Ah, another controversial topic for your arguing pleasure! It’s only been recently that I heard the expression, which at least to my knowledge is the new form of “buppie” or in its more politically correct form “the emerging black middle class”. Now, admittedly, it’s an expression I’ve used, to my shame now, but it is nonetheless a very convenient expression. People tout the “emerging black middle class” as the ultimate indicator that our country’s not running downhill, but what I had pointed out to me recently changed my views on this expression.
During a conversation about the “Black Diamond” phenomenon, the person I was talking to gave me the reason why they disagree with the term:
• The very term “previously disadvantaged”, which is also often used, implies that the people to whom the term refers are no longer disadvantaged.
• The term is inherently divisive, as it refers only to black people. Perhaps a more accurate term would be “South Africa’s expanding middle class”.
• Furthermore, the phrase “Black Diamond” has some somewhat uneasy connotations: firstly, it’s very akin to “black sheep”, or something that goes against the normal grain. Added to this is the fact that “Diamond” connotes rarity, once again marking the people who classify for this definition as something rare and “other”.
All this gave me a great deal of food for thought, particularly in terms of how people in this country are segmented and labeled (more on segmentation later). Are we being intrinsically discriminatory, or are we merely “telling it like it is” (to use an overly hackneyed expression)? And how useful is this term, and the segmentation behind it?
Yours
aimee
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Rad post and very interesting. I agree with you. The extent to which we're unaware of the implications of this tool called language is actually quite frightening, even to the extent that we understand our usual unawareness. So discussions like this are extremely important, especially so given the socioeconomic and discriminatory implications of this particular example.
yay! someone's reading it :) but yes - people often forget how important language is in its nuances, and "pc" is seldom the answer (in fact, i'd argue pc is often exactly the wrong reation, as it tends to make issues where they needn't exist, by cloaking the true issue...)
Post a Comment