It is an identity. People from the islands aren't always "black" "native" or what have you. They have Indians, Chinese, Blacks, Whites, etc and they all mix with each other and share culture together. Maybe in their own islands they talk shit, but when they come to America they have that solidarity that they come from this specific island and they are from whatever that island is even though they recognize they maybe have different ancestors from different parts of the world.
They recognize they aren't "white" and that they are "of color" from island X.
Saying where you're from is one thing, but acting like "not white" is a type of people is another.
Language changes. It could mean something one time and mean something else another time. I don't understand why people cannot reuse that to mean just that - people from all over the world that is not white? How is that perpetrating anything?
"People of color" is not always used for hatred, but it implies a separation between white people and every other people, and this separation has been and continues to be the foundation for hatred of white people or people of color.
I grew up with parents of two different races and it never even occurred to me that anyone would dislike a person for the color of their skin until I learned about the civil rights movement. I thought that black skin and white skin were just features like brown hair and black hair. (Am I going to hate someone for having brown hair?) Black people and white people never seemed different to me until schools and my peers hammered the "people of color and white people" crap into my head for years.
If it never occurs to people that different skin colors are anything other than different skin colors, it's hard to develop hatred for someone because of their skin color. But if you tell people that people are different "people of color" because of their skin color, even if you tell them that these "different" people are equal, hatred is still possible.
To be fair, i can't get on white people or men not knowing what language they speak in India or whatever trivial shit like that. You CAN and SHOULD get on people for being insensitive and douchey though. It's not cool to ching chong East Asians… it's not cool to refer to blacks as my pals, and its not cool to call gays faggots etc etc.
I think that's generalized. If they're fine with it, then it's chill. Proceed with caution, but take it on a case-by-case basis.
What do you mean by the human part? Because honestly, if you teach people that you're a dick if you do the above things, you don't think that'll make them think about other dickish things they do/say to others in their life?
I don't think most humans think that deeply about their morality. Their response to being told they're saying something offensive would be something like, "okay, this demographic finds this word offensive," rather than "this demographic finds this word offensive. I wonder why. What other types of suffering are there other than offense? Why do people suffer and why do they create suffering for one another when they themselves know they do not want to suffer?"
So no, I don't think pointing out what words offend which people is going to cause anyone to get introspective about their own morality. Civilization has way too much entertainment floating around to make that likely.
I think all immorality has a pretty simple root. Unfortunately, I find it hard to explain in words, but I'll try. Human beings, as conscious beings do, enjoy the act of living and what it has to offer. Negative emotions are the result of a disruption of this enjoyment of an act of living. Unfortunately for humans, we can be ignorant of the idea that we're hurting others, (like if a child says "you're fat" to someone unaware that it's an insult), we can be so attached to our own joy that we avoid knowing if we're hurting others (alcoholics that unwittingly neglect their responsibilities), and we can even convince ourselves that depriving others of joy leads to a greater good (any group of people that says "x will be better if we kill y people").
All oppression is this. The oppressing group wants something that makes them feel good (control, a sense of grandeur, etc.) and the oppressed group feels bad because their own joy is disrupted by restricted freedom, resources, hatred, etc.
On the simpler level, the root of immorality applies to everything from the Holocaust, to gossiping about that bitch you work with, to stealing the last cookie from the cookie jar and blaming it on your sister. Everyone wants something and dislikes when they can't get it, and our actions can result in other people not getting what they want.
But social justice warriors, feminists, etc. don't seem to care about it on the simpler level. They won't ponder any metaphysical or psychological explanations. They seem to enjoy being crusaders for justice more than they want to find what justice actually is, whether it's a concept, a chemical process, etc. Of course they may care passionately about causes and how they apply to the lives of individuals, but they put on blinders and resist caring about any and all issues that hurt human beings in any way big or small.
Of course I'm only going off of my experience, but it makes me feel like they don't care about humanity as a whole. Do they ever wonder whether the oppressor suffers? No, they seem to hate them and/or pretend that life is all peachy for them. They're absolutely devoid of compassion for them. They're not interested in looking at both sides of the coin and making the best for both, they pick one side of the coin and fight for it.
It's all fights for women, fights for gays, fights for minorities, but it's not about creating a social climate where ALL humans can fucking get along. That doesn't seem to even cross their minds. Where is the love? They don't seem to want humans to develop a loving mindset towards one another, but to merely rip the shackles one places on the other, even if the shackler later gets shackled, or beaten, or shunned, or ostracized.
