Just because someone is not white-"Anglo saxon", does not mean that they are coloured does it, when I was in Japan earlier this year most people were paler than me, in no way could they come under the banner of "coloured".
It just seems to me like it's an us and them thing. Coloured seems to be lumped together, singled out, different. It just seems to be easier to refer to people as Black, Asian, Japanese etc rather than coloured and non-coloured. It doesn't tell the whole story.
Oh good grief, is 'blacks' now racist?...:rolleyes:
No it isn't. People are here debating the relative acceptability of 'blacks' as compared to 'black people'. Neither term is racist.
The truth is that the use of words such as 'blacks', 'jews', 'gays' and 'immigrants' are usually reserved for derogatory or maligning statements, usually made by people with a particular agenda.
Statements made with the intent of supporting or accepting such minorities are much more likely to use 'black people' or 'jewish people'.
As the language around minorities evolves and is adopted by people with different agendas it's inevitable that we will find that terms which were once acceptable are now decreed unacceptable. This is almost never decided by the minority themselves. I as a black man take no offence if referred to as coloured. These decisions are usually made by apologists and people with overactive collective social consciences, rightly or wrongly.
Taking a minority group such as 'gay people', failing to refer to them as people at all then ignoring them as individuals by bunching them together as a collective 'gays' shows a dismissive attitude and the absence of a desire to understand 'gay people' or to see them as individuals or even as fellow human beings.
If people with unsavoury views such as the BNP adopt 'blacks' and 'gays' in their preachings then we can probably expect their usage to become gradually unacceptable in the same way that the National Front stopped us from proudly waving the Union Jack for a while back there.
No it isn't. People are here debating the relative acceptability of 'blacks' as compared to 'black people'. Neither term is racist.
The truth is that the use of words such as 'blacks', 'jews', 'gays' and 'immigrants' are usually reserved for derogatory or maligning statements, usually made by people with a particular agenda.
Statements made with the intent of supporting or accepting such minorities are much more likely to use 'black people' or 'jewish people'.
As the language around minorities evolves and is adopted by people with different agendas it's inevitable that we will find that terms which were once acceptable are now decreed unacceptable. This is almost never decided by the minority themselves. I as a black man take no offence if referred to as coloured. These decisions are usually made by apologists and people with overactive collective social consciences, rightly or wrongly.
Taking a minority group such as 'gay people', failing to refer to them as people at all then ignoring them as individuals by bunching them together as a collective 'gays' shows a dismissive attitude and the absence of a desire to understand 'gay people' or to see them as individuals oreven as fellow human beings.
If people with unsavoury views such as the BNP adopt 'blacks' and 'gays' in their preachings then we can probably expect their usage to become gradually unacceptable in the same way that the National Front stopped us from proudly waving the Union Jack for a while back there.
I remember when my dad started using the term coloured. We were watching the football and he said that the coloured guy scored a good goal. I asked which one, the black guy or the asian guy
Just done it to make him feel arkward for a laugh and it worked.
Nothing racist about it, I would call an "African American" black. I'd rather use it than African American. I think that could be detrimental to their history. How about Afro Carribean? or mixed race like Lewis Hamilton or Obama?
Just to let you know, I'd rather prefer to be called black American, than African-American. No one in my family is from Africa, except a cousin by marriage. (I know, I know, my ancestors were from there, but I also have European ancestry.)
Just to let you know, I'd rather prefer to be called black American, than African-American. No one in my family is from Africa, except a cousin by marriage. (I know, I know, my ancestors were from there, but I also have European ancestry.)
I don't like it when people go "the blacks", but "blacks" is just like a group of white people being called "whites" - there's nothing offensive about it unless you're looking to find something to take offence at.
I would always prefer something like 'Black Man' or 'Black Guy' over 'A Black'. In fact, even though it is now seen as a bit silly and outdated, I think even 'Coloured Guy' is preferable. I guess it is because it is the idea of someone being a Man, Guy, Person, whatever, and then with a descriptive word, just seems much better.
Conversely, I belive that 'Jew' or 'Jews' is perfectly OK. Like 'Muslims' or even 'Teachers', I suppose....
OP, who gives a crap someone will always get offended at something you will say eventually it is better do what you think is best than listening to the sheep who enjoy burning books and the like.
What wrong with calling a black person black? That is what they are!
That wasn't the point. I'm black and I know it, and I'm not offended if someone says I'm black, but I've across people and issues over the years, in which saying it in a certain context, or way, or adding another word to it or substituting a word would be more "acceptable" than others to other people, or not. So I just wanted to see whether it was as trivial as people say, or if people are more worried about it, or think more about it than what meets the eye. And I find it interesting.
Who cares about all this what's acceptable rubbish, everything is too PC nowadays.
I think it causes more problems than it solves, silly things like "baa baa black sheep", "black magic" and "black boards" being not right, and the crazy thing is that many people think that "blacks" are forcing this on us when in actual fact its middle class white people spotting problems that never existed.
The term "blacks" should be banned. I am a person not a damn colour. I wonder how many white people would like to be referred to as "whites". It's just a label and it sucks that most of this country still use it.
The term "blacks" should be banned. I am a person not a damn colour. I wonder how many white people would like to be referred to as "whites". It's just a label and it sucks that most of this country still use it.
White people mostly aren't bothered about being called "whites", because their race has never been an issue, and they don't have the history black people do of being discriminated against because of their skin tone.
The term "blacks" should be banned. I am a person not a damn colour. I wonder how many white people would like to be referred to as "whites". It's just a label and it sucks that most of this country still use it.
Stop being such a baby that is what you are you are black so there!:eek:
Carlos and Carmen Vidal just had a child
A lovely girl with a crooked smile
Now they gotta split 'cause the Bronx ain't fit
For a kid to grow up in
Let's find a place they say, somewhere far away
With no blacks, no Jews and no gays
...the words are used as nouns to illustrate the bigotry of the characters in the song.
I would never say "I like the shirt that black is wearing"
But, "I like the shirt that black guy is wearing" is fine.
People can call me what they hell they like, as long as its true and in the right context, people are oversensitive about this type of crap.
Ive heard people use the word "blacks" before, yes white people, and want to know the context it was in?
They were saying how these 2 particular black people (<--- this not been banned yet?) were excellent players on their football team, as the rest of the team sucked balls (<--- should i be saying scrotum, which is least offensive?)
If people (<-- prehaps this should be "humanistic based organism") cant understand the context in which these words (<-- should this be "literary discription") are being used then its their problem not the person (<-- is this wrong to single out an individual, maybe i should have said persons) using it.
Of course certian racist (<-- "diversity challenged") groups use words which are offensive aswell, but is it the word or are it the actions which count, if someone was knocking my teeth out for being white the last thing on my mind would be "OMG.... he called me a honky!!!!".
But keep it up all you sheep out there, lets keep devolving our world and banning everything.
Comments
It just seems to me like it's an us and them thing. Coloured seems to be lumped together, singled out, different. It just seems to be easier to refer to people as Black, Asian, Japanese etc rather than coloured and non-coloured. It doesn't tell the whole story.
No it isn't. People are here debating the relative acceptability of 'blacks' as compared to 'black people'. Neither term is racist.
The truth is that the use of words such as 'blacks', 'jews', 'gays' and 'immigrants' are usually reserved for derogatory or maligning statements, usually made by people with a particular agenda.
Statements made with the intent of supporting or accepting such minorities are much more likely to use 'black people' or 'jewish people'.
As the language around minorities evolves and is adopted by people with different agendas it's inevitable that we will find that terms which were once acceptable are now decreed unacceptable. This is almost never decided by the minority themselves. I as a black man take no offence if referred to as coloured. These decisions are usually made by apologists and people with overactive collective social consciences, rightly or wrongly.
Taking a minority group such as 'gay people', failing to refer to them as people at all then ignoring them as individuals by bunching them together as a collective 'gays' shows a dismissive attitude and the absence of a desire to understand 'gay people' or to see them as individuals or even as fellow human beings.
If people with unsavoury views such as the BNP adopt 'blacks' and 'gays' in their preachings then we can probably expect their usage to become gradually unacceptable in the same way that the National Front stopped us from proudly waving the Union Jack for a while back there.
Post of the thread. Well said mate :cool:
You'd call them a 'mixed-race homosexual'
Just to let you know, I'd rather prefer to be called black American, than African-American. No one in my family is from Africa, except a cousin by marriage. (I know, I know, my ancestors were from there, but I also have European ancestry.)
Aren't all of our ancestors from Africa?
Conversely, I belive that 'Jew' or 'Jews' is perfectly OK. Like 'Muslims' or even 'Teachers', I suppose....
Also nobody actually thinks the hair stereotypes are true, whereas lots believe the ones about race.
I think the poster's ancestors are from Africa, but saying black just means or implies that anyway.
That wasn't the point. I'm black and I know it, and I'm not offended if someone says I'm black, but I've across people and issues over the years, in which saying it in a certain context, or way, or adding another word to it or substituting a word would be more "acceptable" than others to other people, or not. So I just wanted to see whether it was as trivial as people say, or if people are more worried about it, or think more about it than what meets the eye. And I find it interesting.
What's your preferred term?
Stop being such a baby that is what you are you are black so there!:eek:
There is nothing wrong when the word black is used as an adjective.
There is when it is used as a noun, as has already been pointed out.
In for example the lyrics to "There but for the Grace of God go I"...
...the words are used as nouns to illustrate the bigotry of the characters in the song.
I would never say "I like the shirt that black is wearing"
But, "I like the shirt that black guy is wearing" is fine.
I am black? You assumed I was black because I mentioned the effects on racism? Racism doesn't just relate to african descendent you know.
Ive heard people use the word "blacks" before, yes white people, and want to know the context it was in?
They were saying how these 2 particular black people (<--- this not been banned yet?) were excellent players on their football team, as the rest of the team sucked balls (<--- should i be saying scrotum, which is least offensive?)
If people (<-- prehaps this should be "humanistic based organism") cant understand the context in which these words (<-- should this be "literary discription") are being used then its their problem not the person (<-- is this wrong to single out an individual, maybe i should have said persons) using it.
Of course certian racist (<-- "diversity challenged") groups use words which are offensive aswell, but is it the word or are it the actions which count, if someone was knocking my teeth out for being white the last thing on my mind would be "OMG.... he called me a honky!!!!".
But keep it up all you sheep out there, lets keep devolving our world and banning everything.
i thought you were black because you said i think the term blacks should be banned. i am a person, not a dam colour.
and to me that would suggest you are black!
i thought you were black because you said ''i think the term blacks should be banned. i am a person, not a damn colour. ''
and to me that would suggest you are black!