Benedict Cumberbatch sorry for 'coloured' comment
Discussion
B17NNS said:
You can't keep up with appropriate terminology these days. Black used to be offensive and coloured was acceptable. Now it's the other way round. Strangely, 'people of colour' is fine. If people had listened to the sentiment rather than taken one word out of context they'd have not been offended at all.
Probably best not to dip your toes in the race issue then, if you are ignorant of what's what.I'm 42 & black has been the preferred term in the UK since I can remember. At least since the end of the 1980's. Only very few old folk use the term coloured, but then maybe I come from a more enlightened background than you do?
The dislike of the term is strongest in the US, because the word was used to segregate whites from blacks up until about 1965.
FredClogs said:
"People of colour" is acceptable and a plural term, identifying someone as "coloured" is not.
That, Captain, is illogical.When I was a lad 'coloured' or 'black' were interchangeable. My parents, who arrived on the banana boat (literally) in the early '60s, knew more than I about racism, and were not offended by either word. If anything, 'coloured' would have been considered the more PC term, if such a concept existed back then.
When I have to complete government forms I tick 'Black British'. (I actually object to this. Why does my race matter?) In a few years I expect the forms will have to say "citizen of the UK from African extraction", or some such b
ks.The 'acceptable term' for referring to any minority group seems to change with such frequency that only the professionally offended could possibly keep up.
In summary: Benedict Cumberbatch said nothing wrong and had nothing to apologise for.
Digga said:
FredClogs said:
Digga said:
FredClogs said:
Errr... I'm just demonstrating how his dislocation from reality and awareness of the acceptable vernacular came from - his closeted and extremely privileged upbringing, he has an excuse for his ignorance - I'm being kind to him.
Did your school canteen serve a lot of chips?I don't know what relevance this has to a man with a very high level of privileged education feigning ignorance of the language and violence of one of the historical corner stones of western culture. It's a bit like people using the derogatory language of the holocaust and pretending they just didn't realise that words have meanings... It's ludicrous. Which is why (to be fair) Cumbercock has unconditionally apologised with contrition and humility and probably feels like a right dick now, it never ceases to amaze me why so many people take delight jumping on a bandwagon that has a shamed and ridiculed driver trying his best to get off.
SpudLink said:
That, Captain, is illogical.
When I was a lad 'coloured' or 'black' were interchangeable. My parents, who arrived on the banana boat (literally) in the early '60s, knew more than I about racism, and were not offended by either word. If anything, 'coloured' would have been considered the more PC term, if such a concept existed back then.
When I have to complete government forms I tick 'Black British'. (I actually object to this. Why does my race matter?) In a few years I expect the forms will have to say "citizen of the UK from African extraction", or some such bks.
The 'acceptable term' for referring to any minority group seems to change with such frequency that only the professionally offended could possibly keep up.
In summary: Benedict Cumberbatch said nothing wrong and had nothing to apologise for.
Absolutely spot on !When I was a lad 'coloured' or 'black' were interchangeable. My parents, who arrived on the banana boat (literally) in the early '60s, knew more than I about racism, and were not offended by either word. If anything, 'coloured' would have been considered the more PC term, if such a concept existed back then.
When I have to complete government forms I tick 'Black British'. (I actually object to this. Why does my race matter?) In a few years I expect the forms will have to say "citizen of the UK from African extraction", or some such b
ks.The 'acceptable term' for referring to any minority group seems to change with such frequency that only the professionally offended could possibly keep up.
In summary: Benedict Cumberbatch said nothing wrong and had nothing to apologise for.
It really rankles me when you have to fill in forms ie Council tax Q How would you describe your family A One that pays all the bloody taxes as every one else!
TBH I always refuse to answer, wife tuts & tells me I am getting old & techy about silly little things.
Here's some more from Wikipedia,
"Different societies, such as Australia, Brazil, the United Kingdom, the United States and South Africa apply differing criteria regarding who is classified as "black", and these criteria have also varied over time. In some countries, social variables affect classification as much as skin color, and the social criteria for "blackness" vary. For example, in North America the term black people is not necessarily an indicator of skin color or ethnic origin but is more of a socially based racial classification related to being African American, with a family history related to institutionalized slavery. In South Africa and Latin America, mixed-race people are not considered to be "black", and in other regions, such as Australia and Melanesia, the term "black" has been applied to, and used by, populations with a different history and racial origin."
So the situation is absolutely not as clear-cut as some try to claim.
In my opinion it's all about context and intention, so seems to me inappropriate to make a fuss about Mr Cumberbatch.
"Different societies, such as Australia, Brazil, the United Kingdom, the United States and South Africa apply differing criteria regarding who is classified as "black", and these criteria have also varied over time. In some countries, social variables affect classification as much as skin color, and the social criteria for "blackness" vary. For example, in North America the term black people is not necessarily an indicator of skin color or ethnic origin but is more of a socially based racial classification related to being African American, with a family history related to institutionalized slavery. In South Africa and Latin America, mixed-race people are not considered to be "black", and in other regions, such as Australia and Melanesia, the term "black" has been applied to, and used by, populations with a different history and racial origin."
So the situation is absolutely not as clear-cut as some try to claim.
In my opinion it's all about context and intention, so seems to me inappropriate to make a fuss about Mr Cumberbatch.
SpudLink said:
When I have to complete government forms I tick 'Black British'. (I actually object to this. Why does my race matter?) In a few years I expect the forms will have to say "citizen of the UK from African extraction", or some such bks.
you don't have to fill in anything like that, leave it blank if it offends you - I wouldn't tick any box with 'white' it's pointless and irrelevantks.the only official way of saying someone is 'black', is if they say it themselves, there isn't a dulux colour chart on the wall of the statistics office
Mr_B said:
Does anyone here actually think he is a vile racist, or just someone that said something a bit clumsy to a very faux overreaction by the likes of PH's permanently offended band of warriors of Zygalski and Fred Blogs ?
I believe that I have a bit of a reputation for lefty-pinko-liberalism, but I would concede that this does seem like a lot of fuss over nothing to me.That said, I am however surprised that someone of Cumberbatch's age and intelligence wasn't aware that 'coloured' is a very outdated term that should no longer be used.
I thought the issue with the word 'colour' was that you're saying they (black people) are a different colour to the default which is white. e.g. nobody is saying a white person is coloured just people who are black.
Saying someone is white or black is fine but saying someone is coloured is like saying they are a different colour to the norm.
Edited to add, I'm not offended by either word or by anything in this thread. I'm not even offended by people who are overly PC.
Saying someone is white or black is fine but saying someone is coloured is like saying they are a different colour to the norm.
Edited to add, I'm not offended by either word or by anything in this thread. I'm not even offended by people who are overly PC.
Edited by el stovey on Tuesday 27th January 11:39
Hugo a Gogo said:
you don't have to fill in anything like that, leave it blank if it offends you - I wouldn't tick any box with 'white' it's pointless and irrelevant
the only official way of saying someone is 'black', is if they say it themselves, there isn't a dulux colour chart on the wall of the statistics office
On occasion I do write 'not relevant'.the only official way of saying someone is 'black', is if they say it themselves, there isn't a dulux colour chart on the wall of the statistics office
zygalski said:
Fartomatic5000 said:
Anyone know the history of the word? I thought it started being used because some found "black" offensive. Hard to keep up with the serially offended PC crowd.
Typical faux ignorance.Clearly you have access to the internet. You may watch tv, listen to the radio & read newspapers too. When was the last time in any media that you saw or heard a black person being described as "coloured" when used as the description of race?
Some people talk utter b
ks in these forums. Your post being a prime example.el stovey said:
I thought the issue with the word 'colour' was that you're saying they (black people) are a different colour to the default which is white. e.g. nobody is saying a white person is coloured just people who are black.
Saying someone is white or black is fine but saying someone is coloured is like saying they are a different colour to the norm.
And they, describing themselves as 'people of colour' ? Is this wrong too ? Come on. Are you going to tell them ?Saying someone is white or black is fine but saying someone is coloured is like saying they are a different colour to the norm.
BC should be challenged over one thing though. Over why he really did apologise ? That would be interesting.
Benedict Cumberbatch is my motherf
king caucasian
Derek Smith said:
It is a farcical response. His message against racism and for equal opportunities has been lost in the race to make him suffer for a slip of the tongue.
It would appear that taking offence at nomenclature is more important in the great scheme of things than anti racism.
Welcome to the 'modun' world. It would appear that taking offence at nomenclature is more important in the great scheme of things than anti racism.
For example, here at home. Fewer PCs on the street, but PC on every street.
Claudia Skies said:
I have been around for many years and have NEVER been aware until today that the word "coloured" had any unfortunate connotations.
I'm surprised that anyone who grew up in the UK in recent years (80s onwards) didn't know it wasn't really on to used the word 'coloured'. I do recall kids giggling about it at school whenever an older folk used the word - the lengthy apology from Cumberbatch is probably more to do with his embarrassment at his lack of up-to-date terminology than any actual offence caused. Clearly he didn't know - no one should blame him for this.FredClogs said:
Eton educated ponce can't converse with people in the real world - not news, no surprise.
That has nothing to do with it. I'm a similar age to Cumberbatch and was told at school that it was "offensive to say "black", their skin isn't black, we all have many different shades - you should say "coloured" ". My school? A chav infested comprehensive where kids were expelled for things like smoking, drug taking, and in one particular case having a w
k under the table during a lesson. It's as plain as the nose on my face that some people have evolved for a Northern European environment, and others have not.
One of the few factually correct descriptions of someone based upon their appearance may be 'evolved for an African environment' by nature of their ancestry and so on. Unfortunately any mention of evolution carries the suspicion that it might also include the brain rather than just skin pigment, therefore this is unlikely to catch on. I suggest we continue tie ourselves in euphemistic knots.
One of the few factually correct descriptions of someone based upon their appearance may be 'evolved for an African environment' by nature of their ancestry and so on. Unfortunately any mention of evolution carries the suspicion that it might also include the brain rather than just skin pigment, therefore this is unlikely to catch on. I suggest we continue tie ourselves in euphemistic knots.
FredClogs said:
In South africa that is the terminology, you have whites, blacks and anyone else is called coloured. In the states "coloured" was a term used in the south to identify slaves, words have no meaning without history, cultural relevance and reference, they're just a collection of letters, most people who have been brought up correctly through the latter part of the last century should be aware that if in doubt you just don't say stuff. People like Cumberbatch have so little connection to the real world that eventually when his world and the real world collide there is bound to be some disparity.
Yes, in the States the term has it's roots in the slave era and, even today, is still commonly heard below the Mason Dixon Line. Most Americans would give foreigners or geriatrics a pass. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff