It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Idk if that’s for white folks like me (and you?) to decide, and there is no harm on erring on the side of caution.

    yeah, probably not, and that’s why i tend to err on the side of these discussions not being very productive. As for erring on the side of caution, idk. I’m not really sure theres that much caution even present to begin with. It might even be sufficient enough to just not use the terms around specific people per their request, or not at all, who knows.

    It’s like the deal with micro-aggressions. Alone they’re not much, but a constant buildup of these little things can leave someone feeling raw and very sensitive to it.

    i think my problem, is that people have a very analytical and sterile approach to these things. In terms of classifying and denoting things micro aggressions as a term makes sense. But from a broader societal perspective, i think it’s useless, if not negatively impactful.

    It’s better to identity specific facets of society that are problematic, for example treatment and behavior of certain people differently from others, as opposed to “treating the symptom” so to speak.

    I don’t think the etymology started with race, I think it started with day/night. But I’m not an expert on etymology, and while I’m very curious, it probably doesn’t really matter here.

    it really could’ve been from anything, but at the end of the day whatever it started from is irrelevant to it’s use case today, and anybody using it to be offensive is offensive for other reasons at that point.