03-08-2019, 04:27 PM
(03-08-2019, 03:13 PM)Sunshine Wrote:(03-08-2019, 01:33 PM)baggy1 Wrote: And here is my worry - people are feeling outraged / discriminated against by a descriptive word that if used in a non-segregational, non-slavery, non-apartheid context could be seen as reclaiming the meaning of that word and consigning the misuse of that word to history. And yet I don't hear the same protest being made against the "n" word when it is used by the very community that is upset about the word coloured.
Its doubtful black people would choose a middle class priveliged white right wing politician as a spokesperson to launch the campaign to reclaim the word.
Its complicated, but i generally think its ok for black people to use the n word as a way of reducing its impact however it has been used as a derogatory term within the black community to describe lower classes.
And I doubt that the middle class privileged white right wing politician in question would be looking to be that spokeswoman, but that wasn't the point. I appreciate the patronising view that I couldn't see that as well, I can honestly say that I won't be working out if I should feel offended by that - I'm not.
And my focus wasn't on the n word, it is on the use of coloured. And using your context shouldn't the BAME community start using the word coloured instead of outlawing it to reduce the impact of it.
And, this bit i need some help with so if I can understand better, the context that has been explained is because the word coloured was used to segregate e.g. 'no coloureds' being used as a sign in shops / cafes etc, but I'm pretty sure there were plenty of signs used in the UK that said 'no blacks' but we are ok to use that descriptive word in BAME - that does confuse me.