Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz. referred to Black people as "colored people" Thursday in floor debate over his proposed amendment to an annual defense policy bill, prompting a stern rebuke from the former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. Lawmakers were debating a series of GOP-backed amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act, which the House aims to pass by the end of the week.
    • Nougat@kbin.social
      332·
      1 year ago

      Context matters. The phrase “colored people” in the US refers only to African Americans, and comes from a time when regular things in the world were labeled “white only” and “colored.”

      “People of color” in the US refers to all people who aren’t white, and further prioritizes “people” over race.

      Most importantly, we call people what they want to be called. It’s not unreasonable for black people in America to not want to be referred to as “colored people,” and everyone knows it. Continuing to use that language, with full knowledge that it’s received as offensive by the people you’re using it to describe, is being racist on purpose.

      The outrage is not about specific words, it’s about people being racist on purpose, and that’s not manufactured.

    • chaogomu@kbin.social
      202·
      1 year ago

      It’s attitude and intent.

      “People of color” is often used in the context of opening doors. “Colored people” is used in the context of slamming them shut.

      You bet your ass that this republican fuck is racist as hell. His proposed amendment is the newest in the long line of “let’s make it illegal to acknowledge the actual effects of racism in society” that racists are pushing these days.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      184·
      1 year ago

      Colored people puts their color first before their humanity and has hiatorically been used by racists doing racist things. People of color acknowledges that they are people first, and is a reaction to systemic discrimination. That is why white person isn’t a big deal, since we don’t have a history of oppression.

      It is semantics, but there are reasons behind they similar sounding stuff is seen in very different ways.

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        142·
        1 year ago

        More importantly, there actually is proper data showing that this kind of thing can actually make a meaningful difference, and surely we’re all evidence-driven people here, right?

        A 2008 experiment researched teenagers’ perception of epilepsy with respect to people-first language. Teenagers from a summer camp were divided into two groups. One group was asked questions using the term “people with epilepsy”, and the other group was asked using the term “epileptics”, with questions including “Do you think that people with epilepsy/epileptics have more difficulties at school?” and “Do you have prejudice toward people with epilepsy/epileptics?” The study showed that the teenagers had higher “stigma perception” on the Stigma Scale of Epilepsy when hearing the phrase “epileptics” as opposed to “people with epilepsy”.

        https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2008.01899.x

        Not an exact parallel, but the point stands that these kinds of language patters can genuinely influence perception.

      • echo@sopuli.xyz
        12·
        1 year ago

        That’s just how adjectives work in English. Would the equivalent be fine in French since “people” comes before “colored”? I’m pretty sure the actual reason “people of color” is preferred is that it signals that you’re trying not to be racist, not because of some inherent property of the word order.

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          31·
          1 year ago

          If you ignore the history of slavery and discrimination then the order doesn’t matter.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          102·
          1 year ago

          This wasn’t bungling it.

          There’s a clear connotation in the US between the phrase “Colored People” and Jim Crowe laws. It’s not a phrase you use by accident or by messing up the correct term. This was a conscious decision to use racist language, and if it wasn’t conscious it’s because he refers to PoC that way or worse in private, which is the definition of racism.

            • BURN@lemmy.world
              2·
              1 year ago

              If you can’t tell the difference you’re being willfully ignorant. “Colored” is the problem in the phrase, as it has historically only been used in racist ways.

              Anyone, especially anyone in government should at least be aware of the historic context of “Colored People” as a phrase and know better.

              He 100% used it intentionally. The Republican Party has a history of racist language when referring to People of Color, including members of their own party. “He’s one of the good ones” is a standout moment from the house speaker elections.

              It’s not wrong to want our government officials to not use racist language when describing their constituents.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      141·
      1 year ago

      I’m going to take a wild and crazy guess that you never cared very much to begin with.

      To throw another example, there’s no real difference in meaning between ‘gay’ and ‘homo’, but if a conservative Christian calls me a homo, I’m going to be a lot more skeptical of their intentions than if one of my gay friends calls me gay.

    • Eleazar@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      52·
      1 year ago

      Lemmy seems to consist mostly of white, male tankies that only care about skin color when it benefits their political ideology. Blaxploitation is an effective tool and they cherish it deeply.