Let's have a common sense party please!

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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);

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

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.

Was it this freshers' fair?

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

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.

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

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.

. Oops.
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
Germaine Greer has been no platformed from universities. We need to be very careful about who holds the power over speech.

I am committed to a

Maybe there is some middle way. I think there is a difference between dropping a clanger and deliberately trying to offend.

Any society which doesn't want to be constantly at war with each other has protocols for accepted behaviour. It's in the society's best interests not to kill each other. Surely accepted behaviour includes being respectful.

doodledog I would much rather learn a new way to express something (how hard is it, after all?) than go through life insisting that I have a right to cause upset or offence to people by refusing to learn.

Apparently attempting to be kind and thoughtful isn’t actually “common sense”.

Sara65 seems to be the only one who has got the point. The point is not feeling unable to say something, but the fact that we CAN'T speak our minds when we wish to.

What on earth CANT you say?

But the films aren't set back in the fifties or whenever they were written- they are fantasy novels and the film scripts are considerably updated so has the casting - . James Bond is not a real person any more than Dr Who - now a woman- shock horror.! Idris Elba would be a fab Bond.

I don't understand why James Bond couldn't be played by a black actor. I haven't seen the latest David Copperfield with Dev Patel in the main role but I did hear the film review. The conclusion was it simply didn't matter what colour or gender any of the characters were, what mattered was the brilliant production of a much loved Dickens novel. I've never liked, much less loved Bond but I honestly can't see why he has to remain as white and misogynist as he was originally written.

Actually rose James Bond is not just ‘ an idea of a guy’.
If you read the books Bond is described and so is his background which fits in with the British intelligence service
At that particular time.
I have no objection to a man of any race/colour playing the part these days, because times are different, and are not based on the books ( ran out of books some time ago.) They are just film scripts now.
To Bond purists though, he will always be a white British man as the original books indicated.

Bond, James Bond, is just an idea of a guy .. nothing he does is specifically white-

Ahah ladymuck what a pathetic get out. You can use * and quotation marks to say practically anything on here you want. If you are directing it at another poster or stating it as a fact, it might be against the guidelines. Maybe HQ is part of the conspiracy? One place you can go and say anything and I mean anything is the DM BTL comments. Or any meeting with TR and his supporters.

No need to say "sorry" *trisher. I agree with you. I'm baffled by the idea that people voted "leave" because they had somehow been prevented from saying what they really thought. What on earth did they want to say and what have they actually achieved?

Periods of polarization in society provide people with the opportunity to discuss matters openly- Some make every effort to do so in good form, some don't- Either way you choose to present your view, be prepared to have your ass handed to you kindly or on a silver platter by someone with an opposing view-

A forum member expressed her concerns regarding her daughter traveling to Pakistan with her family- She was belittled and labeled a racist for expressing said concerns by another member from atop her perambulating pedestal- Who, days later, was labeled the same for peddling a cemented concern about China as fact- Her pedestal tipped, and she landed, cake and ass in hand, tiara athwart ..