• QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      I suspect it’s a joke based on The Office. Oe of the main characters is a Triscuit-American called Jim. There is a different character called Asian Jim. Caucasian James = white Jim.

      • planish@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        But “Caucasian” is now recognized as a racist term (in that using it produces racism), kind of because it’s a science-y word for “white”, an unscientific concept.

        • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Who recognizes “Caucasian” as a racist term? I’m asking this in all seriousness as I have never heard this before

          Caucasian should mean “from the Caucus mountain region”

          • planish@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Yes?

            I suppose this doesn’t exactly suggest it’s deprecated in Twitter handles. But if the scientists have given up on it, why should normal people keep it?

            • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              No.

              A couple researchers suggesting a literary review of the specific usage of a word and how it is used in specific contexts within scientific literature is a far cry from the idea that scientists in general are claiming that the word caucasian is a generally racist word.

              • planish@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I don’t know that scientists in general (from chemists to seismologists) know it, but the people who study what scientists ought to call groups of people seem to have reached consensus.

                  • planish@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Oh I see, maybe this is saying more that people should abandon the term, not that they have already abandoned the term. I might be filling in the bit where people actually notice that they should indeed abandon the term and do so, which might not actually be happening.

                    If you look at this article for example I think it supports your view: people often in practice continue using the term even though it has been discovered by some experts to be incorrect. That’s not what a broad consensus in science and medicine overall would look like.

                    I guess I think the people providing evidence that the term should not be used are in fact correct. I haven’t seen a lot of support for the opposing view, so I think there is consensus among the people who professionally consider questions of terminology around race and ethnicity. None of the articles citing the first article I posted seem to be along the lines of “no we should keep it actually”. So my view is that the field consists of people who know better and people who haven’t bothered to think about the question, and the people who know better are probably right.

    • Thunderbird4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Most likely a reference to the character Jim from Mark Twain’s book The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Although he wasn’t ever called “N****r Jim” in the actual book, the character was referred to by that name throughout the Jim Crow era.