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.

[quote FreekStar]@rainkeepsfallingdown Why can Asian not refer to both Indian and Chinese- after all they are both countries in Asia- the same way as I am European.[/quote]
Well, it could, but it doesn't. People in the UK have used Asian to mean Indian for so long that the word has lost its original meaning over here as relating to all of Asia. I guess it's similar to how BAME is starting to be used interchangeably with black, and is clearly going to lose the link to AME in the near future.

It's the evolution of language. I don't have to agree with it to be aware of it.

In the US, Asian still largely means Asian.

I did feel a bit sorry for the football official. He was actually speaking about the discrimination and abuse black players face and how unacceptable it is. He looked like an older man who had used outdated language inadvertantly. Use of language and what is considered offensive changes all the time. In the context of the question he was asked he would have had to use some term such as black, mixed race or Asian, people of colour, etc in order to answer. He chose the wrong term but I don't think he was intentionally othering anyone or meaning to be offensive.

@PaxMalmKallax is your child white?

This reminds me of a time when an older gent was referring to my colleague 'you know that little Chinese one' i told him we didn't have anyone Chinese work in our bit. (she's Indian) I was telling her the story and she laughed. I said to her (let's call her josmi) 'josmi you do know that to all white people over 70 if you're not white you're Chinese!' she said 'oh my god you're soooo right!' I didn't feel the need to hide the conversation from her. We made a mockery of it and the joke was on the poor old boy who needed a geography book!

What was OP thinking?

We can't be certain of course but maybe they were simply trying to learn something?
Reading up on this is another approach, but given the diversity of views here it's entirely possible they'd have found a similar mix of opinions elsewhere - and who's to say what the"right" one is?

Personally I like to enquire about things which confuse me and learn a lot by listening, but each to their own of course

That was meant to be for @rainkeepsfallingdown!

I haven’t heard ‘oriental’ outside of Edward Said in about forty years. 😂😂

And cats. Always cats. Cats are like Kevin Bacon, any conversation can be linked to cats isn less than six steps.

I actually find being referred to as 'white' offensive, if you were to compare my skin tone to a paint code, it certainly wouldn't be white.
Why on earth in this day and age we all have to be catalogued by our skin tone, race or religion is beyond me.

Always fascinating how many people are apparently still regularly hearing ‘coloured’, ‘oriental’ or repeatedly having to describe their cousin to others by visual cues in circumstances where ‘the man in the blue shirt’ would be entirely confusing.

There’s a Venn diagram linking people having these experiences and using the phrase ‘minefield’ surely.

@Savourysenorita

That was meant to be for *@rainkeepsfallingdown*!

As with everything, intention is key. If the man genuinely thought Josmi was Chinese, I wouldn't take offence if I were her either. It's usually pretty easy to tell the difference between non-malicious ignorance and wilful hate.

I appreciate it can be difficult getting someone's ethnic origins correct, especially if you haven't ever really met that many people from different backgrounds... I went to primary school in a very white area and on reflection, the first time I saw a black person in real life wasn't until secondary school.

@Whammyyammy

I actually find being referred to as 'white' offensive, if you were to compare my skin tone to a paint code, it certainly wouldn't be white. Why on earth in this day and age we all have to be catalogued by our skin tone, race or religion is beyond me.

I will admit, I have always found it curious why black and white are almost universally accepted by the world as PC terms when they're both inaccurate!

I've never ever seen a black or white coloured person in my life.

I don’t use either coloured or people of colour. BAME is just as bad. I’m a black woman by the way.

As a British Indian I would prefer this to be the way people refer to me. I do not like being called coloured at all. It has only happened to me once or twice, and both from very elderly people who meant no offence at all. No biggie. Generally Black or Indian etc is fine. Just be sensitive to expressions and how things land. Lost count of the number of times I have been asked where I am from. Hope that dies out soon.

@Whammyyammy

I actually find being referred to as 'white' offensive, if you were to compare my skin tone to a paint code, it certainly wouldn't be white. Why on earth in this day and age we all have to be catalogued by our skin tone, race or religion is beyond me.

Do you wonder why these characteristics are seen as important - in a world where people are discriminated because of such characteristics.

People may not see them - but if they don't see them, if they don't want them recorded, if it's not monitored in some way, then how can discrimination and oppression be recognised and reduced?

@JinglingHellsBells

Years ago when my parents were young, calling anyone black was offensive and they had to say 'coloured'.

Very confusing.

I agree. As a youngster (in UK) in the 1970s it was considered polite to use the term coloured and black was deemed very offensive and racist. Of course we move with the times and I would not use that terminology now as would not wish to offend anyone.

@Brainwave89

As a British Indian I would prefer this to be the way people refer to me. I do not like being called coloured at all. It has only happened to me once or twice, and both from very elderly people who meant no offence at all. No biggie. Generally Black or Indian etc is fine. Just be sensitive to expressions and how things land. Lost count of the number of times I have been asked where I am from. Hope that dies out soon.

I'm glad to hear your input on the last sentence. I've often enquired as to colleagues heritage as a way of getting to know them on a deeper level and thinking of shows interest in their lives (I do the same with people with accents - e g Irish, scouse) I'm glad to be educated that it isn't always appreciated. Mind you a friend of mine is Mauritian (Indian ancestry) and someone asked her where she was from she replied 'scunthorpe' (changed place name but you get the gist - same place we were a from in that situation)

a= *all

I don't think POC (person of colour) is being used for black people any more. The new preferred term seems to be BIPOC (black, indigenous, person of colour).

I like that but it wouldn't work in the UK because indigenous people of the UK are white as far back as we know. So the term BIPOC in a UK context would mean 'everybody', which would render it a bit useless

Semantically they mean the same thing, but "coloured" is associated with an era when people were more racist, thus is has racist undertones. I do think many older people use "coloured" innocently, not knowing that it's no longer acceptable, and people are far too ready to assume racism intentions. There was a time when it was the polite phrase and in 40 years I expect we'll be in trouble when we accidentally say "person of colour" and it's no longer socially acceptable.

Ps I don't want to be controversial or high jack the thread but something I'm curious about... Most white people (apart from perhaps some racist snobby aristocratic types) would never dream of shunning a daughter/sons boyfriend /girlfriend because they were black or from another minority ethnic background. In fact itd be extremely taboo and abhorrent to form any grievance with it. However.... I have spoken to colleagues (phillipino, Indian are two examples) and asked them how their family would view marrying a white guy/girl and both answered it wouldn't be approved of. (we were friends so we have deeper conversations so it wasn't like I just randomly asked them without knowing them) my Indian friend went as far as saying it would be a family disowning offence. So my question is how come it's accepted in these circumstances but not the other way around? I wonder how we find this palleteable yet rightly find the shunning of a black /Asian spouse in the white community taboo?

*think I misspelt hijack but tired

@squirrelslikenuts agree with your comments.

However, Black people have been born here for many more centuries even than you suggest. The Roman Army consisted of soldiers from Africa who settled here during the building of Hadrian's Wall.

And if you want to go back even further, @HeIsAVeryBadBoy then Cheddar Gorge Man was black. That's 10,000 years ago. So basically, Britons were black from the outset.

@alexdgr8 I'm 99% sure you are stirring and know full well that "oriental" is as outdated and offensive as "coloured" is.

I'm always surprised and disappointed at the faux naiveté on MN, and the number of people who are "confused" by language and terminology evolving, say, every 30 years or so.

If the OP really wanted to know and not stir things they could have just Googled.

And if you want to go back even further, @HeIsAVeryBadBoy then Cheddar Gorge Man was black. That's 10,000 years ago. So basically, Britons were black from the outset.

Yes but that just makes a mockery of the term 'indigenous people'. You and I both know that if somebody made a weird reference to 'indigenous British people', 9,999 people out of 10,000 would definitely think 'white'. So therefore, using the term 'indigenous people' to describe black people, in Britain, is never going to work.

That's just the way it is.

Really it's just the "coloured" is an older word. It was, at one time, considered to be the good, polite and respectful word to use, and people were encouraged to use it rather than older words that had been used before.

Over time, some activists came to feel that because there were still plenty of racists around, who used the word in ways they didn't like, it should be dropped and replaced with a new designation. That seemed to happen to some extent though it was nothing like a complete change, and there are still a few elderly black people in the US who prefer the term when referring to their race or ethnicity, having never cared what a few activists said about it. Though probably not many any more.

"Of colour" is just newer and trendier, there is nothing intrinsically less or more racist about it.

I''m not sure why, over the last few years, it suddenly became a complete no-no and evidence of being some sort of serious racist to use the older term. Some people don't really seem to be able to understand the difference between "old-fashioned" and "offensive."

To anyone who looks at this, though, it should be clear what the problem is with the whole concept - any word used will come to be associated in some instances with people who use it in ways that aren't 100% complimentary, so until there are no people who think that way, every word will eventually need to be replaced. Which results in a heck of a lot of energy going into keeping up with the lingo.

A lot of the time I think these rules are mostly meant to help identify who is in the in-group, and who isn't, rather than anything real about offence or racism.