Why isn’t saying ‘person of color’ offensive?

Here’s a Facebook posting from a righteous academic:

I’ve been thinking about this image and caption ever since Amatullah posted it. I’ve been thinking about it in its own right—WHY DOESN’T FLINT HAVE POTABLE WATER YET, AND WHY DON’T WE CARE—but also because I see a lot of white “allies” in my daily life and ESPECIALLY in my professional life as a classicist, allies who just don’t know how to PASS THE MIC, step out of their own spotlight, and listen to POC.

Note my post is not a condemnation of Greta, whom I admire. It’s a comment on those of us who can but choose not to promote and listen to our colleagues of color, particularly when it comes to issues of combatting racism.

This is her addition while sharing a post featuring a young woman holding a sign about Flint’s public water supply and the following text:

While I’m immensely proud of Greta & AOC. Please don’t forget Mari Copeny aka: Little Miss Flint. She has been fighting for Flint & has not received even a portion of the attention she & her cause deserves!

EDIT: No empty useless comments about how this isn’t about Race, how it’s Democrats faults, and any other thinly veiled racism wrapped in logical Fallacies will be squashed (to the best of my ability)
This post is to Signal Boost Mari & others like her who are NOT getting the attention THEY deserve.

Read what I said, read it again.
Now share it, follow her & others that have been doing the work. Thanks!

The righteous sharer uses the acronym “POC” for “Person of Color” and refers to “colleagues of color.” If non-whites object to being classified by their skin color, why isn’t this term just as offensive as any other term that refers to skin color, e.g., “darkies” that Kentucky is trying to remove from “My Old Kentucky Home”? If the offensive idea is that inferences can be drawn based on the color of a person’s skin, rather than the content of their character, shouldn’t lumping all “persons of color” together be offensive, regardless of the term used?

Related:

5 thoughts on “Why isn’t saying ‘person of color’ offensive?

  1. The phrase “person of color” may or may not be offensive: it all depends on how progressive the color is. Unlike most of you, racists, the true progressives differentiate between the skin colors that are offensive (i..e, those who do not support equality or actively resist Donald Trump) and those who are not (those who support the progressive agenda, who vote and donate Democrat, who do not oppose the street loitering, and who actively resist the Trumpenfuhrer). Bad races are the curse of our nation and the real shame to our ideals: they are just not white enough and they don’t even feel subordinate to the Caucasian/DNC members. Those dirty, Fascist, Asians get obscenely rich and famous at the expense of those of us who don’t! And they fail to donate money to the right cause!

    For instance, observe how ridiculous the Asians have become: they are no longer just handling their stinky restaurants or their filthy gas stations and laundromat; they dare to become high-paid professionals (despite having a funny accent and a strange skill color-); they own large companies, and they may even get elected government officials. They are not even welcome to Harvard or other schools that build the true character (sorry Dr Goebbels for an imprecise quotation). And they don’t even thank us for the opportunity!

    As I have always said, there are good (progressive) races and then there are bad ones. And for the record, the rich whiteys are always bad–and I am not a racist but you are!

  2. Note also that “colored person” is as offensive as ever, whereas “person of color” still has (temporarily) woke approval. Contradictions like this are there to remind us that the real purposes of wokeness are to dominate everybody else and to humiliate one’s enemies. If wokeness were actually about enforcing some consistent moral system, it would be consistent (and moral). But the real purpose is dominance and humiliation, and although the woke rarely admit that explicitly, the ever-changing, ever-inconsistent rules of leftism are needed to make sure we never forget who’s boss and we never forget we’re being bullied.

  3. I remember a British celebrity getting into trouble for saying “colored person” as a shorthand for “person of color.” Apparently, they do okay on the other side of the pond without these shibboleths.

    Luckily, American celebrities were able to vouch for the Briton, so aside from a quick lesson in how the American left plays middle school-like games about who’s popular, there was no lasting harm done.

  4. Aside from the POC issue, the lead in water thing is related only to the service line that brings the water from the street. There’s no lead in the water when it leaves the reservoir. There’s no lead in it when it’s in the main in the street. The buried service line that goes from the main to your house is the responsibility of the homeowner, as you will find out if it ever fails. In a lot of older houses in older cities, this line is made of lead. These lines should have been replaced decades ago but they weren’t and somehow now this is supposed to be the government’s fault/responsibility.

  5. Also, Flint has always had “clean” drinking water. The lead story was fake news.

    https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-lead-testing/

    https://www.michiganradio.org/post/does-flint-have-clean-water-yes-it-s-complicated

    In addition, how fast do they expect water infrastructure to be replaced? It literally cannot be done in a short number of years in a cold climate. (You can’t compare replacement of infrastructure by union labor to the building of new infrastructure by slave/bonded labor. )

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.