Page Summary
andrewducker - (no subject)
ladysisyphus.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cheekbones3.livejournal.com - (no subject)
lilitufire.livejournal.com - (no subject)
kimberly-a.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wolflady26.livejournal.com - (no subject)
elwe.livejournal.com - (no subject)
sibelian.livejournal.com - Of all you mention
derumi.livejournal.com - (no subject)
bohemiancoast.livejournal.com - (no subject)
octopoid-horror.livejournal.com - (no subject)
darkoshi - (no subject)
derumi.livejournal.com - (no subject)
red-cloud.livejournal.com - Sticks and Stones
imaget.livejournal.com - Considering how funny I think this poll is,
Active Entries
- 1: Interesting Links for 23-09-2025
- 2: Interesting Links for 22-09-2025
- 3: Photo cross-post
- 4: Life with two kids: International Demon-Hunter Shipping
- 5: Interesting Links for 19-09-2025
- 6: Interesting Links for 21-09-2025
- 7: Interesting Links for 20-09-2025
- 8: Interesting Links for 15-09-2025
- 9: Interesting Links for 18-09-2025
- 10: Interesting Links for 08-09-2025
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 11:27 am (UTC)It does amuse the heck out of me that while the general current phrase for the earlier inhabitants of North America is Native Americans, they themselves tend to prefer 'Indian'.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 11:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 11:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 11:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:00 pm (UTC)Many of the more intellectual black circles in our neck of the woods prefer "African-American," especially from people of other races. Though "black" is used quite universally, as well, a small minority seem to find this offensive.
It's a bit like trying to dance with someone who doesn't want to lead.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 01:02 pm (UTC)Except, I guess, that people brought up in Indian households in the UK will actually feel half Indian and half British.
Although I also emotionally shy away from strong definitions of 'British' on the grounds that I don't actually like cricket very much myself...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 01:27 pm (UTC)I think most of the Scottish population would fail the "Tebbit Test" too...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-20 01:13 pm (UTC)White people are born in Africa to, you know, as are many other races....
no subject
Date: 2004-10-20 01:20 pm (UTC)In which case, how to refer to people of that type?
no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 02:43 pm (UTC)Despite (as in Kimberly's comment) some people wanting to be known as African-American, I have to say I think if they thought about it for a second, they'd realise just how derogatory that is.
As in, you're not American. No, you're that sub-class of American - African-American. I've never liked the sound of that. White American, Black American - at least that way, it's only about a difference in colour.
Personally, I think the 'PC' brigade does far more harm than good, and continues to highlight 'causes' as somehow being 'causes', instead of simply saying - "They're a person, like you or me."
I'm sure I ranted about this in my journal a while back....
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:26 pm (UTC)I get offended when people refer to a short person as a "midget" or "munchkin" or any other such belittling (ha ha) term.
I also get offended by many terms used to describe people who are fat by society's standards.
I think we all have our things we're sensitive about. Race -- particularly for blacks who were victims of slavery for so many generations because of the color of their skin -- is one that often cuts deeper than others. Referring to a black man by a term that denotes his skin color raises very complicated issues of the history of slavery and the inequal relationship to whites. I'm not at all surprised that the issue is heated.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 02:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:15 pm (UTC)Also, it has the advantage of being a description and not a race. Because really, there are not all that many situations where categorizing someone by their race is acceptable to me, whereas describing someone by their skin color should be as natural as describing them by their size, or hair or eye color. The two are sadly often mixed together, though.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 12:53 pm (UTC)Of all you mention
Date: 2004-10-19 01:00 pm (UTC)I kind of think "non-whites" is almost as offensive as "nigger".
Re: Of all you mention
Date: 2004-10-19 01:10 pm (UTC)Re: Of all you mention
Date: 2004-10-19 02:17 pm (UTC)Re: Of all you mention
Date: 2004-10-19 02:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 02:25 pm (UTC)Ethnic people sound like what KKK members might call the Irish. Negro is just an archaic term, and has been coloured (err) with bad connotations in some people's view. I'm surprised that the variant word wasn't listed - some people like to use it as a pet word for their peers, but won't allow others to use that word. Self-denigration coupled with racism, in my opinion.
And yeah, I, too, have noticed that Amerinds/Native Americans prefer to use the word Indian instead. So do Indians. Which makes it confusing. And you can't use West Indian, you'd be talking about Jamaicans and Haitians.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 03:41 pm (UTC)Hurt my family like hell when most of his relatives cold-shouldered them at his funeral.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 02:58 pm (UTC)Er, didn't answer the one about drag and blackface because it's all a bit complicated. Yes, the Black and White Minstrel Show is offensive. No, Widow Twanky isn't, and neither are the female characters in the League of Gentlemen. Oh, I mean, they are offensive, but not in that way. It sort of depends on the context.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 03:55 pm (UTC)I liked the b3ta (or maybe somethingawful) where they made up titles for films based purely on the poster. The one for -that- film was "Holy buggery! What's with their faces?" or something similar...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-20 12:19 am (UTC)Ooooh - the Wayans one?
Believe it or not, I was thinking of Little Britain...
no subject
Date: 2004-10-21 03:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-19 07:25 pm (UTC)Ultimately, I like calling them Perry, Dwight, Desiree, Grace, Jason, David, Chris, Al, James, etc. Personal names are so much nicer.
Sticks and Stones
Date: 2004-10-20 01:16 am (UTC)If one sets out to offend then I think you'd be pretty successful whichever term is used. On the other hand, hugely perjorative terms -- in just about any other context -- can be used between close friends with impunity. The same goes for the dressing-up. Intent is hugely important.
Being offensive through ignorance, though, is almost as bad as deliberately setting out to offend.
Considering how funny I think this poll is,
Date: 2004-10-21 03:12 pm (UTC)Here's a quote from a favorite song about the subject:
I am human.
Several of the terms that I saw listed in your poll I would freely use to describe myself, some of my friends, or my family, but I would feel very uncomfortable having to hear come out of the mouth of someone who I don't consider to be black. That's the truth of it plain and simple. I don't think that it is necessarily right or wrong, it's just the way I feel about the subject.
Leave it to Andrew of all my LJ buddies, to bring up a topic that is just sooo uncomfortable to talk about. With most of my friends, and it pains me to admit this, I would prefer not to talk about race and all of its possible attendant modifiers (i.e. prejudice, designation, discrimination, reparations) in mixed company, because it's not something our society teaches us to be casual about. One has to walk such a fine line so as not to end up being hurt or hurtful.
Cheers to greater communicaton, and stepping out of your comfort zones.