Democrat Vilified For Accidentally Saying 'Colored People' Rather Than 'People Of Color'
link
'People of color' is a ridiculous phrase--in part (but not entirely) because it is such a minuscule and contrived variation of 'colored people.' (Also: 'non-white' serves just fine. Just as 'non-Asian' is the obvious way to reference everyone who is...well...not Asian... (though, as I've argued before, there's nothing wrong with 'oriental', either...) I wouldn't be caught dead saying 'people of color.' It's ridiculous. And doubly so if you've already lived through the political incorrectification of 'colored people.' Not to mention the political incorrectification and political correctification of 'black' and 'African-American' respectively. Then the slow politically re-correctification of 'black.' That happened, perhaps, because, for about a decade there, Americans had no PC-acceptable way of referring to non-American black people. When 'black' was still on the lefty-left's Index, I heard many people say things like "British African-Americans are..." and "African-Americans are a majority in South Africa."
It's also important to refuse to dance on command by giving in to the ever-changing terminological whims of the left. And make no mistake about it: it's the PC left that's pushing the phrase, not your average non-white American in the street. I don't think it's entirely crazy to think that a group should have some authority with respect to what it's called. But that's not really relevant in this case. Furthermore, you only get to do this so many times. The more often such fashions change, the less important it is to conform to them.
And hey, anybody know what the NAACP has to say about all this?
Not to mention the...egad!...NSFW...United Negro College Fund!
(At the risk of seeming to virtue-signal, that latter's an organization to which I sometimes contribute. Is such a contribution politically incorrect now, I wonder? I mean, contributing to an organization that uses "the other n-word," as we might call it...damn...I could end up with a 2-minute hate on the Tweeter for such white supremacy or rape culture or whatever... To make matters still worse, I also sometimes contribute to the United American Indian College Fund! Crap! I'm even damnder than I was before! And surely that crowd needs to check its privilege and change the name to the United Native American College Fund. Doesn't it?)
We're not quite down to haggling over iotas yet...but we're gettin' there.
'People of color' is a ridiculous phrase--in part (but not entirely) because it is such a minuscule and contrived variation of 'colored people.' (Also: 'non-white' serves just fine. Just as 'non-Asian' is the obvious way to reference everyone who is...well...not Asian... (though, as I've argued before, there's nothing wrong with 'oriental', either...) I wouldn't be caught dead saying 'people of color.' It's ridiculous. And doubly so if you've already lived through the political incorrectification of 'colored people.' Not to mention the political incorrectification and political correctification of 'black' and 'African-American' respectively. Then the slow politically re-correctification of 'black.' That happened, perhaps, because, for about a decade there, Americans had no PC-acceptable way of referring to non-American black people. When 'black' was still on the lefty-left's Index, I heard many people say things like "British African-Americans are..." and "African-Americans are a majority in South Africa."
It's also important to refuse to dance on command by giving in to the ever-changing terminological whims of the left. And make no mistake about it: it's the PC left that's pushing the phrase, not your average non-white American in the street. I don't think it's entirely crazy to think that a group should have some authority with respect to what it's called. But that's not really relevant in this case. Furthermore, you only get to do this so many times. The more often such fashions change, the less important it is to conform to them.
And hey, anybody know what the NAACP has to say about all this?
Not to mention the...egad!...NSFW...United Negro College Fund!
(At the risk of seeming to virtue-signal, that latter's an organization to which I sometimes contribute. Is such a contribution politically incorrect now, I wonder? I mean, contributing to an organization that uses "the other n-word," as we might call it...damn...I could end up with a 2-minute hate on the Tweeter for such white supremacy or rape culture or whatever... To make matters still worse, I also sometimes contribute to the United American Indian College Fund! Crap! I'm even damnder than I was before! And surely that crowd needs to check its privilege and change the name to the United Native American College Fund. Doesn't it?)
We're not quite down to haggling over iotas yet...but we're gettin' there.
posted by Winston Smith at
2:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home