Let's have a common sense party please!

Political correctness is really about being careful not to cause offence even when none intended - its empathising with others, putting yourself in another shoes, its being considerate and thoughtful. "Dropping a clanger" is unlikely if you engage brain before mouth. No one can stop you thinking racist thoughts but it is no longer acceptable to articulate them in most company. I'm not sure what is objectionable in that.

Bond is described, but not as white, specifically ..

I am committed to a womans right to choose, there are not many issues I feel more strongly about. Recently at a freshers fair in a university, those who dont agree with abortion were forbidden to hold a stall. I feel more uneasy about them being banned than anything that they as an organisation could have said

That does seem a little off. I’m curious what their justification for this was. You can’t choose if you don’t know your options. However if they felt women were going to be bullied then I can see why they might not want them there.

Was it this freshers' fair?

thetab.com/uk/glasgow/2019/09/20/anti-abortion-stall-removed-from-freshers-fair-at-university-of-strathclyde-20302

suziewoozie that is an example of what I mean.

The term 'coloured person' was used extensively many years ago but then that became offensive for some reason and 'black' was the term which had to be used.
Mixed race, dual heritage
Hispanic
White ethnic (USA term for those who are not WASPs)
The lists are endless
I know people who would be termed white because of their heritage but because they have dark, Mediterranean skin, they could be darker in skin tone than someone who is deemed to be black because of their heritage.

Now, of course, we are supposed to use the term 'person of colour' which is PC but to me is hardly different to coloured person which is deemed offensive.

I can understand why people cannot keep up, particularly people even older than me.
In fact, I'd rather forget about it altogether as people are people to me but it seems to be a big issue at the moment.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

And anyone who can keep up with using GN can keep up with acceptable language. If my neighbour didn’t read the racist rag that is the DE, he’d be better for it ( in many ways not just language);

But the essence of this thread is not bigotry and downright rudeness, but political correctness and what are the current terms which are not considered offensive and which constantly evolve, to the confusion of some older people.

An elderly person saying 'I want that nice coloured nurse to treat me' would risk being told he/she is being offensive, probably not by the nurse but by someone who took it upon themselves to be offended on her behalf.

Political correctness is really about being careful not to cause offence even when none intended - its empathising with others, putting yourself in another shoes, its being considerate and thoughtful.

That's the ideal but what it usually is is someone second guessing someone else about whose life they know nothing and imagining all the the most remote things that it is just possible one person in a million in that community might object to if said.

It is usually far more about the person being politically correct than the person who might be offended and enables the person speaking to get on their moral high horse and say, most of what the above quote says as justification..

The quote says at the end 'Its being considerate and thoughtful.' The rest of the quote is the antithesis of this.

Personally I do not believe that anyone can put themselves in somebody's shoes, unless they have lived their whole life alongside them as a clone. We can only walk alongside someone and do our best to be considerate and thoughtful.

Or on his behalf, before anyone picks me up for being sexist

The difference between "coloured person" and " person of colour" is that the "person" comes first - their colour isn't the most defining feature. Its like the term" autistic child" is less acceptable than " child on the autistic spectrum", the child should come first, not the condition.

But the problem is suziewoozie who defines what is acceptable? And how frequently does it change. If you were to refer to my "autistic grandson" I would not assume you were being offensive. However there is a school of thought that says person first descriptor second, so it should be my "grandson with autism", to fit in with the "person of colour" etc We don't at present use that every time though do we? When did you hear or see anyone described as a "person without hearing" or "a person without sight" To add to the minefield it's acceptable for people of colour to use the N word? Either it's offensive or it's not. If we start having different rules for people of different ethnicities is that not in itself is racist?
vegansrock posted while I was slowly typing but I'll let my post stand anyway.

Oh, well, who knew!

I didn't so thank you.
Am I a woman of whiteness?
My SiL being a woman of colour

So referring to someone as a 'privileged white man' is an intended racist insult then.

* oops random is there, sorry.

I was answering vegansrock but typing slowly

jan as I said, some terms there is universal agreement are unacceptable , others there are variations which seem to be in wide use. The general rule for me is what people in that specific ‘community’ feel is acceptable. Even if they don’t all agree, it’s easy to find the parameters within which discussion can take place.

Callistemon I guessed that, us slow typers get a bit out of sync some times

Well they can tell us what we can't say but they can't tell us what to think. We can still have opinions, just keep them to ourselves.

Yes, janipat people probably read my posts and think 'what is she referring to'

Call that’s just silly ‘woman of whiteness’. This discussion is too serious for infantile comments like that. And I think you’re using privileged incorrectly there. Did you mean to say’white privilege’ because that’s a different issue.

Thanks growstuff I am hopeless at links.

Common sense and politics seem to be mutually exclusive. Still, at least we can think whatever we want to - as long as we're silent!

You could just ask friends or co workers I suppose.

So suzie do you approach any individual you're meeting for the first time with "how do you like to be referred to" because all you'd get from my grandson would be his name. His parents have enough worries dealing with his autism not to give a flying fig whether you refer to him as autistic or having autism, being on the autistic spectrum or neurodiverse. They'd prefer some actual understanding of his behavioural issues to discussions on semantics.