AIBU To ask if the term Mixed-Race is outdated

[CambridgeEntry2022]

I don't want to cause offence by using outdated terms. Would it be more appropriate to use the term multi racial?

Imagine a world in which every single white person was presumed to be a Nazi. After all, they were all white too. White people would be in uproar.

But in a world where every single black person is presumed to be "BAME" (or whatever) if they dare to question it, they're the ones with a problem ?

@Comedycook the purpose of the term BAME is not tell you anything about any particular person’s heritage. After all, it is a term for a wider group of non white British people. That does not make it offensive but it can be useless when trying to understand the experience of the different groups within that broad group.

Take Black African or Indian for example. These broad groupings can be equally useless, depending on the circumstances, because of the huge diversity within these broad groupings. However, broad groupings can be useful short forms.

I know no one from a BAME background who would support anyone not seeing their skin colour. My experience is that it is deemed highly offensive because it avoids acknowledging a fundamental part of who they are and their history which is very much important to their present. This is by no way saying that the represent a cipher of history.

I too find the term ‘I don’t see colour’ very strange and ridiculous to say the least.

Who thought up BAME? Does anyone know? Can't stand the term.

After all, it is a term for a wider group of non white British people

So why don't you use "non white"? If it means exactly the same what is the point of the different term?

@SerendipityJane the B in BAME stands for Black. So every black person would be classed under the banner of BAME.

What is offensive about being part of BAME? I can see the issue about groupings but offensive? Why is it offensive unless you think that by pointing out someone is not white is offensive?

@skippy67

Who thought up BAME? Does anyone know? Can't stand the term.

I'd guess a white supremacist who wanted to ensure future generations obsessed on what makes people different, rather than bring them together under the guise of "being helpful".

@C8H10N4O2, non-white was widely used and I still use it. It’s not offensive not to be white. But short hand can be useful sometimes but not always.

It’s perfectly okay to say non-white population of BAME population in the UK experience worse outcomes in terms of promotion in corporate UK than their white counterparts.

It’s okay not to be white. It’s not offensive to say someone or a group of people are not white.

BAME came from BME. I don’t know what it was before that but BAME people were very much at the fore of coining these acronyms.

I'm mixed race. Perfectly fine way to describe me

Why is it offensive unless you think that by pointing out someone is not white is offensive?

Where did I say that ? You made that up all by yourself.

I think pointing out anyones skin color out of context is offensive. But by the same token, when it is in context, there is no intent of offense.

It's obsessing over words, rather than the intent behind them that has made this thread a paradigm of modern society. Well meaning folk come up with a "less" or "non" offensive word to describe (other) people and in time it will simply be hijacked by the ignorant and hateful and morph into the next generations insult. Even as "BAME" is becoming so now. Note when that fucker Farage uses "BAME" it ain't because he's trying to avoid giving offense. Quite the opposite. Which given the man is a little bit of gilding the lily.

@MrsMayJune

BAME came from BME. I don’t know what it was before that but BAME people were very much at the fore of coining these acronyms.

Really?? I find that really surprising. @SerendipityJane's theory seems much more plausible.

It’s okay not to be white. It’s not offensive to say someone or a group of people are not white

Its not offensive to make one racial group the default and lump all the others into a single category as if they are the same?

I agree, it doesn't matter if people's skin is black, brown, yellow or normal.
I'm sorry, what? @Nothingyet

It's really irrelevant where BME/BAME came from though, isn't it ? It's all about how they are used nowdays.

And as this thread shows, they are clearly used to ensure that all anyone sees before they even hear a person speak is a skin colour and associated grab-bag of "history" or "heritage" that has just as much potential to cause divides and schisms as if they saw that person as a non-person, as the deep South slaveowners in days of yore would have speaking to one of their possessions.

So it you are a right wing zealot who hates the idea of equality, it's a pretty good place to be right now. Because it's further away than ever.

Or, you know, Google exists. SerendipityJane's guess is incorrect.

www.healthline.com/health/bame-meaning#origin

@C8H10N4O2 in the context of racial power structure and the consequent impact, yes it is perfectly acceptable to point to the dominant race vs all others.

The term BAME should be used in context and I’ve always heard it used it that way.

Context it key. Identifying someone as BAME when you could easily say the black lady or Asian man is pure laziness.

I agree, it doesn't matter if people's skin is black, brown, yellow or normal What's normal skin @Nothingyet? Anything that isn't that, by your very definition, must be abnormal, then?

@SerendipityJane you raised the origins and once you’re proven wrong it is suddenly irrelevant?

@KarlUrbansWife

I agree, it doesn't matter if people's skin is black, brown, yellow or normal What's normal skin *@Nothingyet*? Anything that isn't that, by your very definition, must be abnormal, then?

And yellow skin? Come on @nothingyet, you're clearly a troll.

Nothingyet proves the problem with ‘I don’t see colour’. It’s often said by those who see their skin colour as ‘normal’.

Why don’t you want to see colour? What is the problem of seeing a person’s colour? What’s wrong with their colour? Is it because it is abnormal according to nothingyet

[quote MrsMayJune]@SerendipityJane you raised the origins and once you’re proven wrong it is suddenly irrelevant?[/quote]
I didn't "raise" it, I responded to someone who did

You can't have it both ways. If you want to "reclaim" words then you are - by definition - ignoring their provenance. If you want to impose words (as a lot of posters here want) then you have to justify it with a backstory. Neither is great when it comes to the truth.

The term BAME should be used in context and I’ve always heard it used it that way

And the views of those with different experiences are therefore wrong?

The origin is irrelevant - it is now used in a way which regularly disadvantages groups within the blanket statement.

Its absolutely problematic to take one race as default or normal, just as its problematic to take one sex as default. Not just because of "peeeceeegornmaaaad" but because its actually harmful to the groups being othered.

The British tend not to want to upset people (as do many other peoples) so we just need to be kept up to date as to what terms to use. Eg in the 1960s I remember our parents going on about never use Mongol (for down's) as it was offensive. It has been a backdrop in the UK for decades to try to avoid using words that are offensive and rightly so.

BAME is useful in some contexts. I would have previously said non-white but moved to BAME as I thought it was now preferred. In other contexts particularly given where I live Indian (or black) are clearer terms for particular groups (we have lots of Indians where I live and my borough is minority white).

(Indians in the sense of both new arrivals from India and those who are 2nd generation I should have said and the second generations ones are of course also British in many cases)

SerendipityJane, my personal view is this - anyone who is afraid of seeing difference and instead see it as a way of “dividing us” really need to examine themselves.

What such people would rather is that injustice is never spoken about and simply brushed under the carpet. They would rather these injustices continue whilst we belch out nonsense about not seeing people’s skin colour.

The only people who feels “against” and hence divided are those who want things to stay as they are because it suits them.

Some people won’t like the progress towards a fairer and more just society. Tough! If they feel justice and seeking justice is divisive, tough!