# Is the term "colored" considered offensive? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 28, 2001, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-term-colored-considered-offensive/90186 "2001-10-28T23:42:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![phartizan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ba8739/32.png) [@phartizan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/phartizan)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2001, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-term-colored-considered-offensive/90186/41 "2001-11-02T23:12:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by non-native \* > \*\*Amazingly enough, almost everyone has completely has missed my point ENTIRELY, even after i tried to clarify several times. > > THIS WAS NOT A THREAD ABOUT PC-NESS, AND WHAT WE SHOULD CALL BLACK PEOPLE. > > What i was talking about was the term “people of color”, which does NOT mean black, but nonwhite. What pisses me off about that term is that it catagorizes people into 2 different things. White, and not white. Why does white race get it’s own catagory while every other race is just lumped together? Why are they special enough to get their own catagory? I can’t think of any term that divides the world into black and nonblack or asian and nonasian. > THAT was what i was complaining about. > \*\* Look at the link I posted about [person of color](http://www.bartleby.com/64/C006/056.html): [/quote] > [@](#): > > **Indeed, the somewhat artificial sound of person of color serves to emphasize that something other than colored person is probably intended, so that when Jesse Jackson proclaims that “These are profound tendencies which strike at the middle class as well as the poor, at whites as well as people of color,” he is encouraging his audience to think more inclusively than if he had juxtaposed white with black. In this light, the term person of color and its related forms are welcome additions to the vocabulary of race and ethnicity.** So complain to Jesse Jackson; he’s often considered a black leader, but he’s the one putting forth the _people of color_ category (presumably he puts himself in it, too), showing he doesn’t see anything wrong with it. And my invoking PC is due to the fact that > [@](#): > > \*\*if you look up “people of color” on google, you’ll notice that it’s extremely pc liberal groups that have adopted this term, I think as if to say that they’re so liberal it’s OK after all. A little like black people using the dreaded N word because they’re referring to themselves. \*\* In other words, these groups see themselves as friends of _everybody-but-whites_, and so they’re turning on its head what originally was a [term of opprobrium](http://www.bartleby.com/61/94/O0099400.html). It’s as if Jackson & the others are saying “the mean old ‘white’ people think they can put all the other ‘races’ down by calling them ‘colored’. Well, we’ll turn it into a badge of honor, and unite against them.” As far as I know, it’s not those prejudiced in favor of whites against the others that use the term _people of color_, but those who see themselves as standing up for their rights. For what it’s worth, I agree with you. I think it’s stupid. But so is all this ethnic hatred shit. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2001, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-term-colored-considered-offensive/90186/42 "2001-11-03T00:38:08Z")
IIRC, **non-native** is an asocial Korean teenager living in Central America. He’s not complaining to any particular ethnic or cultural group, he is complaining about a general trend to lump all non-white people into one broad category of “coloured” or “people of color”. It is understandable that he might not feel any particular kinship with, for example, an African American woman from Hoboken. AFAIK the basis for the term “people of color” was to join all non-white minorities together into a plurality and eventually a majority. This was chiefly a political strategy which doesn’t really make sense outside of the US. In Guatemala, for example, “whites” constitute only about 2% of the population. Ladinos (people of mixed Spanish and indigenous descent) would make up about 55% of the population. Indigenous amerindians would make up about 43%. So most people are “coloured”, to some extent. Somebody mentioned in a previous post where Jesse Jackson talked about the poor, both white and “people of color”. I understand why he makes this distinction, since many people in the US still seem to equate poor with black or hispanic, but the truth is that there are poor people of every ethnic variety you would care to imagine. Personally for me, if you are going to do something for poor people, it should be done irrespective of skin hue. In South Africa, IIRC, “coloured” was a category reserved for anybody who was not African (indigenous peoples) or white (descendants of European settlers, chiefly from the Netherlands and England). This could include people of mixed European and African descent, or other immigrant groups. I don’t recall if Indian immigrants were considered coloured or a separate category during Apartheid, but they are listed separately in the references I can find right now. One reason that I personally find coloured as an offensive term is that people will use this as a fast way to lump people together, regardless of other dissimilarities. I also find it strange the way people of mixed lineage are categorized, and fail to understand the purpose of it. Eventually everyone will likely be mixed together with someone else, and the difficulty of fitting people into categories will necessitate discarding this untenable system. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-term-colored-considered-offensive/90186.md?page=2)