Racism questions

[Scarlett]

Why is it offensive to say a colored person but not offensive to say 'people of color'? 

Is it offensive to talk about people we share core values with as 'our tribe'?

 

[MercyA]

nm, better in a separate thread! 🙂 

Edited March 10, 2021 by MercyA

[Scarlett]

6 minutes ago, MercyA said:

nm, better in a separate thread! 🙂 

I missed it but you know all rabbit trails are welcome in my thread.....

[MercyA]

45 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Why is it offensive to say a colored person but not offensive to say 'people of color'?

I'll take a stab at the first one. Doesn't saying "colored person" imply that white is the "default"? Like, if you had a white piece of paper and colored it?

People of color is more just descriptive, I think. They have more color in their skin than a white person.

[MercyA]

3 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I missed it but you know all rabbit trails are welcome in my thread.....

Started a new thread, but thank you!! 

[Scarlett]

Just now, MercyA said:

I'll take a stab at the first one. Doesn't saying "colored person" imply that white is the "default"? Like, if you had a white piece of paper and colored it?

People of color is more just descriptive, I think. They have more color in their skin than a white person.

Hmmm.  Ok.  A  politician here in OK got in to trouble for saying colored children.

[MercyA]

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

Hmmm.  Ok.  A  politician here in OK got in to trouble for saying colored children.

Seems like he should have known better. 😬

I'm pretty sure my grandma used to use that phrase. She grew up using it and I honestly don't think it ever occurred to her that it was racist. She was anti-racist in other ways. My mom remembers her criticizing how women in Florida treated their black housekeepers. And she didn't have any problem with my mom going to a dance with a black young man in the 60's. 

But, when you know better, you do better....

[Kassia]

5 minutes ago, MercyA said:

 

I'm pretty sure my grandma used to use that phrase. She grew up using it and I honestly don't think it ever occurred to her that it was racist.

My MIL uses it.  We were all a little taken aback when we heard her say it and, like your grandma, she didn't think anything of it because that's what was used when she was younger.  I do think she's racist, but that's not why she used that phrase at the time.  

 

[Danae]

It has to do with the history of how the terms have been used, not the terms themselves.  So you're not going to find a logical explanation based on the grammar of the words.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Phrases change over time.  The correct term used to be colored person (as in preferred by the people it applied to).  I think of the song "Runnin'" by Pharrell Williams where he makes the point that the preferred term at the time was "colored".  But that is no longer the preferred term mainly because that term too became loaded with baggage like "colored only" counters and seats etc. 

[Melissa in Australia]

Why call them anything.? 

Isn't calling people anything with their appearance racial profiling?

 

[Garga]

35 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

Phrases change over time.  The correct term used to be colored person (as in preferred by the people it applied to).  I think of the song "Runnin'" by Pharrell Williams where he makes the point that the preferred term at the time was "colored".  But that is no longer the preferred term mainly because that term too became loaded with baggage like "colored only" counters and seats etc. 

This. It’s not the grammar. The phrase “colored people” started getting a more and more negative connotation and people got sick of being called something with negative connotations. New words came into use that didn’t carry the negative connotation. 

Using that phrase is something someone either utterly clueless or racist would do, because the phrase still carries the negative connotation. 

 

[Roadrunner]

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why call them anything.? 

Isn't calling people anything with their appearance racial profiling?

 

Right. 

To the OP. I was just thinking under what circumstances would you use that? I could see calling a particular group. For example, “incomes of Asian Americans as opposed to Hispanic Americans appear to bla bla bla .....”

When do we group colored as opposed to white? As in who belongs in the colored group? Or is this in reference to African Americans only? 
Just curious. 

[Tanaqui]

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why call them anything.? 

Isn't calling people anything with their appearance racial profiling?

No, and honestly, the people who put forth that argument are talking in bad faith. If you think there's a serious opinion there, you've been taken in.

Race is not a scientific concept, but it is one of the most important social concepts of our world. Race affects... everything. It affects everything. There are people in this world who would like to ignore that, who would like to pretend that race does not affect your odds of having a good life, of having your children do well. Those people are happy to co-opt the language of anti-racism activists for their own purposes, and one of them is trying to slide in this idea that talking about structural inequalities is actually racist because that means talking about race.

And in order to convince people of that idea, they start by repeating, ad nauseum, that race isn't real, that talking about race is racism, that there's no non-racist way to bring up race. This is all a lie.

[Tanaqui]

22 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Right. 

To the OP. I was just thinking under what circumstances would you use that? I could see calling a particular group. For example, “incomes of Asian Americans as opposed to Hispanic Americans appear to bla bla bla .....”

When do we group colored as opposed to white? As in who belongs in the colored group? Or is this in reference to African Americans only? 
Just curious. 

It's used when talking about the shared experience of PoC in societies which are majority-white, as a way of not referring to "whites and non-whites", which increasingly appears to "other" the experience of people who aren't white.

It's also used when referring to people who aren't white as a group, again, in contrast to white people.

[Tanaqui]

3 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Why is it offensive to say a colored person but not offensive to say 'people of color'? 

 

Because language is arbitrary.  Sorry, you're just not going to get a better answer than that, ever.

[lauraw4321]

I thought it was tied a bit to people first language movement. People are people first. Some other people are people of color. Or people with disabilities (rather than disabled people). Or people who use wheelchairs (rather than wheelchair bound people). Using “people” serves to remind us that the key point is that people are people. 

[City Mouse]

I would think that the problem with the term “colored person” is that that was the standard “polite” term used for many, many years during segregation, so it has negative connotations. 

[wathe]

BIPOC seems to be label of choice in my part of the world these days.  Though I heard on an interesting race podcast that "Racialized Person/People" is a better term.  Because that makes it clear that race is a social construct, and that racialization is something that is done to people (active/social), rather than something that people are (passive/biological).  Less othering.  (A bit like the language shift toward saying 'enslaved people' rather than 'slaves' -  something that is done to people; not what people are)

[Melissa in Australia]

46 minutes ago, Tanaqui said:

No, and honestly, the people who put forth that argument are talking in bad faith. If you think there's a serious opinion there, you've been taken in.

Race is not a scientific concept, but it is one of the most important social concepts of our world. Race affects... everything. It affects everything. There are people in this world who would like to ignore that, who would like to pretend that race does not affect your odds of having a good life, of having your children do well. Those people are happy to co-opt the language of anti-racism activists for their own purposes, and one of them is trying to slide in this idea that talking about structural inequalities is actually racist because that means talking about race.

And in order to convince people of that idea, they start by repeating, ad nauseum, that race isn't real, that talking about race is racism, that there's no non-racist way to bring up race. This is all a lie.

Sorry if I upset you. 

I have never called someone black. Nor do I know anyone who does. Except some now decease inlaws in Canada. In my area of Australia Aboriginals are called Aboriginals,  Sudanese are called Sudanese, Italians are called Italians, Chinese are  called of Chinese descent. 

To call someone the colour of their skin is frowned at. It would be like calling Chinese yellow skins or slant eyes. 

The only time I could imagine calli g someone the colour of their skin would be if there was a police report for a wanted dangerous person and they were giving a description. 

[Scarlett]

3 hours ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why call them anything.? 

Isn't calling people anything with their appearance racial profiling?

 

I don’t need to call ‘them’ anything.  But it does come up.  For instance when the politician wanted to talk about the percentage of people who received abortions....it was relevant to the conversation the number of black people who seek abortions.  I literally saw him stumble for the right word...to me it seemed like he almost said black and then chose colored, which was apparently wrong.  

I was raised non racist in a very racist world.  The heart of what my mother taught me was good.  God doesn’t care what the color of your skin is.......I feel that in my heart, I believe it.  I know I am not a racist.  Yet I struggle with word usage.  When my son was 6 in 2006 I got beat up verbally by a black woman because I used the word brown to describe her child. 
 

Now I hear brown and black people and people of color used all of the time.  Yet saying colored child is wrong. It is very confusing.  

[Scarlett]

49 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Sorry if I upset you. 

I have never called someone black. Nor do I know anyone who does. Except some now decease inlaws in Canada. In my area of Australia Aboriginals are called Aboriginals,  Sudanese are called Sudanese, Italians are called Italians, Chinese are  called of Chinese descent. 

To call someone the colour of their skin is frowned at. It would be like calling Chinese yellow skins or slant eyes. 

The only time I could imagine calli g someone the colour of their skin would be if there was a police report for a wanted dangerous person and they were giving a description. 

That is absolutely bizarre to me that you would never describe someone by the color their skin. Do you also never use hair color or any other physical description to discuss someone?

[Excelsior! Academy]

3 hours ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why call them anything.? 

Isn't calling people anything with their appearance racial profiling?

 

I disagree.  When describing someone you might say red curly hair and green eyes or brown eyes, hair and skin.  Why would that be wrong?

53 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Sorry if I upset you. 

I have never called someone black. Nor do I know anyone who does. Except some now decease inlaws in Canada. In my area of Australia Aboriginals are called Aboriginals,  Sudanese are called Sudanese, Italians are called Italians, Chinese are  called of Chinese descent. 

To call someone the colour of their skin is frowned at. It would be like calling Chinese yellow skins or slant eyes. 

The only time I could imagine calli g someone the colour of their skin would be if there was a police report for a wanted dangerous person and they were giving a description. 

My son prefers to be called black, so that is the term we use.  

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

That is absolutely bizarre to me that you would never describe someone by the color their skin. Do you also never use hair color or any other physical description to discuss someone?

Agree! 

[wathe]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

BIPOC seems to be label of choice in my part of the world these days.  Though I heard on an interesting race podcast that "Racialized Person/People" is a better term.  Because that makes it clear that race is a social construct, and that racialization is something that is done to people (active/social), rather than something that people are (passive/biological).  Less othering.  (A bit like the language shift toward saying 'enslaved people' rather than 'slaves' -  something that is done to people; not what people are)

Quoting myself to clarify that the above is for when a term is needed to describe racialized people (meaning all people who aren't white) as an aggregate.

If we are talking about how to refer to Black people, meaning racialized people with Sub-Saharan African ancestry, then here the preferred term is Black. Capitalized.  That's what's used on the national news and government websites etc.

Edited March 11, 2021 by wathe

[wathe]

57 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Sorry if I upset you. 

I have never called someone black. Nor do I know anyone who does. Except some now decease inlaws in Canada. In my area of Australia Aboriginals are called Aboriginals,  Sudanese are called Sudanese, Italians are called Italians, Chinese are  called of Chinese descent. 

To call someone the colour of their skin is frowned at. It would be like calling Chinese yellow skins or slant eyes. 

The only time I could imagine calli g someone the colour of their skin would be if there was a police report for a wanted dangerous person and they were giving a description. 

Interesting.  Canada has shifted away from Aboriginal.  The preferred current term here is Indigenous.  This is a relatively recent shift - within the past 10 years (or maybe a little less)*. 

*Less.  The shift started in 2015

[Scarlett]

And no one commented on the ‘tribe’ comment.  A new found cousin is posting that is wrong to say. Is it?  

[Jean in Newcastle]

5 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

And no one commented on the ‘tribe’ comment.  A new found cousin is posting that is wrong to say. Is it?  

I don't feel qualified to give an opinion.  I did a google search and apparently actual Native Americans prefer to call themselves "nations" instead of tribes.  But I feel like your example is more of a broader anthropological term where you are talking about groups of people. 

[klmama]

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

And no one commented on the ‘tribe’ comment.  A new found cousin is posting that is wrong to say. Is it?  

A relative by marriage says she is "First Nations" instead of "Indian" or "Native American."  She doesn't use "tribe," but does say "band" when she's giving the name of the specific group.  She is from the Great Lakes region, but I don't know if she speaks for her entire band or if what her band prefers is what native people from other parts of the country prefer.  

[wathe]

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Sorry if I upset you. 

I have never called someone black. Nor do I know anyone who does. Except some now decease inlaws in Canada. In my area of Australia Aboriginals are called Aboriginals,  Sudanese are called Sudanese, Italians are called Italians, Chinese are  called of Chinese descent. 

To call someone the colour of their skin is frowned at. It would be like calling Chinese yellow skins or slant eyes. 

The only time I could imagine calli g someone the colour of their skin would be if there was a police report for a wanted dangerous person and they were giving a description. 

Another thought: County-of-origin designations work well for ethnicity and cultural groups rather than race, I think.

Some American racialized groups don't have a known country-of-origin, or have very mixed ancestry - they may have been here hundreds of years, +/- were brought by force and the details of their individual histories have been lost.  Country-of-origin history is lost and maybe even not relevant.  But we still need words to use when we refer to these racialized groups - hence terms like Black (in Canada)

[Roadrunner]

2 hours ago, Tanaqui said:

It's used when talking about the shared experience of PoC in societies which are majority-white, as a way of not referring to "whites and non-whites", which increasingly appears to "other" the experience of people who aren't white.

It's also used when referring to people who aren't white as a group, again, in contrast to white people.

I guess I ask because dividing by white and non white almost implies there are two groups. Well, there is no such thing as a non white group, really. What does it mean “an experience of people who aren’t white?” You mean in the United States? I can’t even imagine defining that group much less coming up with a shared experience. My friend (a Portuguese) was told she wasn’t white but olive skinned by our mutual friend (a British lady). My Portuguese friend almost fell off a chair. It never occurred to her that she was viewed as a non white. And her experience isn’t going to be anything like an experience of a Somali immigrant (for example), or an Indian immigrant. I mean there is no Jon white experience that’s shared, I think. 

[Roadrunner]

1 minute ago, Thatboyofmine said:

I’m more confused than ever now.  Not about the ‘colored people’ terminology.  That’s just a loaded term and makes my skin crawl.  But everything else in the thread I’m just confused about.
 I just say black, white, Hispanic, native American, Asian, etc.   is that wrong? 

That’s what I say as well. It’s more clear that way, I think. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

1 minute ago, Thatboyofmine said:

I’m more confused than ever now.  Not about the ‘colored people’ terminology.  That’s just a loaded term and makes my skin crawl.  But everything else in the thread I’m just confused about.
 I just say black, white, Hispanic, native American, Asian, etc.   is that wrong? 

I don't think that is wrong in the US.  But different countries have different terminology.  And terminology is changing.  But for identification purposes (like census data etc. your designations are still current.) 

[wathe]

1 minute ago, Thatboyofmine said:

I’m more confused than ever now.  Not about the ‘colored people’ terminology.  That’s just a loaded term and makes my skin crawl.  But everything else in the thread I’m just confused about.
 I just say black, white, Hispanic, native American, Asian, etc.   is that wrong? 

Not wrong.  But what's current will be different depending where you live.  In Canada, Indigenous instead of Native American, and Black with a capital B.

But, there is also sometimes a need for an aggregate term to refer to all people who aren't white.  Especially when discussing issues that touch on white privilege, white supremacy, and whiteness.  The shared experience = not benefiting from white privilege, and being oppressed by white supremacy.

6 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

I guess I ask because dividing by white and non white almost implies there are two groups. Well, there is no such thing as a non white group, really. What does it mean “an experience of people who aren’t white?” You mean in the United States? I can’t even imagine defining that group much less coming up with a shared experience. My friend (a Portuguese) was told she wasn’t white but olive skinned by our mutual friend (a British lady). My Portuguese friend almost fell off a chair. It never occurred to her that she was viewed as a non white. And her experience isn’t going to be anything like an experience of a Somali immigrant (for example), or an Indian immigrant. I mean there is no Jon white experience that’s shared, I think. 

 

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, wathe said:

Not wrong.  But what's current will be different depending where you live.  In Canada, Indigenous instead of Native American, and Black with a capital B.

But, there is also sometimes a need for an aggregate term to refer to all people who aren't white.  Especially when discussing issues that touch on white privilege, white supremacy, and whiteness.  The shared experience = not benefiting from white privilege, and being oppressed by white supremacy.

 

That’s where we diverge. 

[wathe]

16 minutes ago, klmama said:

A relative by marriage says she is "First Nations" instead of "Indian" or "Native American."  She doesn't use "tribe," but does say "band" when she's giving the name of the specific group.  She is from the Great Lakes region, but I don't know if she speaks for her entire band or if what her band prefers is what native people from other parts of the country prefer.  

Here, First Nations is a specific sub-set of Canadian Indigenous peoples (Indigenous peoples comprise three distinct and legally separate groups: First Nations, Metis, and Inuit).  I wonder in Native American is a similarly broad term?

We also tend to use the terms Nations and Bands, rather than tribes, when referring to First Nations groups..

[Scarlett]

13 minutes ago, Thatboyofmine said:

I’m more confused than ever now.  Not about the ‘colored people’ terminology.  That’s just a loaded term and makes my skin crawl.  But everything else in the thread I’m just confused about.
 I just say black, white, Hispanic, native American, Asian, etc.   is that wrong? 

‘Colored people’ Makes your skin crawl?  Interesting. To me it is just a description.  I don’t hear ‘ subhuman’ when someone says colored...... I think this is all about intent at any given point in history.  

[Katy]

I know there are some Native American tribes in Oklahoma who use the word Tribe themselves.  And another that doesn't seem to.  So maybe best practice is to refer to the groups the way they want to be referred to? 

[Scarlett]

8 minutes ago, Katy said:

I know there are some Native American tribes in Oklahoma who use the word Tribe themselves.  And another that doesn't seem to.  So maybe best practice is to refer to the groups the way they want to be referred to? 

Sure. As always.  I guess I just wonder if it bothers the average native. 

[Lady Florida.]

I think the tribe question is tricky. I have several Jewish friends who refer to each other as being members of their tribe, as in the 12 tribes of Israel. My mind doesn't automatically go to Native Americans when I hear or say the word but that might be my privilege causing me to not look at the word more deeply.

Personally I think of my tribe as people who are like me in different ways. I have a political tribe of people who share my political beliefs a reading tribe with people who like the same kinds of books I like, etc. However, I'd be interested to know if it's considered offensive. If it is I have no problem dropping it from the casual way I currently use the term. 

[Farrar]

Are these genuine questions or just ways to try and stir the pot? Like, is there actually a confusion that there's a historical basis for "colored" people that is rooted in a time of great racism but that "people of color" is a phrase that was invented and is pretty widely embraced by many non-white peoples? 

And am I actually seeing serious arguments for colorblindness here or is this just more stirring the pot? Like, seriously, I don't know at this point. Do people really not understand that naming skin color - something infants can see and react to - is not racist. Naming race is not racism.

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Farrar said:

Are these genuine questions or just ways to try and stir the pot? Like, is there actually a confusion that there's a historical basis for "colored" people that is rooted in a time of great racism but that "people of color" is a phrase that was invented and is pretty widely embraced by many non-white peoples? 

And am I actually seeing serious arguments for colorblindness here or is this just more stirring the pot? Like, seriously, I don't know at this point. Do people really not understand that naming skin color - something infants can see and react to - is not racist. Naming race is not racism.

If you are asking if I am trying to stir the pot, I can assure you I am not.  I, as a white woman, have used the term tribe to refer to ‘ my people’,  I have no idea why that would be offensive to native Americans who had actual tribes at some point which I assume pointed to and referred to their people.  
 I see crap on FB from people I am related to and I have no idea if they are enlightened or insane.   

[Excelsior! Academy]

55 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

And no one commented on the ‘tribe’ comment.  A new found cousin is posting that is wrong to say. Is it?  

I'll bite.  As a member of the Osage nation and married to a Cherokee neither of us are bothered by the term tribe.

19 minutes ago, Katy said:

I know there are some Native American tribes in Oklahoma who use the word Tribe themselves.  And another that doesn't seem to.  So maybe best practice is to refer to the groups the way they want to be referred to? 

Yep.  Native Oklahoman here in both senses of the word.  Native American, Indian and tribe are okay with me.  Dh strongly dislikes the term indigenous peoples and would much prefer to be called Indian or Native American.

[HS Mom in NC]

I live in an area with a high percentage of black people in the US.  They refer to themselves as black. African-American doesn't really work well because it leaves out other black groups like blacks from the Caribbean.

"Colored" has negative connotations related to segregation, Jim Crow, lynchings, white supremacist views, etc.   We wanted to climb under the table out of embarrassment when my husband's granny, white woman born and raised in rural Mississippi in the early 1900s, used that term to refer to the wait staff (who weren't present when she used it, thank God!.)

I'm from PHX and there's a divide between the terms Latino/a/x and Hispanic.  When I went to high school, about 40% of the students fell into that category and most referred to themselves as Hispanic. I think I hear Latino more now, and I do know a significant percentage don't like the gender neutral Latinx. They also identify as Mexican, Guatemalan, Puerto Rican, and such.

I use white and Caucasian interchangeably and it often comes up in the context of my family because of the 5 of us, one is Asian and the rest of us are Caucasian or white. Interestingly, we adopted her from S. Korea, and on her official Korean paperwork, her race is listed as Korean, not Asian.  Not every culture categorizes race the same way.

My sons-in-law are mixed with one being half Mexican and half Irish ancestry and other being 3/4 white and qualifying as Native American/First Nation (NA/FN) with the US government because of the other 1/4.  He looks white with light skin and dark brown eyes and dark brown hair. He doesn't identify as NA/FN.  I'll have to ask him if he identifies as such on Census and other paperwork that allow for multiple answers.  I know he didn't for college; if he had he could've gone for free or almost free, but didn't out of respect to his granny's tribe (Hopi.) Many people with NA/FN ancestry use the term "descendant" instead of identifying as a tribal member, usually when they're less than half and weren't raised in the culture. 

We have quite a few Asian immigrant friends.  They all refer to themselves as Asian and their country of origin interchangeably like Indian, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, etc.  

[mommyoffive]

I think this depends on where you are from.  Interesting to hear how it is in different countries. 

Colored person is always going to feel really bad for me because of history.  This is not something I feel like should be used in this day and age. 

I personally don't like person of color really either.  That one isn't offensive  to me because of history, but it just makes me feel like there are 2 groups of people.  And aren't we all people of color?  

Personally I don't like black or white either.  I prefer Caucasian and African American.  I don't honestly like to label people at all.   Most likely because of my life experience of people trying to label me something and saying lots of hurtful things to me over my life about my race or background.   I am a mixed raced person for what it is worth.  I just think it is so hard to label someone, because there are a lot of people who don't fit into one basket. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by mommyoffive

[Farrar]

5 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

If you are asking if I am trying to stir the pot, I can assure you I am not.  I, as a white woman, have used the term tribe to refer to ‘ my people’,  I have no idea why that would be offensive to native Americans who had actual tribes at some point which I assume pointed to and referred to their people.  
 I see crap on FB from people I am related to and I have no idea if they are enlightened or insane.   

Well, the thing about the usage of "tribe" is pretty newly put forth. That feels to me like a pretty recent thing. I can easily imagine not having heard that. I find it hard to believe that most people who have any sense of awareness of the world are actually confused by the difference in history and connotation between "colored" and "people of color" at this point. 

I think some people aren't going to be offended by tribe. It's a word with a long informal usage that is pretty wide ranging and has been in use for a really long time. Plus, the intention is rarely to offend. But others are going to be offended. It's a word that is loaded and often used to be dismissive and belittling of cultures and to classify some cultures as being worthy - as in "nations" and "ethnic groups" - and others as being unworthy - "tribes" - and especially "tribal differences" within countries. When middle class folks refer to their friends as "my tribe" there's a sense of dismissiveness for sure of the idea of "tribe" as a serious cultural designation.

In cases like this, I usually ask myself if it's worth it to me to know that I might be offending some - even if others won't care. And if the fact that those I'd be offending would likely be people who have been wronged in some serious long term ways should give their voices more weight, even if I don't fully "get it." Also, I ask myself if it's actually a big deal to stop using a word or two and why it's so upsetting that anyone ask that of me when they're saying the word offends them.

[HS Mom in NC]

17 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Sure. As always.  I guess I just wonder if it bothers the average native. 

There isn't really an average native.  They're a huge array of different people groups with distinctly different cultures from each other and different ideas about all of these related issues.

I met a woman who referred to herself professionally as Mrs. Squaw. She was a Shoshone (the real deal, not some lady in a costume)  who sold her NA jewelry at The Vegas Shoot international archery competition every year during the trade show of archery equipment.  Tourists from all over the world buy decorative NA bow and arrow replicas there and she does a good business selling to jewelry to them.   I would sooner chew off my pinky finger than refer to a NA woman as squaw, but she was comfortable with it. I'm not one of the white people who tells members of racial minority groups what terms they should or shouldn't use, I just bought beautiful dragonfly and bird earrings from her. 

[Scarlett]

2 minutes ago, Farrar said:

Well, the thing about the usage of "tribe" is pretty newly put forth. That feels to me like a pretty recent thing. I can easily imagine not having heard that. I find it hard to believe that most people who have any sense of awareness of the world are actually confused by the difference in history and connotation between "colored" and "people of color" at this point. 

I think some people aren't going to be offended by tribe. It's a word with a long informal usage that is pretty wide ranging and has been in use for a really long time. Plus, the intention is rarely to offend. But others are going to be offended. It's a word that is loaded and often used to be dismissive and belittling of cultures and to classify some cultures as being worthy - as in "nations" and "ethnic groups" - and others as being unworthy - "tribes" - and especially "tribal differences" within countries. When middle class folks refer to their friends as "my tribe" there's a sense of dismissiveness for sure of the idea of "tribe" as a serious cultural designation.

In cases like this, I usually ask myself if it's worth it to me to know that I might be offending some - even if others won't care. And if the fact that those I'd be offending would likely be people who have been wronged in some serious long term ways should give their voices more weight, even if I don't fully "get it." Also, I ask myself if it's actually a big deal to stop using a word or two and why it's so upsetting that anyone ask that of me when they're saying the word offends them.

I can assure you, again, that I am expressing genuine confusion about people of color vs colored people.  It is literally the same description.   Is it a big deal to stop  using the expression? Of course not.  If I actually can understand the difference enough to remember it.  But I very much identify with the poor politician ( and trust me I have no concept of who is is or who he stands for) who stumbled over saying black vs colored and chose colored and got crucified for it.  

[Scarlett]

5 minutes ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

There isn't really an average native.  They're a huge array of different people groups with distinctly different cultures from each other and different ideas about all of these related issues.

I met a woman who referred to herself professionally as Mrs. Squaw. She was a Shoshone (the real deal, not some lady in a costume)  who sold her NA jewelry at The Vegas Shoot international archery competition every year during the trade show of archery equipment.  Tourists from all over the world buy decorative NA bow and arrow replicas there and she does a good business selling to jewelry to them.   I would sooner chew off my pinky finger than refer to a NA woman as squaw, but she was comfortable with it. I'm not one of the white people who tells members of racial minority groups what terms they should or shouldn't use, I just bought beautiful dragonfly and bird earrings from her. 

Right.  And so my new found cousin who lives in NJ should I listen to her FB rants about the wickedNess of this family?

[MommytoFour]

"Colored" is an offensive term because it was used in history to separate Black people. ("Colored" signs on water fountains,  "Colored-only" bathrooms, etc. or used in even more offensive ways.) "People of color" is a current phrase used to describe a group of people who aren't white. I don't generally use that phrase though.

I'm a white mom with two Black kids (and two Hispanic kids). My kids sometimes refer to themselves as Black and sometimes as African American. They are both 11 and not really concerned with the terminology.

As for "tribe," I've never heard anyone say that they were offended by that word. However, I don't use it personally. Not because I think someone might be offended, but probably because I don't have a tribe of friends 😄

[wathe]

11 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I can assure you, again, that I am expressing genuine confusion about people of color vs colored people.  It is literally the same description.   Is it a big deal to stop  using the expression? Of course not.  If I actually can understand the difference enough to remember it.  But I very much identify with the poor politician ( and trust me I have no concept of who is is or who he stands for) who stumbled over saying black vs colored and chose colored and got crucified for it.  

I think your answer is that they mean different things:

Colored people =  historical term associated with segregation and Jim Crow.   Anachronistic synonym for Black (or African American).  Loaded and offensive term

People of Colour = modern term used to refer to racialized people (people who aren't racially white), as an aggregrate.  Not a synonym for Black - encompasses all racialized groups.  Modern inclusive term.