Amber Rudd

[sue51]

I'm seeking to understand the differences between the terms “coloured women” and “women of colour”. They sound intrinsically similar but they may well be different, and a web search didn’t help in defining the difference.

The first term was used by Amber Rudd yesterday, and she quickly apologised as it had caused offence, but was still under criticism in the main national news. If a term is offensive then it’s right that it isn’t used, and where it has been used that should be the subject of an apology.

However, the term “women of colour” was used on Radio 4 this morning, and a review of the play Richard II at the Sam Wannamaker Playhouse by the Guardian’s Michael Billington prominently used the term “women of colour”, and one would have thought, given the Guardian’s credentials, that the term would not be used if it was likely to cause offence.

So, and asked in all sincerity, can anyone explain the difference between these two terms, and why one is deemed to be offensive while the other is apparently not? I would be mortified if I used a term which caused offence to someone but am genuinely curious about the difference in this case.

It’s Orwellian to try to think about people in the terms they prefer?

@Sherbertstraws

If you were black you would be proud and happy to be called black?

You have no idea how you'd feel if you were another race, especially a race that had been subject to oppression, racism for the last few hundred years! I am sure you mean well but please be aware this can come across as very patronising. You don't see the difference between coloured and people of colour as you're looking at it from a different PoV. If you were black and had been more aware of the negative connotations of the word coloured and had it used against you in a derogatory way and seen it used to oppress others, you would probably have a very different viewpoint.

Yes I have read the thread.

*Coloured’ was used in the US to oppress people who weren’t white.

‘People of colour’ is a term that these communities have come up with themselves and find empowering.*

It's the same word though, just used differently.

Well, others have already said “oh it was just a mistake””It was what she was brought up with””She didn’t mean it” and so on. So those people obviously think they know how her mind works. And it’s not “thought policing” to think a senior person in the public eye should not use language that has been considered unacceptable for 30 years. And to think that if she does use it, it must be nearer the front of her mind than the acceptable word.

“It's the same word though, just used differently.”

For some reason this reminded me of Eric Morcombe “the right notes-but not necessarily in the right order”

It sounded as if Rudd inadvertently slipped into the polite terminology of her upbringing. Totally agree.

She apologised, quite rightly.

If I were being interviewed, thinking "how to answer this point, what will the next point be, how do I look, how do I sound, what else do I need to say" and all the while attempting to speak fluently, I may well use the wrong terms.

I'm glad I'm not in the public eye, so my mistakes are not so visible.

BetrandRussell, I am genuinely interested to know if you really believe Amber Rudd’s use of the word coloured in this context is “unforgivable”.

I don't feel I have any say in what other groups would prefer to be known as. As a decent human being and member of a multi-cultured society it's just my job to keep up with what is and isn't acceptable so that I don't offend anyone. A responsibility I'd take a lot more seriously if I was the f*ing Home Secretary.

I'm also in the same age bracket as Amber Rudd, and I do understand this slightly. As when I was grown up it was seen as offensive to say someone was black, saying coloured was the correct word. I understand it's not acceptable now because it puts too many ethnicities in one bracket.

She has apologised and it is clear from her interview she was defending dianne abott, and her intent was good, it was just a mistake, possibly due to how she grew up, but abott has roundly and viciously attacked her for using the term.

That makes me uncomfortable, what amber did was a mistake she has apologised for, a mistake likely due to what she was taught as a child, but Diane Abbots attack in retaliation is deliberate.

I agree with Bertrand

The term was obviously in Amber Rudd's mindset or she wouldn't have used it.

As the grandmother of mixed race children, I found Rudd's use of 'coloured woman' far less offensive than the hypocrisy of Abbott pushing her left wing agenda onto us while sending her child to a private school.

“BetrandRussell, I am genuinely interested to know if you really believe Amber Rudd’s use of the word coloured in this context is “unforgivable”.”

Yes. Obviously it will be put behind and we will move on. But the fact that she thought and said it will be on her “record” forever.

It says something about the sort of person she is. Like Andrea Leadsom’s “talk to the Foreign Office” remark.

The thing about Rudd’s language is that I don’t think it is the sort of thing you say “by mistake” I think you would only say “coloured” if that was the word you used in your head, and only used “black” in public discourse because you have been told that’s the PC way.
I totally disagree. I think if you're on the spot and trying to think on your feet (in any situation, work or personal) it's very easy to come out with something that you wouldn't say if you'd actually engaged your brain first and more often than not it won't be anything that you'd ever say or think. People make mistakes all the time. She apologised. The only reason Diane Abbott won't accept the genuine apology is because she wants to try and score political points off it. It's not because she's genuinely offended or thinks it was a deliberate thing. All a bit pathetic really on DA's part, particularly given the context.

I don't see how anyone else can be in a position to judge whether Diane Abbott is genuinely offended.

I don’t think anyone can actually claim to know Amber Rudd’s mind or mindset based on this evidence alone. If she had history of ‘misspeaking’ in this way I might feel differently. I think she should be able to put it behind her properly and not be held permanently under suspicion of harbouring suspect attitudes.

People don't use terms like that unless they're in their mindset or consciousness.

I do think if you're under pressure it's quite possible to revert to using the 'wrong' (non-PC) term. It's not an excuse but I'm sure it could as easily happen to any of us (in the wrong circumstances).

@spiderbanana, I used Abbott’s mistake as it was she Rudd was defending and it was she who raised a Twitterstorm about it - had that passed you by?

I completely agree with you @ Bluntless.

“that you wouldn't say if you'd actually engaged your brain first and more often than not it won't be anything that you'd ever say or think”
She is not a member of the public caught on the hop by a roving reporter. She is a senior politician who’s had a ton of media training.

Oh, and for clarity, I don’t think this is the worst thing she’s ever done, or that Abbot is gaffe free. But this is what we are talking about on this thread

Those terms are in my mindset. I grew up with 'black' considered really offensive. REALLY offensive. Like the N word now. Words like 'blackboard', baa baa black sheep etc etc.

Just, no. It doesn't come easily to my tongue, I have to check the context to make sure it's ok to say it.

People of colour feels very American, and wouldn't come naturally to me.

I'd me most likely to use Ethnic Minorities or BME. But then grammar trips you up.

I can't think of any context or situation where I'd describe someone as coloured.

When I was a young woman people used the word “nigger” freely. Some black people are reclaiming it. What if I used that word in public (or even private)? Would “I am sorry- I misspoke” get me off that hookk