Well, that was the triggering event for the style guide changes for publications such as NY Times, the AP, etc and the debate that followed.
What was?
It was an example of how people are far more than their skin colors and have far greater aspects that define them. But there is admitted political value on the left of exploiting the concept of identity politics so it is not surprising to see the defense of what is fundamentally a bigoted position.
The way MrDibble capitalizes is at least consistent.
Is capitalizing Chinese-American bigoted?
Seems implausible though. A Black doctor? And a fisherman - I thought Black people couldn’t swim?
My personal approach is to capitalize when it’s specifically referring to the culture or people who are parts of it in that context, but to leave lower-case when it’s strictly as a descriptor. Basically the usual proper noun rules.
For example, saying that “President Obama is a Black man” is something different than “President Obama is a black man”. One implies a membership in a culture, while the other is strictly a descriptor.
Where I get a bit uncertain is when I might say that a guy at work is a black man, but not Black, since he’s actually a Nigerian. But I’m not exactly sure if he’s an African American or not… he is in the most absolutely literal sense, but he’s not, in that he’s not really part of the community that the term generally refers to.
Outside of leftist discussion groups in the real world you’d see black folks are fully capable of the complete human experience! That includes physicians, swimmers, and even the capability of getting a voter id! It’s almost as if infantilizing a group based solely on pigmentation is a bad idea.
Are you one of those woke people I’ve been hearing about?
You calling me woke??? Even though this is the pit… we have standards.
All kidding aside, there is some utility in group categorizations. When taking too far I find it’s dangerous. I think skin color as the primary category of identification is dangerous.
This bothers me. I identify as a White person, and I don’t feel the need for context there. That is, by itself a value-neutral identification: our culture has these labels, and I consistently fit the criteria for one of the labels, so it’s what applies to me, just like Sandwich is the label our culture applies to what I ate for lunch.
The idea that White supremacists are validated by the capitalization strikes me as off-the-mark. The actual white supremacists I’ve had the displeasure of encountering are SUPER into their specific European origin myth: they’re Viking descendants, or they’re Anglo Saxons, or they’re Celts. Acknowledging the cultural label of White doesn’t validate them any more than acknowleding the label of British does.
It’s important that I as a White person can consider how racial constructs have affected my experience without it being a point either of pride or of shame: it just is. If I pretend I’ve not had my experience affected by the specifics of my ethnicity (and the specifics of a White boy growing up in the South are White, not Scots-Irish), that’s going to lead to some dumb “race-blind” game that ends up pretty pernicious.
Good thing nobody here is doing that.
Actually, you are.
Is “straw” a color?
Oh damn which post?
The claim that a skin color is sufficient to pigeonhole billions of people into one ethnic group? Duh!
That’s ridiculous. Obviously we’re only trying to pigeonhole hundreds of millions of people by skin color. And pigeons.
Does the term Chinese-Americans pigeonhole people? Should we stop using it?
China is a proper noun correct? Chinese would be a proper adjective derived from said proper noun.
I didn’t ask if we should stop capitalizing it. Should we stop using it?
I don’t care. What’s that have to do with anything? Would you use the relatively anachronistic yellow or capitalize it as Yellow if you did?