Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Mention:

People of colour - Meghan and Harry approve

Coloured people - sackable offence at an innocent mistake

If "colour" is objectionable, discourage use of either phrase
 
Last edited:
Goldhawk-Road said:
Mention:

People of colour - Meghan and Harry approve

Coloured people - sackable offence at an innocent mistake

If "colour" is objectionable, discourage use of either phrase
Click to expand...
Stroller said:
I think the people that are being described should get to choose what they find offensive or not.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I’m sure Greg Clarke isn’t sat at home every day seething about black people but it’s an incredibly dopey thing for someone in his position to say- along with his comment on gays and women footballers. Doesn’t do a lot for ridding the FA of its image as a doddery old boys’ club. The whole thing was like a Little Britain sketch.
 
Goldhawk-Road said:
Not if it's ridiculously confusing - just proscribe the word "colour" when describing anyone and we'll all conform.
Click to expand...

Again though, it’s not really up to you or I or anyone not in the black community and even then it’s complex as some people may be offended by certain terms and others not. It’s been a given for some time though not to refer to people being “coloured”. Might be a subtle difference to us but it has terrible historic connotations.
 
West WindsR said:
Again though, it’s not really up to you or I or anyone not in the black community and even then it’s complex as some people may be offended by certain terms and others not. It’s been a given for some time though not to refer to people being “coloured”. Might be a subtle difference to us but it has terrible historic connotations.
Click to expand...

I get the "coloured people", but why keep the "people of colour"? The more confusing it is, the more rules will be infringed inadvertently and the white population will lose patience with the whole thing.
 
Goldhawk-Road said:
I get the "coloured people", but why keep the "people of colour"? The more confusing it is, the more rules will be infringed inadvertently and the white population will lose patience with the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Is it really that confusing?

Regular old people letting a word slip now and again is going to happen. Politicians and the like should be held to a higher standard. Doesn’t mean every instance has to be an instant sackable offence but when you’re in Clarke’s position, you have to be whiter than white, pun intended.
 
West WindsR said:
Is it really that confusing?

Regular old people letting a word slip now and again is going to happen. Politicians and the like should be held to a higher standard. Doesn’t mean every instance has to be an instant sackable offence but when you’re in Clarke’s position, you have to be whiter than white, pun intended.
Click to expand...

An increasing number of people think it is. Just use BAME, or Black British. Let's kick "colour" back into history where it belongs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back