|
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
7atetan wrote: |
veiledsentiments wrote: |
Certain words are culturally-loaded... and the term "colored" in the US has historically only been used to refer to African-Americans. I would never use the term to refer to Arabs or Indians or other Asians. And it has long moved into the list of socially unacceptable terms - one that now makes one cringe a bit - just a tiny bit more acceptable than the 'n' word. |
Now, THAT is ethnocentric. The word "colored" is used in parts of the world to mean non-Caucasian as a statement of fact without any racist undertones. (I personally have a problem with it for other reasons.) Likewise, whereas the word "Paki" is condidered derogatory in Britain to the equivalent of "*beep*" in America, it (and "Pak") is used freely in places such as India to refer to Pakistan or Pakistanis. Sometimes it is meant to be offensive, but far more often it is shorthand.
Quote: |
The PC crowd has seemed to exchange it with "people of color"... for the last 20 years or more. I suspect that it is to separate it from the previous meaning.
VS |
"People of color" is not PC at all. PC is a load of tripe anyway: The epitome of an initially noble concept getting out of hand. Surely we should be moving toward a world in which a person's complexion is considered to be no more or less consequential than his/her hair color. And anyway, "white" or "tan" or whatever is also a color so why should the moniker "people of color" not include us, i.e. EVERY person?
Hopefully 500 years from now racism will have been extirpated in the ENTIRE world, as has been done to a commendable degree in the West. |
Your reading comprehension seems to have failed you completely this time. As I clearly stated, I was referring to the US and speaking to another American. You are referring to everywhere else.
Thus what other countries might say about this or that is irrelevant... along with your post.
VS |
|