Rep. Eli Crane used the derogatory phrase in describing his proposed amendment to a military bill. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty asked that his words be stricken from the record.

  • fidelacchius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The politically correct word changes every decade. “Black people” used to be more offensive than “colored people”

    • PolarBone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wasn’t sure about a young guys name out here and asked someone “do you know the young black man who’s new in the neighborhood? I wanted to thank him for helping someone I know the other day.” After I helped host an event.

      holy shit this person got mad at me. Said I needed to call them african canadian or colored. I get so confused by terms these days. Same with indigenous and native. I live in an area with many, and know some, and different ones prefer different words. I call one of them one term, and other that same one, they might get offended. I try to be as respectful as I can, gets hard.

      Example, my therapist goes by indigenous, but her wife goes by native. So I thanked her wife one day for helping me at a indigenous event I was at, and she said “we call it a native event”.

      I’m having such a hard time the past 2 years in particular, and trying really hard with all of these changes in terms, pronouns and every time I think I understand it, apparently I don’t. I have one trans friend who I see occasionally and thankfully they agree with me and makes me feel a bit less nutty.

      My girlfriend is considering changing her orientation to some new wording I’ve literally never heard of all of a sudden now too. I just found a tonne of new things, like grey sexual, demisexual, etc. People I’ve been in employment/training programs with have changed their name and gender 2-3 times in the past year, and each time I see them I get confused with what to say or call them. It is oddly overwhelming.

      sorry this turned into a slight vent

    • Kleinbonum@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Euphemism treadmill.

      In any sensitive, socially fraught context, terminology will just change faster than in other areas of life.

      That’s why we no longer use terms like idiot, retard, cripple, imbecile, etc. as neutral, objective terminology. Instead, terms that where initially used as objective, clinical terminology are now exclusively used as slurs and insults.

      It’s just that when it comes to race, some people (and it’s often people not affected by it) have a hard time accepting that concept.

      • FiFoFree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As we’ve seen over the past decade (well, past few decades, tbh), changing the word only moves the objectionable meaning onto the new word. The goal is to address the meaning, but it feels like so much energy is being spent on addressing the words themselves that the meaning never gets dealt with…

        …which I guess is understandable for those who have given up hope of the meaning being addressed, but then why spend the effort on the word?

      • Chalky_Pockets@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, if I heared someone say “colored people” I would not be at all surprised to later hear them say “retard” in the same setting.

        • Fugicara@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          An easy way to pick out racists in the modern day is if they just casually call black people “blacks.” It seems to be one of the words that, although it’s not used by non-racists, hasn’t been phased out by some of the less explicit racists yet in the way “colored people” has.

          • Chalky_Pockets@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, dead giveaway, they saw “black people” and removed “people” in their head so the verbiage is bound to follow.

  • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “My amendment has nothing to do with whether or not colored people or Black people or anybody can serve,” said Crane, who is in his first term. “It has nothing to do with any of that stuff.”

    I’m gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he’s just a normal idiot racist who has a hard time thinking on the spot and got mixed up between “black people,” “people of color,” and trying really hard not to say the n-word as he would in his usual crowds.

    • jscummy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are we really going to act like “people of color” and “colored people” are wildly different terms that could never be confused? He listed “black people” separately so I’d have to guess he meant to say people of color and mixed up the terms

      Not saying he’s not racist for other reasons, but this is gotcha journalism

      • Kleinbonum@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are we really going to act like “people of color” and “colored people” are wildly different terms that could never be confused?

        In a vacuum, those are similar terms.

        In the real world, one is a term used in Apartheid South Africa and in Jim Crow America that has huge racist and white supremacists connotations, while the other one is the preferred term used by the community to refer to themselves.

  • TheRealGChu@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Word choices aside, the more telling quote is this, “You can keep playing around these games with diversity, equity and inclusion. But there are some real threats out there. And if we keep messing around and we keep lowering our standards…”

    For those that can’t read between the lines, POCs, LGBTQIA+, women, and anyone else that’s not a white male, are “lowering…standards”.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty asked that his words be stricken from the record.

    Keep the words in the record. Posterity should know.

  • _cerpin_taxt_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I had several coworkers at Best Buy that called black people colored. I got into so many arguments. Like dude, that’s racist as fuck. The sad thing is most folks at that store didn’t see the problem with it.

    • jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it’s all signalling, there’s nothing really there to get. The reason “people of colour” is okay and “coloured people” isn’t isn’t because of any real difference between the phrases, but because people who use the former are generally supportive of them, while people who use the latter aren’t.

    • Laticauda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it has a different connotation. It’s generally used by a different demographic, often to refer to themselves, and doesn’t have the unfortunate history that “coloured people” has. Just because they’re similar that doesn’t make them the same. Most people I’ve seen using the term “coloured people” aren’t exactly known for being not-racist. Most people I’ve seen using “people of colour” are, well, people of colour. We sometimes need a shorthand for people who aren’t white but may or may not be black, and personally I tend to go with whatever the people being referred to generally prefer.

    • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The logic behind this change is that it puts the PERSON first. You’re first and foremost a person, and then after that you’re using a descriptor. Usually this terminology is used to be collective of anyone not white, because it’s used in context of the unique experiences that anyone not white has to navigate all their life, at least in US. Examples such as people of color are more likely to be pulled over by police, people of color have a harder time finding makeup that suits their skin tone, etc.

      If you’re just talking about an individual or a group without that context it’s much more common to hear them just referred to as black, or whatever ethnicity they are, if its even relevant.

      I know it can all feel arbitrary when words are suddenly not okay anymore, but I think it is because these acceptable terms for marginalized people eventually get used so often in a hateful context, they may try to adopt a new term. I mean many women now cringe hard and go on alert for red flags whenever they see women referred to as female, maybe can’t even stand it anymore despite the context, because it has been so consistently used by a very specific type of person.

      • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I appreciate and agree with all you’ve said here, just one small thing- “female” is fine when used as an adjective, I don’t think anyone is bothered by that. “The female staff member,” “the author is female” etc. is not problematic. It’s when it is used as a noun that flags are raised- “That female over there,” “the author is a female.” Then it sounds like you’re talking about some other kind of creature, not a human woman.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In that case, I expect to be referred to as a “person of whiteness” as I was unaware that I was being insulted all this time when called a “white person” since “person” isn’t the first word.

        I wasn’t mad about it when I didn’t know people meant to dehumanize me by saying those words in that order rather than the reversed order, but now that you have informed me, I am.

        Same with “male,” the term is “man,” “male” is dehumanizing as well since we use it to describe animals that produce sperm. In fact, sperm is dehumanizing because animals have it too, so I expect human sperm to be renamed so that it doesn’t share any commonality with nature that could suggest I’m also part of nature. Also, some people I don’t like have called me “male,” so I don’t like it. While I’m at it some of those people have called me a sarcastic asshole, and so instead I’d like to be called a sardonic sphincter since it has alliteration and nobody I don’t like has called me that yet.

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, and if I could convince enough people that my ridiculous shit above was a good idea, it would become one. It would still however be just as ridiculous.

            What’s more, at one time not too long ago homophobia and racism were social norms, so maybe clinging to that notion that “societal norms” are somehow an arbiter of goodness isn’t always necessarily true. Just because enough people say something, that doesn’t mean they’re right, and just because the minority or even only one person is saying something that doesn’t mean they’re wrong, either. One has to evaluate an argument (or whatever) by the argument itself, not by how many followers its speaker has nor by what one’s friends think of the speaker or his words.

      • dudebro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s really splitting hairs, but okay.

        How do you refer to white people?

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The good news is that you don’t need to understand. You just need to accept that this is the case because the people it hurts say so.

      You can also go learn about the history and understand if you want, but I’m also all for being lazy and just trusting the people who are impacted.

      • SlowNoPoPo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        this logic is so flawed honestly

        people can choose to “be hurt” by literally any word and it’s entirely subjective and ephemeral because what upsets them today may not tomorrow and what is ok changes just as easily

        word policing is just a losing battle no matter how you try and justify it and the massive sensitivity towards words just makes people look ridiculous

        • MrPewp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That would only be true if we gave every single hurt feeling equal weight, but PoC in America have a long history of pretty blatant discrimination, specifically using the term “colored people”, so I don’t see much wrong with not using the phrase because they’ve asked you not to. It’s not like we’re entertaining every person that wants to be referred to as a “Hylian Deku scrub” or something.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s like saying there’s not a lot of difference between saying “me beat” or “beat me.”

      Simple words aside, there’s a big difference in meaning between the two.

      • Pat12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s like saying there’s not a lot of difference between saying “me beat” or “beat me.”

        no, that’s not the same thing. the difference between “colored people” and “people of color” is similar to the difference between “a red apple” and “an apple that is red”. In English, an adjective can be placed before a noun or after a noun, with the latter formatted with a preposition such as “of”.

        Edit: not sure why i’m being downvoted here - do you all not speak English? If you give a comparison it should be apples to apples, not apples to pineapples.

  • kemal007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yet another complete piece of shit I don’t like this regression to outspoken racism being okay.

  • EvilZionistEatingChildren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not a native English speaker here. I had to scroll comments to even understand what’s the problem. i still don’t understand what’s that “mega substantial difference” between “colored people” and “people of color”. That’s like, literally, grammatically the same. Sorry guys you are just trying hard to set yourself apart from that moron.

    • jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s exactly the point. The reason “coloured people” isn’t okay is precisely because people like that moron use it.

    • MicroWave@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s really about context and nuances.

      “Colored people” is a specific term that was used during the time of racial segregation in America, so it carries a lot of negative connotations beyond its literal dictionary meaning. It’s now considered outdated as well, so it was a bit shocking for a politician, especially one who identifies as white and conservative, to utter it.

      • btaf45@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “Colored people” is a specific term that was used during the time of racial segregation in America,

        And after segregation up to this very day. It is neither a ‘slur’ nor ‘shocking’, merely old fashioned.

        NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The NAACP predates modern terminology and I believe chose to maintain the name out of historic context.

          It’s frequently used as a replacement for the N-word, and ignoring that is just being willfully ignorant.

          Old Fashioned is not an excuse for racist language. This isn’t something that a younger person uses by accident. If this was some 80 year old white man I’d maybe believe that he got it mixed up. But it hasn’t been an accepted term for the majority of his lifetime and it’s not wrong to expect our representatives to not use racist language to describe their constituents.

          • btaf45@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s frequently used as a replacement for the N-word, and ignoring that is just being willfully ignorant.

            It’s not at all like the N-word, and pretending that it is is just being willfully ignorant.

        • rustydomino@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          think of it like the N-word. You (assuming you’re not black) can’t say it. I can’t say it. But there are those who can. Ice Cube explained it really well. He said, “It’s OUR word. You don’t get to use it.”

    • Laticauda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The difference is the history of the terms and which demographics use them. “coloured people” has historically been used in a derogatory way by racists. “people of colour” has historically been used by English speaking non-white people or allies of non-white people and is generally preferred by non-white people. Just because they’re grammatically the same that doesn’t mean they were used the same. At one point the word retarded was just a synonym for slow. But it doesn’t matter what the word meant, what matters is how the word was used.

      • btaf45@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “coloured people” has historically been used in a derogatory way by racists.

        Nope. Racists of 100 years ago used the N word or the C…n word. Historically “coloured people” was the politically correct term used by non racists. The proof is that NAACP, the famous civil rights organization, chose to use the word when it was formed and still proudly uses the word.

    • solstice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s just very dated and has come to be seen as a non-politically correct slur, even though originally it WAS the politically correct language. I agree with you personally and feel like there are much bigger things to worry about than someone using an outdated politically correct euphemism. There have been so many, it’s easy to get confused: negro, colored, minority, people of color, etc. I don’t feel strongly about any of this and just say whatever I’m told is acceptable now, so it’s not a big deal to me. I do think it would be cool if we could just say black white/asian/hispanic/whatever.

      • btaf45@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s just very dated

        Exactly. It used to be the common politically correct terminology. I don’t see how it can suddenly be called a “slur” any more than ‘black’ is a slur.

        NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People

        • kewjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          context matters, a white congress person is using a phrase in Congress that historically was used in Congress to deny people’s rights. these politicians want to “make America great again” they want to undo civil rights.

          • btaf45@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A word does not deny anybody’s rights. “Coloured Person” is just as politically correct as “black” or “African American”. In fact “Coloured Person” is the most accurate of the 3 politically correct terms.

      • Tigerfishy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Problem is, when you let people like him slide when he’s playing his little games, the games keep getting a little more grand. That’s all it is to him. And now he gets to go “What??” When knows damn well semantics matter. He knows the little republican signals matter. They all know what they’re doing.

        Stand back and stand by

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup.

          It’s really bizarre how we all know what’s going on here, but people insist on playing dumb about it.

          “Please explain to me why using terminology that brings back memories about segregation is bad when the other terminology refers to the same group of people? I Just don’t get it! It’s not logical!”

    • Xerø@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You just admitted that English isn’t your native language, and you probably aren’t an African American. So this is one of those things you are just not going to get. It comes down to more than just the language, it’s the shared history that gives those words the weight they carry. And you can choose to privately be insensitive to that history, but publicly you don’t have to say everything you think.

      • solstice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The term is POC now you insensitive clod. I have white friends from south africa and black friends from the caribbean so it’s inaccurate to call either of them african american. Ever met a black british person? Try calling them african american and you’ll get laughed out of the country.

        • Daisyifyoudo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          He’s referring, very specifically, to understanding the difference in the US betweenthe terms poc and colored people.

          “You’re probably not African American” meaning you’re prob not a black person in America descended from slavery directly impacted by this incident and therefore don’t understand the exact argument here.

          He wasn’t saying all black people are African Americans 🙄

        • Xerø@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Say again.

          I was born in London to Jamaican parents. Age of five I moved to Jamaica and lived there for eight years before moving to the States. I am now a black American. You came at the wrong guy with that bullshit Sonny Jim. Plus I get to block your dumb ass.

    • Muchtall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s because liberal politicians here in the U.S. love to play games with words. When a word or phrase doesn’t fit their political motives, they change the word or the definition of the word. There are literally words that we can’t say in the US due to “politically correct” pressures, but if you were in any other part of the world, the same words would be perfectly acceptable. The “negative connotations” are completely overblown by the same people who wield the power of cancel culture.

      • jerkface@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        people who wield the power of cancel culture

        You couldn’t have possibly typed that with a straight face.

      • Nezgul@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah! Kinda like how those liberals try to cancel people for wearing make-up and putting on a wig! Or for kneeling! Or for playing Dungeons and Dragons! Or reading Harry Potter! Or going to the bathroom! Or eating mustard! Or wearing beige suits!

        These damn liberals!!!

        • Muchtall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh. I didn’t realize the term for pedophilic perversion had changed to “wearing makeup”. My bad. I wasn’t keeping up with the latest terminology. Please don’t cancel me.

  • noneya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cue all the “First Amendment absolutists” who believe it’s their right to call people whatever they want, as long as it’s not the pronoun they prefer.