------
New research shows that whites often avoid using race to describe other people, particularly in interactions with blacks. However further research reveals that such efforts to appear colorblind and unprejudiced are associated with less-friendly nonverbal behaviors

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=58199&nfid=crss
-------

Should people use race to describe someone or not?

In what context?

Mlle. Defarge wrote:
In what context?

Exactly. It totally depends on the situation. I think that race should not be the default descriptor, but that in certain cases it can be used unoffensively. It shows that you know something about someone if you describe them by their function, behaviour, personality, etc. It's just a little more respectful. However, if you need to be as efficient as possible, and the person described is the only one of a certain race, and you don't mention that fact, it seems a little insincere, avoidative, and possibly unfriendly. Being like that can also show that you feel uncomfortable talking about race... Maybe because you have unacceptable views and feelings about race? i.e. Kramer?

The context is that it's a photo...you don't know their personality, economic status, religous beliefs..leaving the testers just to describe what they see. That's all. Not exactly a situation most people run into on a day-to-day, but may arise in the case of emergency or criminal situation, for example. The active word is "appear"..the whites tested wanted to "appear" colorblind or unprejudiced when partnered with a black tester, all the while knowing full well what discriptors they could and normally do use. But they just came accross as dishonest or evasive when avoiding race as a descriptor.

A little anecdote, a former co-worker (middle-aged caucasian lady) of my sister-in-law, refused to call latinos "Mexicans" even if they were from MEXICO! In her mind the label is derrogatory and offensive. Though its not exactly the same situation, but maybe, in the minds of the Whites tested, the term "Black" or "African-American" is derrogatory and by them using it in the company of someone who is Black, will make them look like a racist. There own perception of the word "black" is negative...perhapse it's guilt or something.

But why would using race to describe someone be such a taboo... when age, eye color, sex, height, body weight, hair color are fine to use??

On a side, I always find it funny/bazzaar, when Im in a racially mixed group (mostly Asian, with Black and White mixed in), and someone will relate to me about a new friend or aquaintence, a black or asian will be referred to as " this cool Black guy/gal" or " this nice Asian guy/gal" that they have begun socializing with. Yet, if that aquaintence is White, they are just "cool guy/gal" with no racial descriptor...Is being white just a given? or the norm? and if so, why?

I've also been completely stunned at the things I've heard among Whites in social settings when they perceived me to be White (usually Italian or Spanish). That's what started my idea of "every white guy as a closet Kramer". I know its a totally unfair generalization, but in my experience, it seems more common than not that Whites express insensitivity to race issues or deny/avoid it all together, in a mixed group. But among themselves.....

Hapa Tony

What I have found in my own experience is that the more mixed environments a person spends time in, the more comfortable they are with race in general. I used to take the train to Hoboken, NJ every day for work. While down there, everybody seemed accepting of each other (at least where race was involved). They hated or loved you just the same, and respect was based on merit.

Then I would take the train back to upstate ny at night and find that if I was in a convenience store standing next to a black person on line, that it was awkward for either of us to even try to start a conversation with the other. It was like we both knew we weren't supposed to talk to eachother. It was weird, and it really bothered me. It was like there was a role that everyone expected of eachother and to not play that role, meant the spot light and the microscope were going to be on you.

Meanwhile, all of the people I hung out with in Hoboken were either black or hispanic. I did not hang out with the white people at work. I had less in common with them. But in general, everyone felt pretty comfortable around eachother and blacks and whites, etc had good interesting conversations with eachother all the same.

Then I'd come back up to upstate ny, my speech and grammar would change, and races didn't really talk to each other that much. It sucked. So what my point is here, is that different regions apply different types of pressure on the people within their barriers. People are aware of it only to so much of an extent, and people follow the guidelines put before them, not necessarily because they are racist, but because they are sleepwalking through life and not paying attention to the disturbing pressures being imposed on them.

The people in upstate ny always are not used to being around mixed racial environments. It doesn't make them racist, but it makes them ignorant of what people of other races are like. A white person in upstate ny might see more black people in television shows than he does in real life on a day to day basis. That doesn't make him racist, but it makes him very ignorant. You could almost imagine someone thinking that black people are always one type or another because they are going on what they see on tv. That's all the input that they have.

If they're around black people, hispanics, asians, muslims, jews, etc, then they would have a better understanding of the fact that people are people. They're all different. Everyone is an individual, and you can never typecast an entire race by what you see on television.

Anyway, the reason that I brought up all of this about upstate ny versus hoboken nj is that I wanted to explain why I think a lot of white people don't feel comfortable referring to someone by their race. They DON'T feel comfortable about it. They might WANT to feel comfortable about it and that's why they pretend they aren't paying attention to what race someone is.

Another story. I'm hanging out with my sister, her friend, and her friend's boyfriend. My sister's friend is black and Korean. I don't know why, but we were talking about Elvis while on our way from one bar to the next. Those three were saying what they thought his influences were. I think they were saying that it was Country music evolved. I was like, well, Elvis was heavily influenced by the black southern blues of the day. My sister kicked me.

That's how some people react. If you get kicked every time you try to talk openly about anything racial, you might just start avoiding the topic all together. But not me. I know I'm not racist, and I don't care who kicks me or says that I am. I'm gonna keep speaking my mind. That's the only way to get down to the real shit anyway.

Is it offensive to describe people as fat, skinny, short or tall? Using race as a physical description is just fine. Except...

What I noticed in Utah news is that they never racially describe Caucasian suspects when the suspect is Caucasian but will use a racial description for non-Caucasian suspects. That is messed up, it imbues a kind of "default" Caucasian standard and everyone else is an exception. That is not what America is about.

I don't know how the news reports it in more diverse states. I can't wait to move to California....2-3 years away and counting. (waiting for the real estate market out there to drop some more)

"They DON'T feel comfortable about it. They might WANT to feel comfortable about it and that's why they pretend they aren't paying attention to what race someone is."

According to the test, the White testers seemed to want to appear "Color-blind", they didn't even want to acknowledge race...To me its kind of like the difference between (this may seem as a terrible comparison, sorry) The smoker who when asked, denys that they smoke and The smoker who when asked, denys the existence of cigarettes...two denials, one just a lie, the other something else.

While it didn't deserve a kick, "I was like, well, Elvis was heavily influenced by the black southern blues of the day." is just being redundant as the Blues (and Rock N' Roll up to that point) was Black music...their culture and community created it. Elvis coopted (aka STOLE) it and put a sexy white face, heart-breakin-knee-shakin voice and hip swagger to it and now will forever be the KING of rockin'roll! (two scoops of sarcasm)

BTW..Linguistich, Im not baggin on you...Im just quoting you as starting points for my own rants and chest puffetry. ^_^

Hip Hop Tweety wrote:

While it didn't deserve a kick, "I was like, well, Elvis was heavily influenced by the black southern blues of the day." is just being redundant as the Blues (and Rock N' Roll up to that point) was Black music...their culture and community created it. Elvis coopted (aka STOLE) it and put a sexy white face, heart-breakin-knee-shakin voice and hip swagger to it and now will forever be the KING of rockin'roll! (two scoops of sarcasm)

BTW..Linguistich, Im not baggin on you...Im just quoting you as starting points for my own rants and chest puffetry. ^_^

I know you're not baggin me. I actually agree completely with you. It's pretty messed up that so many black artists of the day, who predated Elvis don't get their due creds for inventing rock-n-roll.