Is it ever appropriate to officially refer to someone by the colour of their skin?

[bmd]

I'm thinking that the answer is no. I am also thinking that if there was more of an effort to exclude this, make it not a choice for any official outlet, then that would be a leg up in the fight against racial discrimination, would it, or not? I am going to ignore the fact that it is supposed to have ended already (I believe), because it hasn't.

What say ye?

P.S. soz if there's a mega long thread on this already, I did look.

 

[Thora]

In what context? If you’re giving a description of someone then what they look like is pretty relevant.

 

[bmd]

In what context? If you’re giving a description of someone then what they look like is pretty relevant.

Officially, so say if someone is referred to within media channels for something noteworthy.

 

[emanymton]

When giving a description?

The other night I had to help out this old guy who was lost and didn't know where he was or how he got here. Ended up having to phone the police as I could not think of better option. When I was on the phone they asked for a description so they could look for him if he wandered off. Giving his skin colour seems as valid as hight, hair colour etc in this case.

 

[Thora]

Officially, so say if someone is referred to within media channels for something noteworthy.

Do you mean like “black footballer Bob Smith has scored 22 goals...”

 

[bmd]

Do you mean like “black footballer Bob Smith has scored 22 goals...”

Yes, exactly.

 

[emanymton]

Do you mean like “black footballer Bob Smith has scored 22 goals...”

Is anything like that ever said though?

 

[Thora]

Yes, exactly.

I had kind of assumed media didn’t do that unless it was relevant eg “first black Archbishop of Canterbury Gill Jones”. But tbh I don’t read newspapers.

 

[bmd]

When giving a description?

The other night I had to help out this old guy who was lost and didn't know where he was or how he got here. Ended up having to phone the police as I could not think of better option. When I was on the phone they asked for a description so they could look for him if he wandered off. Giving his skin colour seems as valid as hight, hair colour etc in this case.

That is valid, but for the purposes of this thread I would like to exclude Description.

I wish to meander along the banks of this river, dive in, dredge the bottom, pick the flowers, jump off a bridge and tether my rowing boat along the way. I was thinking about what could be done to make a step forward in racial discrimination that would include more people from all backgrounds.

 

[Thora]

Is anything like that ever said though?

I don’t know.

 

[bmd]

I had kind of assumed media didn’t do that unless it was relevant eg “first black Archbishop of Canterbury Gill Jones”. But tbh I don’t read newspapers.

It is still out there.

As an aside, I was watching whatsisname's (Shaun of the Dead's mate. Big bloke, beard?) new tv series about a phone engineer and in that there's a black kid who is playing a part that I have never ever seen being played by a black person. Zany, intelligent, anxious, nerdy, frightened but kind. Just felt really odd seeing that part played by a black person. Good odd but still. That made me think about how far we have to go with this stuff. That there is still stuff out there that I never have to consider.

 

[Johnny Doe]

I'm thinking that the answer is no. I am also thinking that if there was more of an effort to exclude this, make it not a choice for any official outlet, then that would be a leg up in the fight against racial discrimination, would it, or not? I am going to ignore the fact that it is supposed to have ended already (I believe), because it hasn't.

What say ye?

P.S. soz if there's a mega long thread on this already, I did look.

I sent a message to a football team group last week to say 'remember the tall black kid in central midfield wants to play forward, get someone up his arse and don't let him turn, keep him looking at his own goal, or else he'll destroy us'.

The team in question, had some good footballers and this seemed like an accurate description of this lad. Anything wrong with that? (Genuine question, I hadn't considered it potentially problematic before)

 

[pinkmonkey]

I'm thinking that the answer is no. I am also thinking that if there was more of an effort to exclude this, make it not a choice for any official outlet, then that would be a leg up in the fight against racial discrimination, would it, or not? I am going to ignore the fact that it is supposed to have ended already (I believe), because it hasn't.

What say ye?

P.S. soz if there's a mega long thread on this already, I did look.

I'd ask myself if it's necessary. For instance I admin a community group and we make it clear that you can usually identify strangers who are suspected of or are committing crime without racially profiling them. We banned a white male because he had a bit of a fetish for racial profiling and subsequently has been shown to be a total dickhead on other FB groups - attempting to employ black women to promote rum and paying them in rum rather than the London Living wage (as is the requirement of his own fucking FB group) springs to mind.
Why do we do this? Because black men in our community have told us about some upsetting situations where they have been seen by others, merely unlocking the doors of their own homes and then been challenged/reported/photographed/shamed just because someone else reported being mugged by a black man 15 miles away. Travellers experience the same bullshit, for instance we had a group of travellers rock up in our area last year but because no one had seen them, no comments about any crime, but as soon as they're spotted they get linked to everything and anything that goes on. My neighbour is a traveller, now settled and she said she dreaded a move because this would happen to her, then the locals would come try to poison her dogs in the night. Hell is other people.

 

[Treacle Toes]

I sent a message to a football team group last week to say 'remember the tall black kid in central midfield wants to play forward, get someone up his arse and don't let him turn, keep him looking at his own goal, or else he'll destroy us'.

The team in question, had some good footballers and this seemed like an accurate description of this lad. Anything wrong with that? (Genuine question, I hadn't considered it potentially problematic before)

I'd say there isn't anything wrong with what you said no.

If the kid had been White would you have used his skin colour as a descriptor too or would he have been described as 'the tall kid in central midfield' ?

 

[bmd]

I sent a message to a football team group last week to say 'remember the tall black kid in central midfield wants to play forward, get someone up his arse and don't let him turn, keep him looking at his own goal, or else he'll destroy us'.

The team in question, had some good footballers and this seemed like an accurate description of this lad. Anything wrong with that? (Genuine question, I hadn't considered it potentially problematic before)

You must have missed the bit about Description that I put upthread.

As an aside, what I find a little tiresome about this place, sometimes, is that a poster must first wade through a swamp of questions from people who see some free internet points in their sights. In order to talk about anything even remotely approaching tricky you can forget about anyone trying to understand you . They will try to misunderstand you first. "Explain to me why...." "Do you mean...?" I thought..." and other such openers are all over the thread whenever anyone sniffs a gold star or two. It is fucking tedious tbh.

Obviously I am not talking about anyone on this thread.

 

[Johnny Doe]

You must have missed the bit about Description that I put upthread.

Indeed I did. Note to self to read properly!

 

[Pickman's model]

I sent a message to a football team group last week to say 'remember the tall black kid in central midfield wants to play forward, get someone up his arse and don't let him turn, keep him looking at his own goal, or else he'll destroy us'.

The team in question, had some good footballers and this seemed like an accurate description of this lad. Anything wrong with that? (Genuine question, I hadn't considered it potentially problematic before)

so there's 11 kids from the team on the field, max 5 in midfield, maybe 2 central midfielders. You've identified him as tall. Was he the only central midfielder? Was there another player in the same position always wanting to go forward? Was the hue of his skin necessary to identify him?

 

[bmd]

I'd ask myself if it's necessary. For instance I admin a community group and we make it clear that you can usually identify strangers who are suspected of or are committing crime without racially profiling them. We banned a white male because he had a bit of a fetish for racial profiling and subsequently has been shown to be a total dickhead on other FB groups - attempting to employ black women to promote rum and paying them in rum rather than the London Living wage (as is the requirement of his own fucking FB group) springs to mind.
Why do we do this? Because black men in our community have told us about some upsetting situations where they have been seen by others, merely unlocking the doors of their own homes and then been challenged/reported/photographed/shamed just because someone else reported being mugged by a black man 15 miles away. Travellers experience the same bullshit, for instance we had a group of travellers rock up in our area last year but because no one had seen them, no comments about any crime, but as soon as they're spotted they get linked to everything and anything that goes on. My neighbour is a traveller, now settled and she said she dreaded a move because this would happen to her, then the locals would come try to poison her dogs in the night. Hell is other people.

Thanks for understanding what I mean, it is pretty refreshing.

The incident you mentioned, where black men are seen as burglars, is pretty much what I'm talking about when I started this thread. No, not that black men are burglars (here we go again, I'm just pre-empting, please forgive me). There seems to be so much wilful misunderstanding or straight up racism. Like, do they really think that a black person who is going into a house is robbing it? No.

So, what can we do to chip away at this in strata of societies where light doesn't shine so brightly from torches that aren't The Sun or Daily Mail? I genuinely think something like this, where we are guided on how to refer to someone, would help. Or, if not this then what would you like to see as a measure to reduce racism?

 

[Johnny Doe]

so there's 11 kids from the team on the field, max 5 in midfield, maybe 2 central midfielders. You've identified him as tall. Was he the only central midfielder? Was there another player in the same position always wanting to go forward? Was the hue of his skin necessary to identify him?

There was a real mix of kids (I say kids, mainly in their 20s), and not all played in the same positions all game. They definitely had some other tall midfielders. In retrospect, the lad in question was by far their standout player, hence the planning to deal with him, so perhaps no description at all was needed.

 

[kalidarkone]

I'm thinking that the answer is no. I am also thinking that if there was more of an effort to exclude this, make it not a choice for any official outlet, then that would be a leg up in the fight against racial discrimination, would it, or not? I am going to ignore the fact that it is supposed to have ended already (I believe), because it hasn't.

What say ye?

P.S. soz if there's a mega long thread on this already, I did look.

I'm a black mixed race woman and I have no problem with being described by my skin colour in the right context and think that you are talking pc bollocks.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I'd say there isn't anything wrong with what you said no.

If the kid had been White would you have used his skin colour as a descriptor too or would he have been described as 'the tall kid in central midfield' ?

Depends on numbers, if he's the only black kid on the field, or in central midfield then it sounds valid, if all the team where black apart from the tall white kid in central midfield then skin colour would be valid there too, but if it were a white kid and there were 9 other white kids on the field it would be pointless, so perhaps hair colour/style would be more appropriate then?

 

[Johnny Doe]

If the kid had been White would you have used his skin colour as a descriptor too or would he have been described as 'the tall kid in central midfield' ?

Yeah, I would have said the white kid. The team was fairly mixed.

 

[kalidarkone]

I sent a message to a football team group last week to say 'remember the tall black kid in central midfield wants to play forward, get someone up his arse and don't let him turn, keep him looking at his own goal, or else he'll destroy us'.

The team in question, had some good footballers and this seemed like an accurate description of this lad. Anything wrong with that? (Genuine question, I hadn't considered it potentially problematic before)

Nothing wrong with it unless there is more than one tall black kid.

When it's the other way round I use white as a description when they are in a minority and are not going to be confused with someone else.

 

[MickiQ]

It depends on the context in which it is used, If it's pejorative then no it isn't, if it's purely descriptive then yes it's fine. I once spent 5 mins looking at an office full of people wondering which one was Andy since the person who had described him to me had said "You can't miss him Mick" while simultaneously omitting the fact that Andy was the only black person there.
We can't say skin colour doesn't matter (which it absolutely shouldn't) whilst acting as if it does.

 

[maomao]

I work in a school where there is on average (mode) one white child in each class and have sometimes referred to them as 'the white boy/girl'.

 

[kalidarkone]

However if what the op is talking about is just referring to someone's difference within the dominant culture, for the sake of it then yes I have a problem with that.

 

[kalidarkone]

I think regardless of the situation I would be described as the large woman with bright red hair/red eyebrows....although I'm assuming that.
Ok in an ideal world......perhaps otherwise it would be the mixed girl with huge knockers and bright red hair....

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Depends on numbers, if he's the only black kid on the field, or in central midfield then it sounds valid, if all the team where black apart from the tall white kid in central midfield then skin colour would be valid there too, but if it were a white kid and there were 9 other white kids on the field it would be pointless, so perhaps hair colour/style would be more appropriate then?

Shirt number.

 

[Johnny Doe]

Shirt number.

Couldn't remember it. Probably because we didn't manage to keep him turned around in the first game!

(And also, no guarantee he'd be wearing same number for the away fixture)

 

[teuchter]

It so happens I found myself reading this last night, and noted that they choose to refer to the main participant as "Black Guy". This is from 15 years ago and I wondered if a different choice would be made now.

David Copperfield "Portal" illusion: thoughts on how it's done? - #11 by Bryan_Ekers - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board

Portal. Kinda long, but the gist is that he has a bunch of random people from the audience write and draw a bunch of stuff. Then he takes a polaroid of it. His assistant and he go into a curtain and are magically transp…

boards.straightdope.com