Comment on Is there a website that can tell you the new names to I guess "classify" people? Like the R word, or the N word or skin color or nationaility? For ex. Is African American still acceptable and so forth

meco03211@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• moldy_rice@piefed.keyboardvagabond.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Native is fine in North America, but offensive in South America. Better to use Indigenous

  source
• Evil_Incarnate@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I met a guy with Indian parents, but he was born and lived in the USA. I asked if that meant he was an American Indian. Nobody would answer me.

  source

  • Infrapink@thebrainbin.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    He's an Indian American. An American Indian would be an Indian of American descent.

    source
  • daychilde@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’ve heard a way to disambiguate “Indian” is to ask “dot or feather?” which is, alas, at least mildly racist. But I remember reading about it a few years ago because someone of - wait for it¹ - native and Indian heritage who worked at a casino on a reservation as tech support - was asked this question and got to answer “BOTH!” (and we were all amused at their job and its location) lol

    It sounds made up, and who knows, but at the time I remember the discussion seemed to support that they weren’t lying. :shrug:

    ---

    ¹ but I won’t make you wait long. In fact, if you had skipped this footnote, you’d already know!

    source

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      in swedish it’s “indian” for native north american, and “indier” for someone from india.
      I feel like one could come up with a similar distinction in english but the best i can come up with is “indie” which is unfortunately already taken.

      source

      • daychilde@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        In Canada they use “First Nations”, which I really like, so I use that a lot of the time (of the rare times the subject arises). :)

        source
• bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I think its better to just bypass all of that unless you actually know where they are from and just say, dark skinned fellow. Light skinned woman. There is nothing wrong with using a descriptor.

  source

  • Hegar@fedia.io ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Given the history of racism and colorism in the US, reducing a person of color to just their skin color can sometimes cause upset. Using a non-skin-tone related descriptor is generally safer.

    source

    • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Sure I get that. I’m thinking just in a situation where I am describing a stranger. Like “hey front desk person, a dark skinned man with a blue hat dropped his keys but I didnt see what room he went in. I have to leave so I’m leaving them with you”

      source

      • Bismyth@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I’m probably being overly semantic but perhaps saying “A person with a blue hat and dark skin” would be the least abrasive way of putting it? That said, obsessing over endless semantic refinement and searching for a flawless alternative that does not exist for fear of hypothetical offense will lead to recursive over-correction ad nauseam

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • daychilde@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    dark skinned MAN, you MISANDRIST!

    (I kid, I kid)

    source