'People of Color' Term is Already Running into Trouble

[mahagonny]

https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/02/people-of-color-phrase-history-racism.html

Discuss please, particularly if you are a language expert, or if you are not. What is your responsibility to respond to this and other related discussions? (Wow, it's a year old already!)

[mamselle]

Interesting, in looking up something else on the old forum, this board appeared:

   https://www.chronicle.com/forums/index.php/board,43.0.html

and within it, this thread...

   https://www.chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,28983.0.html

from 2006.

Just as a bit of historic interest, perhaps...

M.

[Anselm]

When did POC ask to be called by that name? 

[Parasaurolophus]

What is there to say, really? We should refer to and call groups of people by the names they wish us to use for them, and we should be reflective in our use of those names. Language isn't static, and the terms we use change as our usage drifts, and some cease to be useful for the purposes to which we previously put them.

[ergative]

What is there to say, really? We should refer to and call groups of people by the names they wish us to use for them, and we should be reflective in our use of those names. Language isn't static, and the terms we use change as our usage drifts, and some cease to be useful for the purposes to which we previously put them.

Yes. This seems like a straightforward example of the euphemism treadmill, where euphemisms are used to refer to unpleasant subjects, but simply by association with those subjects they become themselves taboo, and so new euphemisms must be found. For example: water closet -> toilet -> (in N. America) bathroom/washroom -> restroom. We're constantly looking for more delicate ways to refer to pooping.

In this case it's not the topic itself that is taboo, but the unpleasant emotional load that keeps being associated with it by a subset of the population. Terms for minority groups are either corrupted or simply used with racist intents, so the groups ask to be referred to by other terms that do not carry the unpleasant emotional load of the previous terms. Then racists start using the new terms racistly, and so the new terms are now contaminated, and must be changed again.

This is not an instance of minority groups being perpetually dissatisfied, but rather an instance of racists polluting what they touch. And, as with all pollution, there are two solutions: avoid it or clean it up.  An individual cannot solve racism, but they can at least not use racist terms when explicitly asked not to.

[mahagonny]

What is there to say, really? We should refer to and call groups of people by the names they wish us to use for them, and we should be reflective in our use of those names. Language isn't static, and the terms we use change as our usage drifts, and some cease to be useful for the purposes to which we previously put them.

Yes. This seems like a straightforward example of the euphemism treadmill, where euphemisms are used to refer to unpleasant subjects, but simply by association with those subjects they become themselves taboo, and so new euphemisms must be found. For example: water closet -> toilet -> (in N. America) bathroom/washroom -> restroom. We're constantly looking for more delicate ways to refer to pooping.

In this case it's not the topic itself that is taboo, but the unpleasant emotional load that keeps being associated with it by a subset of the population. Terms for minority groups are either corrupted or simply used with racist intents, so the groups ask to be referred to by other terms that do not carry the unpleasant emotional load of the previous terms. Then racists start using the new terms racistly, and so the new terms are now contaminated, and must be changed again.

This is not an instance of minority groups being perpetually dissatisfied, but rather an instance of racists polluting what they touch. And, as with all pollution, there are two solutions: avoid it or clean it up.  An individual cannot solve racism, but they can at least not use racist terms when explicitly asked not to.

The author does not seem to think the mess can be cleaned up this easily. I think I agree with her in spots. People who look black are black. That part's easy. Why did that need changing? Also I don't know what I am being asked to call people. People at work use POC when referring to themselves in my presence. But it only recently dawned on me that 'POC' is not just another term for 'black' it's more like an umbrella. (I should get out more.) And are these settled questions among the non-Caucasian people involved? I wonder.
Spell correct wants to write 'rakishly' in place of 'racistly.' There's another problem. But thanks for the new word. I bet I'm safe using it until I visit friends in North Dakota.
BTW I have a friend who's a billionaire or close to it. But instead of 'person of means' which might sound pejorative maybe I should call him 'giver to charity.'

[Parasaurolophus]

The author does not seem to think the mess can be cleaned up this easily. I think I agree with her in spots. People who look black are black. That part's easy. Why did that need changing? Also I don't know what I am being asked to call people. People at work use POC when referring to themselves in my presence. But it only recently dawned on me that 'POC' is not just another term for 'black' it's more like an umbrella. (I should get out more.) And are these settled questions among the non-Caucasian people involved? I wonder.

I mean... there's no Central Committee that decides. These kinds of changes in naming conventions percolate from the ground up, not from the top down.

BTW I have a friend who's a billionaire or close to it. But instead of 'person of means' which might sound pejorative maybe I should call him 'giver to charity.'

Whatever. Your billionaire friend is not very vulnerable to discrimination. If you want to ease their conscience by soft-pedalling their wealth and power, and conflating it with ordinary wealth and power, you can do that. If that's how they want to be referred to, then you can use that to refer to them.

Given the givens, it just seems awfully disingenuous, and more like a parody of attempts to be respectful to vulnerable groups of people.

[mahagonny]

Anyone is vulnerable to being disliked by an individual or a mob.

I might be ready to make fun of people who call others racist whenever the whim strikes them though. They annoy me. Partly because they helped Trump get elected. But they were up to this bullshit years before Trump's ascendancy.

[mamselle]

One African American friend refers to herself as "African American" in written work and group discussions; I take my cue from that when speaking and writing with, for, or about her.

Others might use other locutions; I try to be guided by the speech choices people make and reflect them back. 

M.

[ciao_yall]

When did POC ask to be called by that name?

In the 80's I recall the term "Third World" being used to describe ethnic groups from parts of the globe that were less developed.

[writingprof]

I'm sad to have missed that Slate piece, as it verifies what I've been saying for years.  The only problem with "people of color" is that too many people caught onto it and it stopped signaling the user's progressive bonafides.  So what's next?  My guess is "Black" and "Brown," ostentatiously capitalized.  But that, too, will become problematic in time.

(Look for "Latinx" to become verboten, too, if that hasn't happened already.)

[Hegemony]

Yes, there has also been a good deal of criticism of "Latinx" in recent months.

[mahagonny]

One African American friend refers to herself as "African American" in written work and group discussions; I take my cue from that when speaking and writing with, for, or about her.

Others might use other locutions; I try to be guided by the speech choices people make and reflect them back. 

M.

I really doubt that most black people are that particular. If they see that you are acting like a regular guy, a courteous human being, things are cool. I'm not going to be able to remember which coworkers like 'POC', which like 'African-American' or which like 'black' if I see them once every semester at a seminar. Whereas with others whom I know well, the subject doesn't really come up and if it does there's already trust in the relationship. The problem comes in when people are writing or holding seminars. As for deciding what any particular minority should be called, that minority is likely not sure among themselves what gives them the fairest deal. And I wouldn't blame them for that.

apropos of this too:

When did POC ask to be called by that name? 

[Caracal]

One African American friend refers to herself as "African American" in written work and group discussions; I take my cue from that when speaking and writing with, for, or about her.

Others might use other locutions; I try to be guided by the speech choices people make and reflect them back. 

M.

I really doubt that most black people are that particular. If they see that you are acting like a regular guy, a courteous human being, things are cool. I'm not going to be able to remember which coworkers like 'POC', which like 'African-American' or which like 'black' if I see them once every semester at a seminar. Whereas with others whom I know well, the subject doesn't really come up and if it does there's already trust in the relationship. The problem comes in when people are writing or holding seminars. As for deciding what any particular minority should be called, that minority is likely not sure among themselves what gives them the fairest deal. And I wouldn't blame them for that.

apropos of this too:

When did POC ask to be called by that name? 

Yes, exactly, because nobody really thinks that any of these terms are offensive. So much of this discussion seems to be based around the idea that you're going to be in trouble for using the wrong term, but it just isn't true. Minority is actually a weird term in various ways, so you can see why people have looked for an alternative, but people of color comes with problems too. But you can use either term and nobody is going to think you're being a racist just because they think a different term would be better. Ditto for black and African American. 

[Caracal]

People who look black are black. That part's easy.

For what it is worth, that isn't actually exactly true. There are, in fact, people who identify as black, who most people wouldn't classify that way if they saw them out of any context. Walter White, the longtime head of the NAACP is one of the more famous examples. http://blackhistorynow.com/walter-francis-white/

White grew up in a family that always identified as black within a black community, but he was able to interview white people about lynchings in Southern towns. Race isn't just about appearance.