But it isn’t now, apparently. Times change, hairstyles change, acceptable descriptions change.
I don’t really get this debate. If you use a term which people with a certain genetic heritage find offensive, simply to describe their genetic heritage, why do it, unless you want to offend them? It might get a bit bewildering for us older gents, but let’s face it us white western blokes don’t really get this discrimination stuff, because we don’t have experience of it. I am 100% certain that had I been born female, gay or black, even in the privileged baby boomer generation with a family which valued education (like I was) my life would have been significantly different to what it has been, and not in a good way. I would have had to work harder to prove myself, be a better version of myself, and some avenues might have been closed off entirely. I’d like us to be in a world where accidents of birth, the things about yourself that you can’t change, are totally irrelevant (except in matters of personal attraction). Then the need for ‘political correctness’ will disappear. In the meantime (and this is a tragically slow process, 200 years at least and counting) perhaps huge sensitivity to diversity issues will hasten the day that we can forget about them. It’s counter intuitive to think that we need to emphasise diversity and identity to be able to bin it, but it’s a small price to pay in my view. And it both amuses me and drives me to despair when white middle aged blokes get wound up about it, indulging in their own little hissy fits of self identity politics because their lazy stereotyping is challenged, and their identity is threatened by that.
None of the above aimed at you Stainsey, I know you, like me, are just trying to work your way through this stuff.