They way I remember it, it was only about race. From what I recall, I always heard when someone, usually black was being talked about out of earshot. They’d say stuff like “that was awfully white of him.” Basically he was “one of the good ones” and not typical of the race. I also remember it being applied to hispanics/Mexicans.
It’s used sarcastically often now to indicate someone showing the minimum amount of decency toward others, or even less than that. I suppose it could be used that way to imply flat out racism as well.
Yes. The related complimentary phrase “He’s a white man” was also explicitly race-based.
It never occurred to me until a few years ago that things like ‘black list’ were racist. These ideas are all based on the perceived superiority of people with ‘white’ skins over those with darker skins.
Casual racism can be hard to avoid sometimes, especially for those of us who grew up with it.
No, it isn’t. In Western culture, black has been used to indicate negative things for a long time, unrelated to race. In the Roman Empire it was the color of mourning and became associated with death and evil. “Blacklist” goes back to the 1600s in England, a time when there were few Black people in Europe.
If anything, the association is the reverse. Black isn’t perceived as negative because Black people were; Black people were perceived negatively because they were black.
You may be right, but the racist - Black is bad, White is Good - connotation remains.
And before that, at least in my city, the ads were further divided by race. I’ve seen ads from the 40’s. Most of those for black women were maids, housecleaners, and other janitorial jobs.
Yeah. The original connotation may be much older: it may just be fear of the dark. Humans are a strongly visually-oriented species who need a lot of light to see well. At night, there were lots of Things out there, and we couldn’t see what they were, and some of them really existed and actually did want to eat us and were capable of doing so and sometimes did. So we preferred daylight to darkness; and mostly still do.
But just as words change meaning over centuries, they also change connotation. If a white/black phrasing wasn’t racist in 20BCE or even in 1600CE, that doesn’t mean it’s not racist in 1920CE, or in 2021.
I agree, and it’s a real conundrum for what to call people with large amounts of African heritage (when of course it is necessary to specifically refer to them instead of just as people.) Because African-American doesn’t encompass, for instance, Caribbean-Americans or recent African immigrants, but they are still treated as black to a huge degree. It seems that people have settled on Black, even though I would prefer to avoid it due to the inescapable connotation the word has held for centuries of black being something bad.
European-American is a completely opposite case. I firmly believe, at this time period, it is more appropriate than “White” because most people who use “white” are specifically referring to people of European extraction, and it doesn’t exclude any non-Germanic Europeans like it did in former centuries. And it avoids the White = Good connotations.
As someone who lives (geographically at least, thanks Brexit) in Europe, I have an issue with that though: not all Europeans are white, and language implying that they are (or that real Europeans are) is not exactly helpful.
While a substantial number of Blacks and others people of color now live in Europe, nearly all immigrants to the US from Europe were white. So I think this works in the American context.
So can we just go with Burnt Umber?
I have a good friend who has dual citizenship and is literally African-American (he’s white). And students “of color” with no connection to Africa. They use the term “black”.
‘Nearly all’ isn’t all.
There’s plenty of racist assholes that don’t consider non-white Europeans to be real Europeans. It’s a real issue. Claiming that using ‘European’ as a synonym for white is somehow more inclusive, because it avoids the positive connotations of the word ‘white’ is utterly ridiculous. There’s enough US cultural overspill that you can’t pretend that it wouldn’t be a free kick for European racists.
Go for ‘beige’, if you want.
I did not think about the connotation that people whose long-ago ancestors were not from Europe are not “real” Europeans, but it is still a lot more accurate than to co-opt a term that is neither specific nor accurate nor really descriptive and also has way-overloaded connotations, in addition to there being very few people in America who are descended from those whom the term would not be accurate for.
It is true that it isn’t a perfect term, but I can’t think of a better one that would be instantly-understandable. In addition, selfishly, that is what I call myself because I don’t have any more specific European heritage that I have enough of a concentration of ethnicity and tradition to feel comfortable calling myself, and I am not about to call myself English-Irish-Polish-German-Jewish. That’s such a mouthful that I’d frankly rather call myself White despite it being scientifically inaccurate, socially imprecise, and with a connotation of inherent goodness.
I either call myself White or Caucasian (and then regale my friends with tales of my upbringing in Caucasia…).
True story:
I was about to check “White” on my 1980 census form, but as I put my hand on the paper, I realized it was a long ways from white. So I wrote in “Pink”. No one’s come to check on me yet…
I grew up living in West Africa. White people were known as Europeans(even if they were Americans) and the mostly black-skinned locals were natives.
There was also a third group who were referred to as ‘Syrians’. They were mostly shopkeepers and moneylenders I think.
Yep, and we need to get rid of fireplaces too- except those actually needed.
Except few “white” people are really white (Pinkish tan) and the same goes for “black” people (various shades of brown, mostly).
Some time ago, when a buddy called a girl “Black” she replied in a huff "I am not Black, I am a lovely shade of Mocha brown.’
Every large suburban house I’ve visited in the United States has a separate living room and formal dining room. These days the rooms might be repurposed for daily use—the formal dining room is often used as a home office, for example—but houses are still being designed and built with this concept in mind.