66
67

The Hugo Awards Were Always Political. But Now They're Only Political. (io9.com)

ProfSwagstaff が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]JangoF76 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (21子コメント)

"People of color"

youch...really?

[–]thistledownhair 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (20子コメント)

What are you even saying?

[–]JangoF76 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (19子コメント)

The phrase 'people of colour' is one step away from 'coloured people'. It's kinda racist.

[–]ratjea 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (7子コメント)

"(Person) of color" is a phrase that's been in use with its modern meaning since at least the 1970s, replacing the words "minority" and "colored people" in the lexicon. It's primarily an American term. It replaces "minority" because that word implies "lesser" and it replaces "colored people" because that phrase is now considered offensive.

Here's an Asian woman talking about her ambivalence with the term "people of color":

Still, it’s helpful to understand ‘POC’ is still a useful term. Quoting Loretta Ross of the Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective in her interview with Racialicious, ‘woman of color’ emerged from a Black feminist platform at a National Women’s Conference in Houston in the 1970s:

So they actually formed a group called Black Women’s Agenda to come [sic] to Houston with a Black women’s plan of action that they wanted the delegates to vote to substitute for the Minority Women’s Plank that was in the proposed plan of action.

Identifying as a person of color in solidarity with other people of color says ‘hey, my people have been oppressed by White people, maybe in a different time and space than your people, but we can work in solidarity.’ The identification needs to carry some degree of humility, and a deeper commitment to allyship . The POC umbrella is not an excuse to disavow the ways we benefit from various racial structures and sit idly by as our communities reap advantages from racism towards other people of color.

You may also enjoy this summary of the history of the term from NPR.

And of course, Wikipedia gets right to the point for us:

People of color was introduced as a preferable replacement to both non-white and minority, which are also inclusive, because it frames the subject positively; non-white defines people in terms of what they are not (white), and minority frequently carries a subordinate connotation.[1] Style guides for writing from American Heritage,[2] the Stanford Graduate School of Business,[3] Mount Holyoke College,[4] recommend the term over these alternatives. It may also be used with other collective categories of people such as students of color, men of color and women of color. Person of color typically refers to individuals of non-European heritage.[5]

[–]JangoF76 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Seems like this is a predominantly American term then. Where I'm from (UK) it wouldn't really be an acceptable term.

[–]thistledownhair -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

It's pretty widely used pretty much anywhere people speak english to be honest.

[–]JangoF76 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (4子コメント)

No, it's really not. If you don't believe me, come to south east London and see what kind of reception it gets.

[–]thistledownhair 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

You seem to be under the impression that I'm a yank.

[–]JangoF76 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Nope, just that you don't live where I live. Am I wrong?

[–]thistledownhair 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're not, but you're also saying Brits never use 'people of colour', which is bizarrely untrue.

[–]Indenturedsavant 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You're white aren't you?

[–]weezer3989https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7190387 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Not really? It's the accepted way of referring to people who aren't white on discussions of racism. Do you have a better term?

[–][削除されました]  (8子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]weezer3989https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7190387 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    Because they're the groups discriminated against because of their race and the color of their skin. At some point you have to discuss discriminated minorities, unless your plan is to totally ignore racism. What better term do you have to do that?

    Wiki has a decent, if short, article in why the term was developed and preferred over non-white or minority. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_color

    [–][削除されました]  (5子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]pensee_idee 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I'm doubting most of the "people of color" in the world actually had a say in it.

      Who on earth do you think came up with the term?

      I'm amazed that it's the year 2015, it's April, and you're only just now noticing this term for the first time, and you think that that's because the term isn't widely used, rather than because you haven't been paying attention.

      This has been, in the US, where io9 is writing from, the term used by non-White peoples, and especially by advocates for racial justice, for something like 20 years now. You're two decades to late to win an argument over whether or not this term is, or should be, widely used.

      If you want to know more, rather than picking fights on a scifi discussion board, why not just look it up? Here, I'll help.

      [–]weezer3989https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7190387 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

      Io9 is an American site, and the Hugo an overwhelmingly American award, it think they can be forgiven for using terminology that admittedly is American in origin and use.

      I would do something more nuanced than "whites" and "non-whites" for the simple reason that such a black and white version of racism and discrimination never existed

      Yes, that would be ideal, sounds great! What term are you thinking of using instead?

      PoC is not ideal, I admit that, there's just no better term to quickly capture privileged vs non-privileged races.

      I've asked twice now: what do you suggest be used instead of PoC?

      [–]DiaboliAdvocatus 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      PoC is not ideal, I admit that, there's just no better term to quickly capture privileged vs non-privileged races.

      My point was that it does no such thing. It is only useful in the context of America, and is just a thin veneer over "non-white" so why not just be honest and say what you mean?

      Saying "non-white" avoids issues such as people trying to build some mythical community of "people of color".

      [–]weezer3989https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7190387 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Non-white is defining people by a lack, a lack of whiteness. The term PoC exists independently of whiteness, not just in opposition to white people. Non-white people don't exist unless there are white people to compare them to. I think the tonal difference is obvious.

      And yes, one of the purposes is to bring together the diverse group of racialized peoples and create a common cause against racism. That's in contrast to the earlier civil rights/anti-racism campaigns that focused almost entirely on African Americans. It's not saying "all of these groups are the same" it's saying "all of these groups have a common struggle". It's about solidarity, not a 'mythical community'.

      Yes, it's an American term, almost entirely used in America by Americans. And this is an American context, so it makes sense to use it.

      [–]skulgun -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      It'll stop real quick once people start pronouncing it 'pock'