Defence or unwanted interference?

By way of explanation for my conclusion about chips on shoulders, I made allowances for the racism of the woman I knew for a long time but when she tried to justify the actions of the Glasgow Airport suicide bomber and said that those trying to stop him causing a disaster were "just as bad" I realised that I had been making excuses for her for a long time and it was time to stop.

So, yes, people are free to express their feelings, whatever those feelings are, and other people are equally free to criticise the premises those feelings are based on if they see fit. Freedom of expression works both ways. The fact that the woman writing the article we've been talking about had such feelings and wrote about them doesn't make her right in her conclusions about Defender Woman whose motives seem to me to have been good.

The essence of the story is this: one stranger to the young couple started verbally abusing them. Another stranger stepped in and told him to stop. Perhaps stranger number two didn't need to step in but the young couple were glad that she had.

So why complain?

I think that some, if not a majority of people of colour are rightly fed up of being protrayed as victims.

I think that the racial situation in this country has been overegged.
My children, as I have written elsewhere, mix and work and live, here and in other countries and places, with many many people of different nationalities.
They say that people of colour are a lot freer than we are as regards how they speak in their daily lives. That it is white people that are so hung up about it all.

"people of colour" I dislike this description intensly, I find it a racist statement, I am pinkish, so I am of colour. Black people are rightly proud of being black as are all other races, black > white and all shades in between.

I hate it intensely too. But it is the politically correct one.

Bugger politically correct.

Respect people, yes, and be polite to them and about them. Be politically correct for it's own sake, not bloody likely.

Apostrophe!!! How do they get in??

Here we go again. And anyway fwiw is it the term that is broadly accepted in the UK by those it is used to refer to? I thought it was a USA term? But anyway, it's the decision of that group that matters. WTF does political correctness have to do with describing people with particular characteristics as they choose? I'd call it educated , intelligent, thoughtful politeness. But no let's have a silly discussion about being pinkish

That - what is being politically correct for its own sake? Do you mean being a complete idiot who doesn't understand why certain terms are more acceptable than others but uses the one that has been labelled as pc and then sighs as they do so and makes a pathetic comment?

But so-called "politically correct" terms keep changing. What is 'correct' one year is incorrect and even called racist another year. If one is polite and respectful, one is not being racist or mean whatever words one uses. It's not the words that matter but how they are used.

I used the term "of Asian lineage" to describe someone. Do not tell me this is wrong in any way. It is purely descriptive, just as someone might describe me as "of European lineage". "Person of colour" is not neutrally descriptive in the same way; it's a mere label. For now. It'll change as have all the terms that preceded it. I'll stick with 'mere' descriptive terms when I need them, thanks.

There are several questions here.

Should we follow the letter of the law or the spirit of the law? If we go by the letter, we can still be bloody nasty without transgressing.
Is racism in the language or in the heart? does it matter which?
Can non-white people be racist or are they all perfectly PC toward other races?
Should we stop arguing about how many angels can stand on the head of a pin and just welcome the angels when they appear? (or is it on the point of a pin? Must get the terminology exactly right even if I am not certain I can define the concept )

The last question is sarcastic, in case anyone did not recognise that.

I never thought "person of colour" was a good term.
But I do not work in the public Government world, so am never up on the latest terms.
So it is non white now?
No wonder older people have even more problems. They can be 20 years out fo date without realising it.
Even 1 year out of date [which not at all sure I am] is deemed wrong now.

The non white people in the real world are not bothered by this much, if at all. It is only whites who are so anguished.
[I dont even like the term white either. Stupid term]. Really ridiculous situation. I do think whites need to get a grip. They are the ones with the problem. The rest of the world is getting on with its life.

I am beginning to think that gransnetters have their own unique acceptable code on this.

I have now googled.
Yep, that term is now not right.

Good. Very good. I never liked it.

So sorry, if I have offended anyone whatsoever. I did not know it had changed. I did see the term used on gransnet a few months ago, so assumed that it was ok. The term to use.

Apologies once again.

The fact that people feel the need to apologise just in case they might inadvertently have said the wrong currently out of favour word or phrase, shows how ridiculous political correctness is.

Good morning janeainsworth.

It's okay by me for people to write any article they want to about anything.

Or almost.

The scenario you imagine is very unlikely. I don't think it is so easy for black people to patronise whites.

By the way, I too hate the expression 'person of colour'. It's so twee. But if persons of colour want to be called that I respect their wishes and use it.

And the very name "political correctness" shows that it isn't about the basic human grace of politeness but about some stupid ever-changing rule that someone somewhere invented to keep tripping everyone up. That's all political correctness does: gives people who defend it an excuse to attack others over trivia.

Absolutely, thatbags.

Why is the scenario janea outlined deemed very unlikely? Why is is less likely for a "person of colour" to step in and help someone else? I regard that as a racist view.

I'm a person of non-colour. Fading out of here. It's getting bonkers.

I tend to agree with thatbags.

She may well have still been feeling angry and quite het-up when she posted it and not looking for glory.
It may well have prevented the young couple being further abused - who knows if it may have become much worse if no-one had intervened?

Should we walk by on the other side?

When I worked for the Government, about 15 years ago we had to fill in a lengthy form answering all kinds of personal questions.
In return I got a slip of paper telling me where I worked and that I was 'white Caucasian'.
Crazy waste of money.
As far as I was concerned I was a civil servant.

I will start a thread, so as not to be accused of derailing this one.

Going out later, so it will have to be tomorrow.