I asked my half black brother in law to explain to me the difference between “people of color” and “colored people” and why one is offensive. Because to me “people of color” is just a clunkier way of saying the same thing. He didn’t have an answer, he just said “it’s not up to you to decide what is and isn’t offensive.”
Did he also ever happen to say "it is not my responsibility to educate you?" That's the other popular response given when leftists talking about race and oppression don't have an answer, in a desperate attempt to make it sound like there is actually an answer.
At work I was talking to a facility manager who also happened to be my manager's girlfriend, & she wanted to know who authorized me to perform the work I was doing. I couldn't remember the guy's name so I told her he was the director upstairs. She asked "which one?" I said "he's a tall black guy." When I got back to my office, my manager called me in & reamed me out for calling the director a racist name! I wasn't going to put up with that & told him right to his face "Black is not a racial epithet. There's nothing wrong with saying someone's Black. He's a Black guy. That's all there is to this." Man that pissed me off.
It puts “people” first. It doesn’t define the way “colored people” does - it makes it a trait of the person, not the person.
Hope this helps.
It’s a semantic gymnastics game, apparently describing people in a way one would in straight word for word translations from Romance languages is nicer than the good old way we do in Germanic languages.
But then why wouldn’t you say “a person of gayness” instead of a gay person. Or a person of whiteness instead of white person. Feels like wokeness, not semantics.
I asked my half black brother in law to explain to me the difference between “people of color” and “colored people” and why one is offensive. Because to me “people of color” is just a clunkier way of saying the same thing. He didn’t have an answer, he just said “it’s not up to you to decide what is and isn’t offensive.”
Did he also ever happen to say "it is not my responsibility to educate you?" That's the other popular response given when leftists talking about race and oppression don't have an answer, in a desperate attempt to make it sound like there is actually an answer.
For a half brother to preech to you racist mind games, that'd be a red flag for me.
“it’s not up to you to decide what is and isn’t offensive.” That is some pompous, sniffing your own ass level if ya ask me.
At work I was talking to a facility manager who also happened to be my manager's girlfriend, & she wanted to know who authorized me to perform the work I was doing. I couldn't remember the guy's name so I told her he was the director upstairs. She asked "which one?" I said "he's a tall black guy." When I got back to my office, my manager called me in & reamed me out for calling the director a racist name! I wasn't going to put up with that & told him right to his face "Black is not a racial epithet. There's nothing wrong with saying someone's Black. He's a Black guy. That's all there is to this." Man that pissed me off.
Good for you for being brave in that situation. God, I hate living in a Leftist state ...
It puts “people” first. It doesn’t define the way “colored people” does - it makes it a trait of the person, not the person.
Hope this helps.
It’s a semantic gymnastics game, apparently describing people in a way one would in straight word for word translations from Romance languages is nicer than the good old way we do in Germanic languages.
But then why wouldn’t you say “a person of gayness” instead of a gay person. Or a person of whiteness instead of white person. Feels like wokeness, not semantics.
Big gay decided it, not me
Citizens of Lesbos
Ya I understand the “logic”. I just think it is retarded and obnoxious.
Yep it emphasizes group identity above the individual.
The universe is saved with reordering of terms!
I just call them crayons now
It's a wimpy PC term.
Did you tell him it's not up to him whether or not you deport him?