ANONYMOUS Vol 11, Issue 9 I’m not white. This fact is surely noticed by most people upon meeting me, although I think it’s far from the most interesting thing about me, and not something that I constantly think about. Nonetheless, in instances of discrimination and racism, as well as more benign social exchanges that I’ve faced, it’s something that I’m instantly reminded of. Nothing like being asked the brilliant “Where are you from?” in a circle of otherwise only white people to make your day. Or, to be spoken of as a ‘person of colour’. I’m proud of my heritage. It’s of course not always a bad thing to be reminded of; for most of us, there are moments of intense perspective, meaning and value that can be drawn from thinking about our roots, and enjoyment, community and identity are experienced by engaging with it as well.
It’s also great that there has been an increased focus on diversity in social discourse; and in particular relevance to De Minimis readers, firms are starting to be more conscious of having a broader selection of backgrounds and racial mix in their candidates. Ideally, it shouldn’t have to be so conscious: but until there are no longer unconscious (or outright bigoted) biases that often cause people to prefer white candidates, this may have to suffice. At the same time, it’s disheartening to hear the phrase ‘person of colour’ (or worse yet, the more dehumanising ‘PoC’) used so frequently in not just social movements and campuses, but in professionalised contexts as well. When we use that phrase, what we do is entrench condescension and difference. I understand that what using the phrase ‘person of colour’ is intended to do is be well-meaning. It intends to recognise that there is substantive disadvantage and different experiences often faced by those of us who aren’t white. It recognises that non-whites are often marginalised, and allows us to have the realities of the perspective we are speaking from acknowledged. But here’s the thing; when you say ‘people of colour’ what you’re really meaning is ‘people who aren’t white’. So, if you’re saying ‘people of colour’ because the phrase you’d otherwise be saying might come across as racist, remember that you’re singling out people on the basis of their race or relative lack of whiteness. So, if you’re going to do that, if you’re going to make a point about the differences non-whites face, you either need to rethink what you’re about to say or just be transparent about what you’re doing rather than using a misguided term for supposed PC credibility. The most important thing to remember about the phrase ‘person of colour’ is that it’s really just a rephrasing of ‘coloured person’. This word was frequently used in a derogatory manner in pre-civil rights United States and is not acceptable in a 21st century context. Does re-arranging the words and adding an ‘of’ really make it any different? I don’t think so. I understand the idea that a word can change its meaning, can be reclaimed, and reused in a positive context. But, I would take issue with the rationale that that’s what has happened here: instead, it’s the reuse of a formerly racist term in the guise of progressiveness while really just treating the lack of whiteness as a paramount quality of non-whites. It should be considered about as acceptable as the ‘magical negro’ trope; those of us who aren’t white are imbued with some sort of crude ‘magical’, ‘colourful’, ‘soulful’, ‘spiritual’ quality that makes us differ from the norm and lets us be used as tokenistic caricatures. Lumping all of us who aren’t white into some abstract category of being ‘people of colour’ further reinforces whiteness as the norm, rather than challenging its status as the dominant hegemony. It strips away our hopes, fears, successes, failures, flaws, strengths, beauty and ugliness away from being the meaningful qualities that define us and instead decides that our ‘colour’ is what makes us special. I don’t want you to respect me as a ‘person of colour’. I want you to respect me as a person. This is the work of a JD student The rest of this issue
Political Oncologist
1/5/2017 09:54:35 pm
It's a symptom of the cancer of the millenial left whose raison d'être today is identity politics, to the exclusion of practically everything else. Self styled progressives have become obsessed with pigeonholing people into neat and tidy boxes which they can then use as a basis for making decisions on everything from which things you can express an opinion on, to which jobs you are qualified for. Are you a strong independent woman of colour or a heterosexual cis white male? The answer you give, far from being inconsequential, is to today's "progressives" probably the most fundamental aspect of your character.
A Non White Writer
2/5/2017 08:42:40 pm
Thanks for your comment - I'm the writer of the article. Ultimately, I do consider myself part of the modern left and I do think there are many good things about it that are probably beyond the scope of this article or comments section.
Anon
3/5/2017 12:49:06 am
Bravo to you both. Too often the comments section od de minimis descends into ad hominem insults, whereas you have both provided reasoned, polite and constructive discussion.
Woman of Colour
3/5/2017 03:06:17 pm
Completely agree with this comment. Would love to be known for more than just my skin colour, would love to exist for more than just advocacy by virtue of my skin colour
Not buying
2/5/2017 08:17:57 pm
I personally dislike the word, but for reasons entirely different from the author's.
Not buying
2/5/2017 08:23:17 pm
To clarify. What I mean by the first section is that just because a phrase is often used in wrong contexts does not mean it should not be used in contexts where it clearly serves the intended purpose. And just because some people misuse it does not mean the phrase should be abandoned -- maybe people should just stop misusing it?
A Non White Writer
2/5/2017 08:49:29 pm
Thanks for your comment. Yes - ultimately I do think we should eventually be somewhat "colourblind" to race and make far less of a big deal out of it. In a globalised world holding on too steadfastly to culture and identities that existed before nations and people's were so intermixed is incredibly closed-minded and backwards looking.
A Non White Writer
2/5/2017 09:18:44 pm
Also, you brought up also disliking the term (for reasons differently to mine). Out of curiousity, what are they?
Name
2/5/2017 10:27:32 pm
You can't have it both ways.
Noname
2/5/2017 11:13:10 pm
Once upon a time there was the idea of being colourblind, which although it often or even usually might not have reflected reality, was something for our society to aspire to.
If a racist tree falls in the woods and there are no minorities around to be offended, did it make a racist sound?
3/5/2017 05:35:57 pm
There was once another solution to this conundrum. It was colloquially called the 'white Australia policy' and was originally designed specifically to ward off the threat of a society riven by sectarian ethnic/racial divisions.
Alternative names
2/5/2017 10:44:34 pm
What about "off white"?
Ho Wen
2/5/2017 11:37:03 pm
As someone who moved here last year, I find it more frustrating when people just assume I've lived here all my life, or at least did undergrad here.
Micro aggressor
3/5/2017 02:40:09 am
I've never felt there is anything wrong with asking about a person's background, provided it is done tactfully as with all things, and notwithstanding the righteous crusade du Comments are closed.
|
Archives
October 2022
|