"It wasn't that long ago that "Negro" was the accepted term and "black" was derogatory.Certainly in my lifetime."
.,,.
Indeed. And the same applies to 'coloured'. Someone was in trouble this week over the use of 'coloured' in the Tiger Woods row that has been going on; this was taken exception to and he apologised. But I remember, not too long ago, when 'black' was offensive and 'coloured' was the correct term to use; now that is entirely reversed. How, and when, and why, did this happen?

Oh, dear, it is so hard just to keep up. What do we think of "Dame Edna Everage's" facetious and evasive usage, 'tinted folks'? Should we adopt that?

Seriously, though, what do black/coloured/negro/tinted/ethnic/whevs Mudcatters reading this think?

~M~

Are any of these labels useful anyhow, or a mere distraction? Do we need them? I, just as a for-instance, am a London-born atheist, of pure Jewish ancestry SFAIK, but who embraced the Church of England in middle age, but, as my first wife said, that never 'took' and I quite soon returned to my default atheist position. So what am I? If it matters...