BY: Kee Malesky Language is and always will be an essential element in the struggle for understanding among peoples. Changes in the words and phrases we use to describe each other reflect whatever progress we make on the path toward a world where everyone feels respected and included. A Google Ngram search comparing the frequency of the use of "colored people," "minorities" and "people of color" delivers interesting results. The use of the phrase "colored people" peaked in books published in 1970. For "minorities," the top-ranked year was 1997. Since then, the term has steadily declined but continues to significantly outstrip the use of "people of color," which reached its apex in 2003 (although it is important to note that 2008 is the latest year for which results are available). Let's consider the evolution of that ubiquitous phrase, "people of color." It's not new. A little research into early sources turns up "An Act to Prohibit the Importation of Slaves into any Port or Place Within the Jurisdiction of the United States" (signed in 1807), which applied to "any negro, mulatto, or person of colour" — indicating that the term was well-enough established to be used in the text of legislation. People who fit this broad category could no longer legally be brought into the country for the purpose of involuntary servitude. But the precise definition of "person of color" has varied among the states and over time. As the Baltimore Afro-American newspaper noted in November 1912: "The statutes of Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas assert that 'a person of color' is one who is descended from a Negro to the third generation, inclusive, though one ancestor in each generation may have been white. According to the law of Alabama one is 'a person of color' who has had any Negro blood in his ancestry for five generations. ... In Arkansas 'persons of color' include all who have a visible and distinct admixture of African blood. ... Thus it would seem that a Negro in one state is not always a Negro in another." The Oxford English Dictionary's earliest reference for "person of color" is from the French gens (or hommes) de couleur, in the late 18th century. A 1797 survey of the population of what is now Haiti described three classes of people, including "The class which, by a strange abuse of language, is called people of colour, originates from an intermixture of the whites and the blacks." "Person" or "people" as a term for human beings, that's pretty much uncontroversial. But color — which can be used as a noun, an adjective or a verb (transitive and intransitive) — is a word packed with history, prejudice and confusion when it's used to describe someone's complexion as an indication of race or ethnicity. The adjective form — "colored" — we hardly need the OED to confirm, but it says the term is now: "Usually considered offensive ... Coloured was adopted in the United States by emancipated slaves as a term of racial pride after the end of the American Civil War. It was rapidly replaced from the late 1960s as a self-designation by black and later by African-American, although it is retained in the name of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. In Britain it was the accepted term for black, Asian, or mixed-race people until the 1960s." In a 1988 New York Times column about the phrase, the late great language maven William Safire pointed out that Martin Luther King Jr. referred to "citizens of color" in his speech at the 1963 March on Washington. Safire also quoted an NAACP spokesman: " 'Times change and terms change. Racial designations go through phases; at one time Negro was accepted, at an earlier time colored and so on. This organization has been in existence for 80 years and the initials NAACP are part of the American vocabulary, firmly embedded in the national consciousness, and we feel it would not be to our benefit to change our name.' " Safire continued in that 1988 essay: "Colored people (which in South Africa means 'people of racially mixed ancestry') has in the United States a connotation different from people of color. ... Colored is often taken as a slur, even when not so intended, and so this term — first used with this meaning in 1611 by the historian John Speed as 'coloured countenances' — is better replaced by its synonym as noun and adjective, black. People of color, on the other hand, is a phrase encompassing all nonwhites. ... When used by whites, people of color usually carries a friendly and respectful connotation, but should not be used as a synonym for black; it refers to all racial groups that are not white." When I was a kid, the "flesh" crayon in a box of Crayolas was pink, even though no one actually has pink skin (except maybe after a day on the beach without sunscreen, when I could go all the way to orange-red). The company renamed it "peach" in 1962, and now promotes a "Multicultural" box of crayons in eight "skin hues" — Apricot, Black, Burnt Sienna, Mahogany, Peach, Sepia, Tan, White. The first thing I learned in color theory as an art student was that, when you're talking about light, white means all colors and black is the absence of color, but if you're referring to paint, then white is no color and black contains all colors. Contemporary artist Carrie Mae Weems produced a series of photographic portraits of African-American children and called it Colored People. A New York Times review of an exhibit of her work described how she "tinted the prints with monochromatic dyes: yellow, blue, magenta. The results were beautiful ... but the colors carried complex messages. They are reminders that the range of skin colors covered by 'black' is vast." "Person of color" is a useful term, because defining someone by a negative — nonwhite or other than white — seems silly. But some white folks object to the phrase, too, because, hey, we do have color. One definition of white, from the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, is "marked by slight pigmentation of the skin." And the term seems to be replacing "minorities," which makes sense, since minorities can be a demographic inaccuracy. In U.S. history, "person of color" has often been used to refer only to people of African heritage. Today, it usually covers all/any peoples of African, Latino/Hispanic, Native American, Asian or Pacific Island descent, and its intent is to be inclusive. I think professor Salvador Vidal-Ortiz summed it up well in the Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity and Society: "People of color explicitly suggests a social relationship among racial and ethnic minority groups. ... [It is] is a term most often used outside of traditional academic circles, often infused by activist frameworks, but it is slowly replacing terms such as racial and ethnic minorities. ... In the United States in particular, there is a trajectory to the term — from more derogatory terms such as negroes, to colored, to people of color. ... People of color is, however it is viewed, a political term, but it is also a term that allows for a more complex set of identity for the individual — a relational one that is in constant flux." Requirements for BLOG POSTS
25 Comments
Alexander Salah
11/14/2014 11:27:05 am
In the article “The Journey from “Colored” to “Minorities” to “People of Color” ”, Kee Malesky demonstrates how communication is a vital tool that is shown to influence how people act and feel. Communication has always been an important component in whether or not people agree and understand each other based off of similar words and meanings. Changes in the words and meanings we use to label each other, define the progress we have made to achieve a world where people feel equally respected and valued. 'Times change and terms change. Racial designations go through phases; at one time Negro was accepted, at an earlier time colored and so on.”(Malesky, pg.1) Throughout the limited number of years our country has been in existence, we have put certain meanings behind specific words such as “negro” or “colored”. Nowadays we do not hear these words because society has proven them to be outdated in terms of parity and equivalence. Personally, I have used the term “African-American” or “Latinos” to describe people in terms of ethnicity. I have a hard time using other words because I am not sure if they are still socially acceptable. In the article “The White Fight” by Mark R. Warren, he brings up how although progress has been made to combat racial and social injustice, we are still light years away from being able to call all of humanity equal. “More than 30 percent of blacks and Hispanics live in poverty compared to 13 percent of whites.”(Warren, pg1) this is a large skewed number due to the injustice felt by minorities over hundreds of years. If we can equalize certain terms and phrases we use in our everyday lives, we can end inequality for good. “People of color, on the other hand, is a phrase encompassing all nonwhites. ... When used by whites, people of color usually carries a friendly and respectful connotation, but should not be used as a synonym for black; it refers to all racial groups that are not white."(Malesky, pg.1) When someone is speaking in a conversation and they use the phrase “people of color”, I normally think of darker skinned people based off of instinctual thought. Society has a way of always putting labels on everyone and everything that does not fit the socially accepted norm. Kee Malesky has brought up many points throughout this article but some have specifically stuck with me. We grow up learning to see people differently because of their color. We grow up learning to stereotype other races based off of phrases and words we learn. This taught me that we have to learn to teach without labeling everything and we also have to not correlate meanings to specific words or phrases.
veronica romo
11/16/2014 01:11:13 pm
I also believe that the key points in this essay include the need to change our over-all social interactions as a population. although every movement starts with a single individual it is important to understand our ability to impact those within our lives just by changing our own interactions. By doing so we can help lead by example either for the future or just those ignorant or less educated about the inaccuracies and prejudices of our nation. Too often it seems that as individuals we are quick to judge or dismiss the things which we do not completely understand. It is unfortunate since those who tend to discriminate and hate others are usually those insecure with their own identity. Language barriers between us should not dictate how we view others. People seem to be too ready to scapegoat rather than take responsibility to make a conscience effort to alter the things we disagree with
Jason Do
11/16/2014 03:01:07 pm
I too find it interesting how we can relate a word with something that can be totally unrelated with its actual meaning. For example, while I associate the word dog with the animal, when I hear the word bitch, I don't picture a female dog, just like how you pointed out that the phrase people of color elicits an image of a darker skinned person when the phrase itself covers a broader range of skin color.
Karla O'Connor
11/16/2014 03:42:44 pm
Alex, you make such important points about race and ethnicity. It is hard not to think of the term "people of color" only describing African-Americans, because before reading Malesky's article I associated the term with only African-Americans. Also, when I describe a racial group, such as Latinos, there are so many subcategories of ethnicities that vary culturally. For example, when someone asks me what race I am, I say Latina, but have to go further and explain how I am half Nicaraguan as my ethnicity due to my dad's side. Growing up this was a problem because classmates would tell me that I was Mexican then, when in fact I wasn't. This ties back to your point of how society has a way of putting labels on people. I was being put into this racial category that was culturally incorrect. I learned that "people of color" includes: Latinos, Native-Americans, Asian-Pacific Islander, etc. Times are changing and the fact that we have come a long way in using a term that is socially acceptable and historically appropriate makes me feel good about society. But, the quote you incorporated about more 30 percent of Blacks and Hispanics still living in poverty in comparison to their white counterparts, is something we have to acknowledge and explain.
Nelson Chuang
11/23/2014 01:35:21 pm
I feel like since individuals are voicing their opinions more often when racism and prejudice is evident that these terms are being changed to terms that are more neutral but still depict a negative connotation. People who are labeled a "Person of Color" versus as just a person still makes me feel like they are being targeted, whether or not its to help them or make them remember their place.
Karla O'Connor
11/16/2014 07:28:50 am
In “The Journey From ‘Colored’ to ‘Minorities’ to ‘People of Color,’” Kee Malesky gives an interesting perspective to how race and language is interchangeable. In a 1988 essay from the New York Times, people of color now refers to all non-whites, not just blacks. It is now considered a friendly and a more respectful connotation. There is this inclusion of all racial and ethnic groups in reference to “people of color.” To prove that the evolution of the word “People of Color” has changed, the article has highlighted how the use of the word “coloured” to “minorities” to “people of color,” has differed in each historical context. From 1797, where “people of colour” referred to the intermixture of blacks and whites, in which Haiti is located now; the language behind this was the abuse that was associated with the term. To where “colored people” after the American Civil War was seen as more obscene, the language behind this, was that any drop of African blood meant you were “Negro” no matter if an ancestor of yours was white. Malesky states that “In U.S. history, "person of color" has often been used to refer only to people of African heritage. Today, it usually covers all/any peoples of African, Latino/Hispanic, Native American, Asian or Pacific Island descent, and its intent is to be inclusive” (Malesky). To add on to this, in “The Essential Social Fact of Race” by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, states how race is a social construct. It is permeable and can change over time. This ties back to Malesky’s theme of language and how the term “people of color” has evolved over time. Silva looks at race and ethnicity to explain social categories and the factors toward racial inequality.
Alexander Salah
11/16/2014 01:31:15 pm
Karla, I agree that race and language are interchangeable today in society. Due to exceeding societal pressures to convey the right message, words and meanings change frequently. The essay you mentioned of the New York Times in 1988 refers the term people of color to mean a variety of races not just black. Before this time, the term colored, inexplicitly meant black people. We have learned to adjust our vocabulary to compensate for the meaning of the phrase “people of color” to incorporate actual people of color. It is important to take into consideration the meanings of certain phrases when speaking and allocating your opinions.
Tiffany Le
11/17/2014 04:22:44 am
Hi Karla! I like the article you have chosen to use because race is socially constructed, which creates different power struggles for different groups of people; whereas, ethnicity is chosen by the individual based on how they identify. Thus, people can celebrate their different cultures! Language can have a powerful affect on how we think about other people and about ourselves.
Arnulfo Gembe
11/22/2014 09:56:41 am
I definitely agree with the how race and ethnicity are assigned to individuals. My coworker has a White mom and an African American dad yet people identify him as a white male while he associates himself more as an African American. Although he identifies himself as an African American he still feels like he does not fit in with his other family members at family gatherings because of his skin. Although society has made progress in terms of labeling individuals there are still some aspects that need to be fixed.
Vanessa Fernandez
11/16/2014 11:16:08 am
In the Article ''Journey from "Colored" to "Minorities" to "People of Color" the three themes that stuck with me were language, historical context, and public policy. Kee Malesky spoke about how crucial it is for people to use the right language and communicate in order to change something or make progress. Throughout history slang and terms have lost and gained their intensity in a conversation or even in legislature. The definitions for the racial terms like people of color, minorities, and many others have different definitions depending on where you are, who you are, and who you're saying it to.The article Bell Hooks on Education by Barry Burke explains "Literacy is essential to the future of the feminist movement because the lack of reading, writing and critical skills serves to exclude many women and men from feminist consciousness". Even if this quote is specifically about feminism, I believe someone who can not inform themselves on an issue is contributing to the ignorance that comes along with terms often used irresponsibly. The article explains that the term negro was once accepted but now carries offensive memories and hurtful implications. Someone who is not educated about the history of this word will casually use the word without thinking twice. So who's job is it to educate people of racial terms? Bell Hooks believes that education should not only take place in the classroom but everywhere someone goes. If we, as a society educate people on what terms actually mean and what is attached with saying those terms, we can eliminate the misuse of racial language. Ignorance is bliss but knowledge is much more productive. The more we educate people on the historical context of language and race, the easier it is to move foreword and create equality.
Alexander Salah
11/16/2014 01:52:37 pm
Vanessa, I agree that Terms have been intensified to resemble societies views on race and issues on equality. I like how you said, “Throughout history slang and terms have lost and gained their intensity in a conversation or even in legislature”. I think that it is important to address not just the social problem of race and phrasing, but legislature as well. Our system of policy has always favored people with lighter skin whether it is from phrases or meanings. We have to learn to change the way our society views race if we want to change how we live.
Jason Do
11/16/2014 02:57:59 pm
Definitely I think it is important to educate people on how deep the meaning of words can go. It was definitely eyeopening for me to realize that words can carry history beyond their literal meaning. For example, when someone calls someone a bitch, it's usually not to call them a female dog, which is the literal meaning, but it employs all of the feelings and history of inferiority that's come to be associated with that word.
Karla O'Connor
11/16/2014 03:27:40 pm
Vanessa, I like how you mentioned historical context being a theme in Malesky's article, because racial terms do vary across times, and it astonishes me how public policy can definitely influence how people perceive these definitions. It ties back to Bonila-Silva's article of how race is socially constructed. It becomes a social reality once you put meaning to something. I enjoyed reading your response!
Tiffany Le
11/17/2014 04:26:00 am
Hello Vanessa. I agree with you about educating people on the terms that have been used previously and also how the misuse of racial language has perpetuated racism. This corresponds to the misinformation and miseducation on differences that breeds misunderstanding. Education and praxis will help us heal as a society so that we can climb the ladder of social equity.
Hakwoo Kim
11/19/2014 12:48:46 am
I agree with you Vanessa. Language is very powerful and can influence our consciousness. But I think it is very tricky as well. I am very for eliminating those words charged with racial discrimination and historical memories, but they are very commonly used in society, many people do not link the word with those memories when they use it; they just use them very casually. I was taking basketball class, and it was one of the most frequent words I heard in the class by the very racial group. The similar thing applies to the word "bitch". In Nicky's class we learned clearly that the word is very sexist, and yet people use it all the time and choose to do so even when they are aware of the very fact that it is a sexist term. Sometimes, a word was used without any discriminatory or oppressive connotation, but it gains that kind of connotation as people start using it as such, like the word "gay". Although I support not using those words, my little concern is the way to go about it; should we change the attitude and meaning behind it, or should we eliminate the word and reinvent yet another word?
Jennifer Melgarejo
11/19/2014 01:02:58 am
Hi Mr. Kim, I agree that words do influence our consciousness precisely because of their hystorical implications. And I also agree that language is very powerful and precisely because of that we can not eliminate any words. All words carry the hystory that has shaped the consciousness of today and to eliminate it would be to eliminate precious insight into or current situation. As 'bad' and as these words may be we need to keep them and educate ourselves on the weight they carry.
Nelson Chuang
11/23/2014 01:40:04 pm
Educating society on terms and the harsh connotations they bring is definitely an important step in minimizing racism and prejudice in our society. I will admit that at a young age, I was unaware of the power of language and how it can trap and put people in bad places. It was not until I understand the power of language that I started becoming more careful with my word choice with others. Education is definitely one of the important factors that we should include in our combat against racism.
Jason Do
11/16/2014 02:41:20 pm
"Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." This is what every kid is taught when faced with name calling or verbal bullying. From a literal standpoint, the cute little rhyme seems quite obvious. How can something as intangible as a word cause any sort of harm whatsoever? However, if I have learned anything from taking this class, it's that words can carry the weight and history of centuries of abuse and hatred, and every time a word is said, that weight is thrust upon the shoulders of anyone who hears it. Malesky's article highlights themes of the history behind words, word connotations, and verbal discrimination. Whenever someone uses the word Negro, the entire history of slavery and African discrimination is called up in an instant. It might not be obvious or apparent, but the weight is there. While words and meanings might change over the years, the history stays the same, only changed by the addition of new history. Just because we aren't living in that time period anymore doesn't mean that history doesn't apply to us. Second, all words carry with them an implicit connotation that invokes feelings depending on what the word is. When someone says the word Negro, the feelings associated with the word might be more neutral than bad. However, the word nigger is most definitely an insult and an attack. "[Nigger] is still the first word on most white people’s mind when we see a black man being taken off to jail on the evening news." (Wise 173) How can a word bring up feelings of a black criminal, and how can we relate a black criminal to an antiquated word? This is due to the history and connotations behind that word. Lastly, words can be used to discriminate, by painting people as one of us or one of them, as Tim Wise would say. Though people of color might be considered politically correct, it still depicts these people as the "other" when in reality they are just people like anybody else. Words like these create these divides, and reinforces them with each use. We hear words like these on a day to day basis from when we are impressionable children to when we are independent adults, and as a result, these words bring those divides into us and internalizes them. Wise states that we have all been "sucker-punched by racist conditioning like everyone else" even though we all like to think ourselves as above racism. (Wise 174) So in the end, while words may not be able to break our bones, they have enough power to break our minds and make us think racism and discrimination are normal everyday things.
Jason Do
11/16/2014 02:44:31 pm
Malesky, Kee. (March 30, 2014). The Journey From ‘Colored’ to ‘Minorities’ to ‘People of Color. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2014/03/30/295931070/the-journey-from-colored-to-minorities-to-people-of-color
Tiffany Le
11/17/2014 04:19:16 am
In this article “The Journey From 'Colored' To 'Minorities' To 'People Of Color’”, Kee Malesky emphasizes the socialization of the words ‘colored people,’ ‘minorities,’ and ‘people of color.’ Three themes in this article include how the perception of color is subjective/changing, how the implication of language can be racist/targeted, and how language changes over time. First of all, Malesky notes how different states have different viewpoints on who is a person of color and who is not: “According to the law of Alabama one is 'a person of color' who has had any Negro blood in his ancestry for five generations. ... In Arkansas 'persons of color' include all who have a visible and distinct admixture of African blood. ... Thus it would seem that a Negro in one state is not always a Negro in another" (Malesky). Also, Different language has been accepted in different time periods throughout history. Safire states, “Colored people (which in South Africa means 'people of racially mixed ancestry') has in the United States a connotation different from people of color. ... Colored is often taken as a slur, even when not so intended, and so this term — first used with this meaning in 1611 by the historian John Speed as 'coloured countenances' — is better replaced by its synonym as noun and adjective, black” (Malesky). The term colored people originated in the 17th century and has changed as time progressed. The word color(ed) denotes a prejudiced perspective of people who are nonwhite. In the past, colored people referred to people who were of African descent; whereas, people of color includes people of different ethnic backgrounds (African American, Latino/a, Asian American, Pacific Islanders, etc.). Then, the term people of color becomes a political one, which people identify with different ethnicities. People can use language to be inclusive or exclusive of others. To reiterate, Tim Wise, in the article “Exploring the Depths of White Racial Socialization,” discusses the internalized racism that has been ingrained in American society. A woman whose mind is deteriorating because of Alzheimer’s and who has fought for racial equality for many years before developing the disease resorts to using the word nigger in her semi-conscious state of mind, a word loaded with racist connotations. Wise says, “Fact is “nigger” is still the first word on people’s minds when they see a black man being taken off to jail on the evening news” (Wise). For years, people have used the word “nigger” to degrade black people, and people have used colored in the same way. Society has purposefully chosen these words to socialize the way people think so that people create a hierarchal structure of who is “good” (white) and who is “bad” (nonwhite). The idea of whiteness has permeated into our minds: “No one is unaffected by the daily socialization to which we are all subjected--specifically with regard to the way we think about persons of color in this society” (Wise). The way people use language has created a mindset of “otherness” that separates whites from nonwhites.
Arnulfo Gembe
11/22/2014 10:20:37 am
I agree with your observation that society associates the word good with white and bad with anyone who isn't white. As a society we have learned to identify an individual based on their skin tone first and secondly by the personality of the individual. We have to stop using this formula though in order to not have stereotypical assumptions of individuals.
Arnulfo Gembe
11/21/2014 01:00:01 pm
The article examines how society keeps changing race identifying terminology towards minorities, mostly African Americans though. For example different states define people of color differently than other states, it all depends on an individual’s family tree. Compare Texas and Alabama, Texas considers an individual as a “'a person of color' is one who is descended from a Negro to the third generation” (Malesky). In Alabama “'a person of color' [is anyone] who has had any Negro blood in his ancestry for five generations” (Malesky). Another point that the Malesky points out is the meaning of the word color when used to identify people. At first color was used to identify Haitians and gradually it transformed into a word used to identify individuals who were not White in England and in America. Lastly the Malesky informs that in present day minorities fall under the label people of color. However the context in which it is used can either be political correct and or still offensive, although no matter what context it may fall under people may still find it offensive. In Peggy McIntosh’s “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” McIntosh points out that due to her being white she “can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider: (McIntosh). This is an unfair advantage that white individuals have over people of color because if a person of color were to voice their negative opinion of the government most people would classify their comment as hostile or being an extremist. However a white individual comment would not be seen as hostile or bias towards the government simply because of their skin tone. Secondly, McIntosh states that when she is “told about our national heritage or about ‘civilization’ I am shown that people of my color made it what it is” (McIntosh). This is however falsely representing America’s history because African slaves are not given credit for all their hard labor in building this country. The term “people of color” should be absolute because of the history behind that term. I doubt that society will ever be able to coin a term to identify different races that would be agreed upon by everyone. But as long as progress is made that is all that matters.
Nelson Chuang
11/23/2014 01:31:17 pm
Language is a method of communication necessary to bring societies closer as well as create disconnections between individuals. With the social trend of terms and definitions, we can see the progress society has made towards including and respecting individuals. In “The Journey from “Colored” to “Minorities” to “People of Color”, Kee Malesky explains the social trend of derogatory terms and how it has been changed to include as well as respect those it attempts to identify. It makes me think about the ways society is attempting to include people of color while constantly reminding them their place in society. Just because terms have changed, it does not mean society is evolving to accept and include those that were once oppressed. Wise states “Fact is “nigger” is still in first word on most white people’s minds when they see a black man being taken off to jail on the evening news”(273). The sad fact is that the racism and ignorance that was once easily noticeable has become a underground project where we cannot blatantly accuse someone for prejudice and exclusion. We are only able to challenge the fact that they are racist in an action they take such as the constant deaths of African Americans throughout the United States from white police officers. It is not a coincidence these events happen every week.
Hakwoo Kim
11/24/2014 10:25:14 am
Yeah I agree that the term reflects our efforts to become more sensitive to others and address them properly. Although I liked his explanation of color, I am still quite not sure what it implies. Was that implying that our perception of color depends on how we see them? I don't know... I was a bit confused about that part. It resonated with me that society is constantly attempting to include but keep reminding them of their place. The feeling I was getting that the word "people of color" still addresses their underprivileged status. I'm not saying that they are deliberately reminding them of that but that it just reflects our reality that we have still things to work on.
Hakwoo Kim
11/24/2014 10:17:13 am
Kee Malesky’s article “The Journey from ‘Colored’ to ‘Minorities’ to ‘People of Color’” shows an interesting change in language when addressing “people of color”. He presents several different terms, such as, “colored”, “minorities”, and “people of color” and shows the frequency of the word in use historically. He claims that this change in the usage of the words reflect the historical change in our consciousness when dealing with differences. He, then delves into the word “people of color”, which is now the most common term to address non-white people. The word was first vastly used to distinguish black people or black related race. After going through a phase where the term “colored people” were commonly used, which also mostly address black people, words like “minorities” emerged to address those who are non-white but non-black as well. However, as the consciousness that the term “minorities” do not really reflect the reality, it is now less frequently used as well. Now the phrase “people of color” refers to a complex racial groups that are not white, acknowledging different racial groups including but not limited to black people. This seems to be more respectful towards the complexity of a person. Leave a Reply. |
Poli 15
This blog is for Poli 15 students. Archives
November 2014
Categories |
RSS Feed