Why the Words We Use About "Race" Are Never Neutral

Hello {{ first name | friends}},

This is a micro-series I've been meaning to write for a while, and as it turned out, it ended up running long. The goal here is to share some of reasons for using the language I use in SARN, and to create a handy reference for you to get started in assessing your own language use. If you're a long time reader or anti-racist, some of the terms won't be new to you; unless you're in my spaces regularly, some of the reasons for my choices might be.

Let's start with one of the changes I made a couple years ago, and try to surface at least once in most pieces:

I get it: talking about "race" can feel like tiptoeing through a minefield. Nobody knows what to say, and everyone you ask has a different take. Some people try to dance around it by referring to Black and Global Majority people as "racialised". They aren't wrong, but they miss an important fact: EVERYONE is racialised. Yes, everyone, so "racialised" is not a shorthand for people who aren't white.

As I said in The "Fact" of Whiteness (SARN Minis #84):

"I am racialised as Black - the identity my skin and culture assign me - some of you are racialised as white - the identity your skin and culture assign you - and others are racialised in different ways. And I wonder how conversations about racism would change if more people racialised as white recognised their whiteness as a construct."

When I write in SARN, I like to use "racialised as Black" or "racialised as white" to keep that constructed reality visible.