I think this is one of those things that if it bothers people, it is really easy to change the way we speak out of courtesy and understanding. When green and blue people start speaking up for themselves, I’ll adapt my usage of those words as well. It really isn’t a hard thing to do or understand.
“Mansplaining” bothers me, “personsplaining” would be more fair and inclusive.
Many years ago a co-worker explained why she didn’t want to be called ‘oriental’ and preferred Korean or Asian. I got it. ■■■■■■, gypped, other obviously hurtful terms? Gone from my vocabulary. But there are other words that I won’t give up. Adopt? Yes, highways and laws and dogs can be adopted and I’m not going to stop using the term ‘adopt’ except when talking about children. I’m going to continue to use the word nude to refer to a light tan/brown color in shoes or clothing, but practically see through in pantyhose, even though I personally am much whiter than that when naked and my adopted, Asian daughter is much much much darker but we still use nude as a color reference. I’m still going to refer to blush pink dresses or blush wine even though there can be several degrees of color differences, and blush at the make up counter comes in many colors of brown and pink and red.
I agree with what is said and (what I think is) unsaid in what twoinanddone just wrote. Some words are loaded and problematic, but some fuss is just, well, random.
Of course “nude,” in general, can rankle those for whom it’s not their nude. I will respect another’s wishes or feelings or sensitivities or awareness. Of course, I will try to anticipate, not wait to see if a words offends, use my noggin, as my mother would say, and my heart. But it does bug me when people whip up a storm and miss the larger points, the harsher realities that could use our attention, the greater prejudices and stereotypes so many fall into, the assumptions.
How ironic this all comes up about MM’s wedding.
Any easy google check will show how some of the fashion world has already been adapting “nude” to encompass a range of shades that better reflect the range of skin tones. More power to them. It’s been a long time coming. Are we done yet? Of course not. Lots of progress yet to come. Sensitivity is good.
White people come in a variety of shades too. “Nude” isn’t neutral on all of us. Makeup and stockings labelled ‘nude’ are often way too light for my daughter but too dark for me. Other brands end up being way too light for both of us. And we don’t all blush the same either. I don’t turn pink…at all. I’m either pale or red. My daughter has her dad’s darker Mediterranean skin tone and she doesn’t turn pink either. We’re all different. I saw a wonderful project online that used Pantone shades to show the variety of skin tones people have. It was beautiful. If manufacturers could create options for all of us that are well made, use healthy ingredients, and are sold at reasonable prices I’d be very happy.
I don’t mind the words “blush” or “nude,” but I think their use was imprecise when used to describe clothing and accessories at Meghan and Harry’s wedding. “Blush” can be a range of shades so it was a poor choice of words. The use of “nude” was actually incorrect because the current definition in Merriam-Webster is that it matches the skin tone. The purse may have been some other woman’s nude, but it certainly wasn’t hers. It was a weak word anyway. As an editor, I’d have replaced it with something more vivid.
But blue can be all different shade too.
@lookingforward , you aren’t calling a thread on some Internet forum that has barely generated two pages of (very civilised) discussion “whipping up a storm”, do you? If so, I am flattered.
It’s not ironic at all that this has come up precisely at MMs wedding. It struck me precisely because these women would appear to not be affected at all any more by the “harsher realities” that you mention, wealthy, famous and successful, and the wedding ceremony appeared to be such a lovely blend of Anglican
High church traditions (the original WASPs!) and African-American traditions (really, the combination of If ye love me by the chapel choir and Stand by me by the gospel choir…swoon…), but the “nude” designation for Oprah’s accessories still struck me as very subtle “othering”.
For Meghan, that’s now what’s left - being there but not “quite” there. Being invited to have tea with the Queen, but some crazy aunt will wear a black a or brooch. And so on.
@twoinanddone , it appears to me to big a big difference whether you or your daughter, being used to a shade of “nude”, use the word whether it’s to dark for you (as it would be for me) or too light for your daughter to match your skin tones, or whether you are a fashion journalist covering of a major national (and royalist!) newspaper covering on of the most important journalistic event of the year, possibly of the decade to come, televised worldwide, of a biracial woman marrying the grandson of the Queen. Like Marian and lookingforward have said, it was both inaccurate and insensitive, using it in coverage tha should have required an extra portion of sensitivity.
Being a linguistics nerd, I had to look up the origins of the term “blush”. “Maiden’s Blush”, as a variant of the shrub Rosa Alba, has apparently been around since the 14th century. It refers to a rose that first blooms white, the turns pink later in summer, thus being compared to a fair skinned young woman blushing by those 14th century gardeners - who, lets face it, were probably monks and shouldn’t have concerned themselves with blushing maidens at all, but I digress, more importantly were probably only vaguely aware that non white people existed at all and probably unsure if they were actually people. So, I make the case that “blush”, having referred to the colour of a rose for not quite a millennium now, is fine.
“Nude” must be a 20th century invention, not something a 19th century lady could use without blushing. And, apparently now defined as “matching skin tone” by standard dictionaries. Wonder what the OED says? Couldn’t imagine the Telegraph using anything else…
Blackamoor brooch, autocorrect, sorry.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/22/princess-michael-apologises-wearing-racist-jewellery-meghan-markle-christmas-lunch