Timeline for Professionally Opting out of Inclusion Diversity and Unconscious Bias "training"
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 2021 at 21:23 | comment | added | Viliam Búr | @nvoigt "freely chosen" by whom exactly? was there a referendum? "people of color" themselves are individuals with their own minds, some of them agree and some of them disagree. whenever someone speaks in the name of everyone else, they really mostly speak for themselves. | |
| May 29, 2021 at 9:13 | comment | added | nvoigt♦ | Well, sometimes labels and descriptions are necessary. How would you describe the person that just stole a book? It would be stupid to not mention their most obvious and unchangeable features, their skin color, sex, height and weight. Or age. That is not discrimination. | |
| May 29, 2021 at 9:06 | comment | added | Donald | I just typically call a person by their name and avoid any labels that describes something that is totally irrelevant to what makes them someone I want to get to know, work with, love or any other positive adjectives that can be used to describe the interaction with another person. This Philosophy has always served me well in life. | |
| May 29, 2021 at 6:11 | comment | added | nvoigt♦ | @Ertai87 Their boss decides what they work on. And the boss decided that this training is part of the job. If the OP wants to make their own rules about library work, they need to found one themselves. That's why it's a paid job, not a hobby. You don't always get to do what is fun. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 19:09 | comment | added | Ertai87 | @nvoigt If I was the OP, I would rather be spending those 2 hours doing my job at the library and helping people and being paid for that, than watching a video and not doing my job and not actually helping people. OP seems passionate about her job and not passionate about this training and would much rather be doing one than the other, and I can empathize with that. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 16:24 | comment | added | Seth R | @DannyBeckett, the phrase "person of color" emphasizes that they are a person first, and the fact that they are non-white is just an added descriptor. "Colored person" puts a qualifier on their personhood, as if to say they are almost like a (white) person, but not quite, because they are "colored". Whether intentional or not, historically, that is exactly the sentiment behind the phrase. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 15:47 | comment | added | nvoigt♦ | @DannyBeckett In a nutshell, "colored" has always been a label created to discriminate against people (whether it's Jim Crow or the Apartheid Regime), while PoC is a description freely chosen. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 15:39 | comment | added | gnasher729 | A "coloured" person would be someone who is originally say white, and then gets "coloured" by applying black or brown paint. A "person of colour" is a person whose natural state it is to have a colour that isn't white. Similar to "transgender" and "transgendered". A "transgender" person is in their natural state; a "transgendered" person would have been somehow modified. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 14:39 | comment | added | Barmar | @DannyBeckett Words and phrases have historical context, beyond their literal meanings. | |
| May 28, 2021 at 13:31 | comment | added | Chris H | @DannyBeckettn Chicago Tribune piece; paragraph 6 is probably most relevant but best to start at the top | |
| May 28, 2021 at 13:19 | comment | added | Danny Beckett | Regarding the word order, I am interested but you didn't say... what is the difference? It sounds akin to "yellow coloured bees" vs "bees coloured yellow" | |
| May 28, 2021 at 10:03 | history | edited | nvoigt♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| May 28, 2021 at 6:39 | history | answered | nvoigt♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |