Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

*TW* To think the terms “Caucasian” and “white” race are problematic?

216 replies

LetsCombatRacism · 11/01/2021 14:21

Hi all,

So I’m not hoping for this to be antagonistic, but this is something that does affect me.

I’m by the way considered “Caucasian” and I’m fair skinned. However I’m neither European nor “white” according to what the terms refer to.

After I traced my DNA and found that a chunk of it came from the Caucasus region, I started looking into the origins of the word Caucasian..

I passed through the idea that the “origin” of beauty is from there. And that Noah’s arc descended there.. and that every other form of beauty is somewhat considered steering away from the perfect creation of god.

Even more so, that this very concept has its rooted in encouraging slavery.. in that apparently Noah’s Son had been cursed by his father to beat offspring that are “dark and primitive” and... that the northern Africans contributed greatly towards history because they have been blessed with beinf mixed with the whiter race and so watered down the curse.

Now... I’m not reading this from a controversial source.

I’m quite disgusted and appalled that knowing this is the origin of the words and they’re still being used today.

I think a real attempt at tackling racism should start from those terminologies.

Im quite shaken by what I’ve read. It’s not because I’m naive. I didn’t grow up learning European history because I’m not European by heritage.

But I AM, by DNA partly from the Caucasus.. and I am of “semetic” descent, so those theories don’t only not make any sense to me... but they absolutely make me angry..

I feel like I need to say something.. I know we all know it’s irrational to connect the theory to the terms used today but the words we use do define our culture abs for something to have originated in something this DISGUSTING should be uprooted.

I am a woman of Abrahamic faith, and I totally respect the story of Noah but not the racial adaptations that came of it.. in my narrative there was no reference to skin tone in that story and the purpose of it’s narration was to remind everyone that they’re all servants of GOD and so such narrative indicates to me that European scholars at the time had totally used this religious story as a tool to nurture the ideology of superiority of the blond hair blue eyes and that everything steering away from that is merely contaminated.

In fact, there is NO box for me to tick anywhere for my cultural heritage..

Why?! Because people of my ethnicity don’t have their own category.

Why?! Jesus, Abraham and Noah had my regional heritage.

Why? Because I am meant to tick white Caucasian?! But I’m not, I don’t adopt the terminology. I don’t have things in common with the European culture.

My culture wnd that if my entire region descended from Speakees of semetic languages, and traditions and cultures.. we had total different historic journey...

But I need to accept that Jesus was blond and blue eyes and so he is considered “Caucasian” and so am I?! Because otherwise the average European won’t be able to relate?

Why? Is it because it would be hard to comprehend that Aramaic Jesus might be somewhat contaminated from the “perfect creation of god” which is meant to be white and blue eyes?

Was that historically threatening to the narrative that white hair blue eyes is superior in the eyes of god?!

This terminologies are all deeply routed in total hijack of faith figures and imposing racism into it.

And so this is why as a woman of faith I’m appalled.. it was a total historic hijack of crusade Europe which totally disrespected the Christian faith and decided to utelise it for horror.

And then... for those who don’t believe in faith, I wonder how the use of those terminologies and the way people were categorised this way... is justifiable rationally ??

So am I justified in wanting to start a petition to completely obliterate the use of these terminologies and classifications which have any reference to skin tone or “origin of perfect human race”?!!

Instead, say “European heritage”, “”African heritage”, “Middle Eastern heritage”... etc

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
HangOnToYourself · 11/01/2021 14:24

Eh? Confused

CuriousaboutSamphire · 11/01/2021 14:28

I have no idea any more.

Identity politics seem to be impenetrably complicated.

LetsCombatRacism · 11/01/2021 14:30

TLDR (sorry for the typos I’m also breastfeeding)

I think the terms “Caucasian” and “white” when referring to heritage on forms should be replaced by “European” heritage. Because they’re deeply routed in a very racist way of classifying people by appearance and a crusade European interpretation of the story of Noah which would somewhat justify the idea of a “superior” race.

OP posts:
Stripesnomore · 11/01/2021 14:31

What country are you in?

Caucasian isn’t a category in the U.K.

The origin of Caucasian as a racial term comes from scientific racism. The categorisation is based on white sex slaves from the region. Try reading Nell Painter on this.

I think you have gone off on a bit of a tangent with the Noah’s ark stuff.

Fressia123 · 11/01/2021 14:33

I had no clue what you said... There's no way I'm white. Yet, I pass as such. By definition my mix should equal being some shade of brown, but I'm not! Do I consider myself white? Not at all. Will other fellow brown people see me as brown? Rarely. In the end I'm just me. And if I ever fill a form I just say I'm "other".

NotDavidTennant · 11/01/2021 14:34

I thought Caucasian had mosty been phased out now. On UK forms the options are usually 'White British', 'White Irish', 'White Other', etc

CarolEffingBaskin · 11/01/2021 14:35

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

bestsquirrelinthewholehole · 11/01/2021 14:37

Eh, but Jesus was of middle Eastern, north African decent and so dark/olive skinned and dark hair.
And also I have no idea what you are talking about. I got a bit lost.

Stripesnomore · 11/01/2021 14:37

I have never seen a form in the U.K. with Caucasian on it, or heard the term used officially other than on American tv. And I am old.

Sheleg · 11/01/2021 14:41

What are you on about??

Robbybobtail · 11/01/2021 14:43

Just tick "other"?

ChilternsChaCha · 11/01/2021 14:43

@LetsCombatRacism

TLDR (sorry for the typos I’m also breastfeeding)

I think the terms “Caucasian” and “white” when referring to heritage on forms should be replaced by “European” heritage. Because they’re deeply routed in a very racist way of classifying people by appearance and a crusade European interpretation of the story of Noah which would somewhat justify the idea of a “superior” race.

Er, "European" is not a colour or a race.

I rarely say this about matters of race, but I think you are overthinking this.

Or else coming at it from a religious perspective that most people don't share.

umpteennamechanges · 11/01/2021 14:44

I think most reasonably educated British people accept that Jesus wasn't white European and would have had a typical appearance of the average person from the Middle East.

pleasefeedthecat · 11/01/2021 14:45

The North Americans tend to use the term Caucasian, but we don't. I don't know about the rest of Europe.

Stripesnomore · 11/01/2021 14:47

Art work from the crusade periods doesn’t depict Jesus as blonde haired and blue eyed either. In fact it would be a bit bizarre given how much of the crusades were fought over the Iberian peninsula where people mostly aren’t blonde and blue eyed.

Coffeehunter · 11/01/2021 14:47

I think you need to have coffee and a nap then come back and ask again without the Noah story and a better explanation of what you're trying to say

Remxhah126 · 11/01/2021 14:50

European is not a skin colour. Lots of Europeans are not white. YABU.

ChilternsChaCha · 11/01/2021 14:50

@Coffeehunter

I think you need to have coffee and a nap then come back and ask again without the Noah story and a better explanation of what you're trying to say
Superb Grin
KrakowDawn · 11/01/2021 14:50

The fact that you're using a Bible story as a source... YABU

But I'm sure Armenians (as an example) are white but certainly aren't historically privileged, or colonial powers.

Who on earth would seriously think that the historical figure Jesus would have blue eyes?
We don't have any pictures of him...

Winterwoollies · 11/01/2021 14:52

That was long and confusing.

KrakowDawn · 11/01/2021 14:54

@LetsCombatRacism

TLDR (sorry for the typos I’m also breastfeeding)

I think the terms “Caucasian” and “white” when referring to heritage on forms should be replaced by “European” heritage. Because they’re deeply routed in a very racist way of classifying people by appearance and a crusade European interpretation of the story of Noah which would somewhat justify the idea of a “superior” race.

Even worse! DH is of European heritage, and falls into groups that have high representation in sickle cell/thalassemia diagnoses. I am WBRI, and therefore minimal risk. Fudging ethnicity questions in that manner could lead to health conditions being overlooked (or HCPs wasting time looking for conditions which are highly unlikely to be present).
AccidentallyOnPurpose · 11/01/2021 14:56

You don't seem to understand half the stuff you've written and mashed up together half thoughts,theories and ideas in one long,non sensical verbal (or should that be written) diarrhoea . No wonder you are shocked.

It's like coming up with a theory for lighting in the Middle Ages. Those people were pretty shocked too. Didn't make it right.

If it helps , the term Caucasian is considered fairly out dated now and no longer in use in many countries.

MilkMoon · 11/01/2021 14:57

@bestsquirrelinthewholehole

Eh, but Jesus was of middle Eastern, north African decent and so dark/olive skinned and dark hair. And also I have no idea what you are talking about. I got a bit lost.
Yup, and everyone is aware of this now, though admittedly there's still an inheritance of religious iconography of fair-haired, pale-skinned Jesuses. But not everywhere -- the children's bible I had in the 70s had a wiry, Middle Eastern-looking Jesus.

Agreeing on 'Caucasian' not being used here -- I'm in Ireland. The terms on the census are 'White Irish' or 'Other White background'.

Lifeisabeach09 · 11/01/2021 14:57

Sorry, only scanned read as your post was long and a bit nonsensical.

But...Jesus was blond and blue eyed?

'Caucasian' as a term for white ethnicity was mentioned in the story of Noah's Ark??

Why the trigger-warning??

NotaRealLawyer · 11/01/2021 14:58

I see they've just closed down Parler.
Do you have a MAGA hat?