AIBU to ask how "coloured" and "of colour" differ?

[JohnAndMichaelsSister]

I've hesitated all day before posting this, because it's a sensitive subject and I don't want to offend anyone. But I need to know the answer, so as not to unintentionally offend anyone in future!

I turned on the radio this morning (Today on Radio 4) to hear that the FA chairman Greg Clarke has had to resign for using the term “coloured footballers”. Then Dame Heather Rabbatts, in talking about it, used the phrase “person of colour”.

How can “coloured” be offensive and “of colour” not be?

To me, logically, both seem offensive. Both imply that to be white is “the norm”, and lump together everyone else in the world who is of any other colour as somehow departing from this “norm”.

And any physicist will tell you that white is formed by combining all the colours of the spectrum, while black is an absence of colour. So actually it's white people who are coloured!

Yet for a while now we have been told that “... of colour” is the correct term for everyone who isn't white.

I'm in the UK, but I know that in the US the main organisation that campaigns for the rights of black people is called The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

So I'm totally confused. I'd like some guidance (especially from black British people - I'm white) on what is offensive and what isn't.

YANBU = “coloured” and “of colour” are as offensive or inoffensive as each other.
YABU = there really is some difference between the two terms.

I guess the main thing is not to refer to someone's ethnicity unless you need to.

A cynic might suggest that the purpose of such changes is to catch out, publicly shame and humiliate decent well-meaning people who are trying very hard not to offend anyone but may not be aware of this week’s ‘correct’ words

It doesn't change that quickly though and anyone high up in a public-facing organisation should be aware of the current terms. The fact that he wasn't speaks volumes about football and other sports, and much of society being run by a bunch of white, male, old farts on a gravy train.

@Aoki

Europe is part of Asia too you know. Just a mountain range dividing Europe from Asia and it’s not as big as the Himalayas that divide Asia from India. Which is why India is technically a subcontinent and Europe is not.

Europe is part of Asia? And India is not in Asia? The Himalayas?
Apart From your confusing post which isn’t making sense, what has any of that got to do with the point I was making as to the disparity between how the U.K and rest of the world describe Chinese/Indian/Pakistanis?

I was speaking from a geographical and geological perspective. The line between Europe and Asia is imaginary drawn along ethnic lines rather than geological lines. They are not two separate land masses and never were, so only reason we call them different continents is due to culture not science. But Asia and India were separate continents until India crashed into Asia, creating the Himalayas which is why technically India is a subcontinent.

What does it have to do with your comment on how people are referred to differently depending on where you live? Well the point is that cultures tend refer to some other peoples based on geography and some others based on ethnicity and this is not always consistent, and we should not expect it to be. So I don’t think the answer is to follow what US, Australia, Canada do (which by the way isn’t “the rest of the world”) Their way is simply different, not better or worse.

@Graciebobcat

I guess the main thing is not to refer to someone's ethnicity unless you need to.

A cynic might suggest that the purpose of such changes is to catch out, publicly shame and humiliate decent well-meaning people who are trying very hard not to offend anyone but may not be aware of this week’s ‘correct’ words

It doesn't change that quickly though and anyone high up in a public-facing organisation should be aware of the current terms. The fact that he wasn't speaks volumes about football and other sports, and much of society being run by a bunch of white, male, old farts on a gravy train.

Tend to agree with this. I am 58 and I think I am fairly OK at not using offensive terms in the way that 63 year old did - and he is the boss of a large and significant national organisation (and I'm not).

In my opinion most people I know who complain terminology changes too often aren't incapable of keeping up, they just don't want to be bothered.

Some the changes in term happen as a term that is deemed acceptable or just descriptive gets used as a term of a abuse. At that point a new term is chosen. Example - Scope used to be called The Spastic Society as used to help people with Cerebral Palsy. Limbs are spastic meaning muscles are weak. Spastic evanescence’s abusive so the name was changed.

Coloured is offensive because of the context.

I am Asian Indian. I’ve never had racism around word Indian or Pakistani, however have around the P word and that is racist.
I usually deal with things on a case by case basis does this person need to refer to race at all? - does this person mean to be abusing me, tone and context? Was this the correct word some years ago or something unacceptable for decades?

Having terms is important so that discrimination and prejudice is recognised.

A cynic might suggest that the purpose of such changes is to catch out, publicly shame and humiliate decent well-meaning people who are trying very hard not to offend anyone but may not be aware of this week’s ‘correct’ words

You can generally tell the difference between decent well-meaning people and those who don't care if they offend or not.

I agree with dynamokev, it’s about keeping up with changes and I want to do that
One of the reasons I’m still on mumsnet aged 64, keeps me relevant
Babies sleeping on their tummies when I had mine, dangerous now so I put my grandchildren on their backs.I wouldn’t be saying well it was ok when I was a young mum

Do you believe everyone from a white background is racist towards black people?”
Nice bit of whataboutery! Maybe answer my question first? @Savourysenorita
Your posts seem to imply that there would be a problem. Not in my case!

What does it have to do with your comment on how people are referred to differently depending on where you live? Well the point is that cultures tend refer to some other peoples based on geography and some others based on ethnicity and this is not always consistent, and we should not expect it to be. So I don’t think the answer is to follow what US, Australia, Canada do (which by the way isn’t “the rest of the world”) Their way is simply different, not better or worse

So you're agreeing with what I said then. Good!

@Aoki,
Yes, I was agreeing with you on how there are differences between countries and that this causes confusion over what does Asian mean? Etc. The only bit I disagreed with was trying to make a global universal standard matching how Australians, US or Canadians categorise peoples. Telling, say U.K., Mozambique, China or Brazil that they can’t categorise peoples the way they currently do and must use an imported system would be a form of intellectual colonisation.

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]@Aoki,
Yes, I was agreeing with you on how there are differences between countries and that this causes confusion over what does Asian mean? Etc. The only bit I disagreed with was trying to make a global universal standard matching how Australians, US or Canadians categorise peoples. Telling, say U.K., Mozambique, China or Brazil that they can’t categorise peoples the way they currently do and must use an imported system would be a form of intellectual colonisation.[/quote]
No, I was not arguing for any global universal standard so you've misinterpreted my post. My reply was based on the previous posts and my summation is that neither side is right or wrong. I actually think the historical timing of how people migrated to various parts of the world may be the key to how they described by the locals.

@Skysblue

“Coloured” means you live in the 1950s. “Person of color” means you live in America. “BAME” means you’re in the civil service, in Human Resources, or both. God help you. “Black” means you’re black. “Half caste” means you’re at my secondary school in the 1990s. “Brown” means you have good eyesight.

Tongue paralysed with indecision thus making you incapable of saying any of the above means you’re white British.

Yes you’re right!

Is it any wonder people get tongue tied though with all of the disagreement evident even on this thread.

I think generally most people don’t want to offend though and hopefully that comes across?

I see many of you missed the point I was making. I also see many of you used classic White Womaning tactics to imply that I am being prejudice against your DC when I was merely using the language and examples I used to make a point.
Here’s my point again. Being a sole minority in a mainly White space or area is no fun. When you are constantly referred to as the Black person over there instead of your individual traits it gets old. Not that hard to understand. I have worked as an educator for years, never have I needed to refer to anyone by their race to get my point across as to who they were when I was speaking of them. If I am capable of it surely you are too.
It is quite sad that I can state my opinion only to have it argued down and people such as yourselves who are White and don’t experience constantly getting referred to by your race can dismiss what I’m saying because you can’t relate.
No one is trying to move the goalpost to confuse White people, instead we want to be able to live our lives and raise our kids without constantly having to be referred to as our race. If there are only a hand full of Black children at a school how do you think it feels for them to grow up as the Black kid while a White child gets to grow up race neutral only noticing race to slap a label on it which is often done incorrectly. It’s not that hard to understand my point if you want to. But again why do White people get to live race neutral lives while everyone else must constantly be labeled? Do better Mumsnet. Also, I was using the term Blacks as an example and yes, I do see this used quite often when speaking of the Black community.

justanotherneighinparadise
If you described Richard as the guy on the left in the green shirt that should be the end of it. Why do you have to incorporate his color? I can see it for myself it goes without saying. Again, why do non-White people have to constantly be taken down to our ethnicity as the overriding descriptor of who we are? I have hip length hair. If you described me as the lady with hip length hair always smiling, I guarantee people would peg me in an instant. Also, I referred to myself as Black to make a point. I am mixed race and very, very, often get mistaken for being Native American because White people make assumptions. It is embarrassing, not because I am ashamed to be mistaken for another race but because I am not trying to co-opt any other race or their very real struggles. I respect them. My point is many times people couldn’t work out what I was and labeled me wrong in the first place. Then I have to stumble through tides of embarrassing answers as I explain to them that, “No, my husband is not Native American too, because I am mixed not x,y,z.” With so many mixed race children being born and adding to the confusion don’t you think it’s time to find other ways to identify and describe people other than race because it just doesn’t work. Sorry if I have come across as rude it is not intentional but race on a global scale is a very prominent issue right now. Also, as a mixed race person I am tired of explaining my background when people have decided I am Puerto Rican, Native American, Samoan, or whatever they decided and I am none of those things. The lines are about to be blurred even more so let’s move on and find new ways together.

I wonder who decides what we can say? My husband is brown, he was shocked that someone lost their job because of this but on the other hand he refuses to accept he "is" BAME.

I worked with a guy from Pakistan, he laughed if people used the P word, he said it meant something good, noble or pure or something so he found it funny that people thought they were insulting him and he thought it was positive. I believe it is what the Maori's call white NZ people, well some of them. I know Irish people called Patrick who are known as Packie.

Language can be a nightmare, personally I don't like the expression people of colour, it reminds me too much of free person of colour, used to differentiate between slaves and free black people in slave era so I feel it has bad connections.

It gets very complicated doesn't it.

I thought what he said about black footballers and the South Asians (I think that was what he said) having different career aspirations was worse to be honest. I think he also said something about women footballers and gay people but that doesn't seem to have got much notice.

MelCMel, well said.

@MelCMel

justanotherneighinparadise If you described Richard as the guy on the left in the green shirt that should be the end of it. Why do you have to incorporate his color? I can see it for myself it goes without saying. Again, why do non-White people have to constantly be taken down to our ethnicity as the overriding descriptor of who we are? I have hip length hair. If you described me as the lady with hip length hair always smiling, I guarantee people would peg me in an instant. Also, I referred to myself as Black to make a point. I am mixed race and very, very, often get mistaken for being Native American because White people make assumptions. It is embarrassing, not because I am ashamed to be mistaken for another race but because I am not trying to co-opt any other race or their very real struggles. I respect them. My point is many times people couldn’t work out what I was and labeled me wrong in the first place. Then I have to stumble through tides of embarrassing answers as I explain to them that, “No, my husband is not Native American too, because I am mixed not x,y,z.” With so many mixed race children being born and adding to the confusion don’t you think it’s time to find other ways to identify and describe people other than race because it just doesn’t work. Sorry if I have come across as rude it is not intentional but race on a global scale is a very prominent issue right now. Also, as a mixed race person I am tired of explaining my background when people have decided I am Puerto Rican, Native American, Samoan, or whatever they decided and I am none of those things. The lines are about to be blurred even more so let’s move on and find new ways together.

I understand and in a way you e answered my question. I shall try my hardest not to mention anyone’s ethnicity to describe them. Do you think I should suggest to my four year old that it’s impolite to mention the skin colour of his friend? I did think I should say something but didn’t know if I was just associating something negative to an innocent remark? I want to try and get it right from the onset.

"White womanning", for wanting to protect our kids?
You were using black kids feelings to make your point, is that not the same impulse?

It's not right to judge or belittle anyone because of their race. That goes both ways.

@Graciebobcat

I guess the main thing is not to refer to someone's ethnicity unless you need to.

A cynic might suggest that the purpose of such changes is to catch out, publicly shame and humiliate decent well-meaning people who are trying very hard not to offend anyone but may not be aware of this week’s ‘correct’ words

It doesn't change that quickly though and anyone high up in a public-facing organisation should be aware of the current terms. The fact that he wasn't speaks volumes about football and other sports, and much of society being run by a bunch of white, male, old farts on a gravy train.

TBH I think this is a bit naive. It's really not difficult to find examples of well known people being criticised harshly in the media for what are clearly unintentional errors, and on SM and in some workplaces it is even worse. My inbox this week included an article detailing another 10 words that are supposedly now taboo because of some unsavoury connotation or another.

Even look at this thread - how many people have said that totally different, and opposing things offend them. One person says being called mixed race is offensive, it should just be black. But the other week there was a post about how it is offensive not to use mixed race, and black was offensive.

No wonder people hesitate and avoid the whole issue as much as possible. If the idea is really for people to think of individuals less in terms of their race, and more in terms of their person, this focus on Right Words doesn't seem likely to accomplish that. Quite the opposite - it seems likely to make them hyper aware.

@7Days

"White womanning", for wanting to protect our kids? You were using black kids feelings to make your point, is that not the same impulse?

It's not right to judge or belittle anyone because of their race. That goes both ways.

Agree

This whole charade of correct/incorrect terms will continue until people begin to see each other as individuals.

If you meet someone new, wouldn't it be better to think "This is a human being. Someone new. We'll get to know each other's interests, likes and dislikes" than "This is a white/black person. They probably like x,y,z and would want me to call them x,y,z because the other white/black person said so".

You'll be playing lottery with the latter. Goodluck.

I suppose this is too simplistic for some. I mean who has the time to treat someone as an individual when preconceived ideas about them are quicker and easily available to draw from? And who has the time to be treated as an individual and asked questions when the other person should already know better just by looking you and wildly guessing your likes/dislikes and interests?

And so now you're going to confuse your child by taking one mixed raced lady's opinion and make him wonder what it wrong with that little boys skin colour of its too hush hush to mention? Don't drag your children into something they're are not even old enough to comprehend. He is NOT being racist by pointing out what he sees. If my child referred to a fellow pupil with black skin as 'black' i would not correct them. We were talking the other night about different hair colours and curly hair and straight hair and then said some people have white skin black skin brown skin but we're all the same inside despite what we look like on the outside. Please don't correct your child on what they've said. Steer it instead.

That was a reply to @justanotherneighinparadise

In my almost forty years of infant teaching I only ever heard little ones use unacceptable words when copying their adult relatives. I used to talk factually about skin tone, pigment which determines shades, temperature, the sun, the cool countries etc to quite young children and had parents thank me for doing that. Make it as straightforward and factual as possible is my motto with explaining everything to children!

@Knittingnanny

In my almost forty years of infant teaching I only ever heard little ones use unacceptable words when copying their adult relatives. I used to talk factually about skin tone, pigment which determines shades, temperature, the sun, the cool countries etc to quite young children and had parents thank me for doing that. Make it as straightforward and factual as possible is my motto with explaining everything to children!

@Knittingnanny this is wise advice. I think its terrible to confuse a child by telling them they're wrong to state a child has brown or black skin. They have no concept of race or prejudice or preferred descriptors. It's a great conversation or discussion opener of course to explore if they have any thoughts on it. Bit hush hushing them mentioning it only serves to make them think there must be something wrong with their skin colour. Creating problems surely

*"White womanning", for wanting to protect our kids?
You were using black kids feelings to make your point, is that not the same impulse?

It's not right to judge or belittle anyone because of their race. That goes both ways.*

Yup. It's the quickest way to turn people away from you. I am not engaging with any argument that blanket acuses non-blacks on this thread of 'white womaning'.