White is a color, vanilla is a flavor


It’s convenient to group all non-white people under the “POC” umbrella. It’s even easier to promote POC-conscious, POC-motivated and POC-favoring things as if they serve every non-white person. The problem is we are now at a cultural standstill when it comes to addressing race. We’ve decided to highlight and celebrate people of color, without understanding why we even have the term. 

Grouping every non-white person under the term “POC” only perpetuates the idea that there is a binary of perspectives when it comes to racial experience — either white or not white. 

When we talk about race, we still consider white the default, or neutral option. There are the Black and Latinx perspectives, but we are too afraid to acknowledge the White perspective. By shying away from terms that emphasize whiteness, we allow their opinions to float above all of the accounted-for racial bias of others’ opinions. We’ve too often privileged this demographic with the authority to speak wholly on matters as if they are the arbiter of opinions. 

Politically, when we consider the “Black vote” or the “Latinx sentiment,” we quiet a discussion about the “White vote” or “White perspective.” This only furthers a bias that experience is homogenous across one racial demographic. It’s a dangerous paradigm to operate on if we assume that there’s one way to appeal to one race of voters for every group — except for white.

That’s not to say all racial categories are inherently bad. I believe labels can be helpful and even empowering. There’s nothing wrong with analyzing how racial groups vote because it reflects the priorities of a demographic in our racially-divided country. It makes sense that if a law or proposition affects one racial group, the study of how that group votes (regardless of other demographic factors) is relevant. 

However, we’ve taken that analysis too far. Racial groups, including White people, cannot be so standardized that we statistically measure who the “Black opinion” favors in a presidential race. It’s this oversimplification that prevents us from considering racial groups as autonomous, intelligent social actors who hold the power of their own votes. 

This trend is present in journalism as well. We like to discuss how “x group” feels about an issue, without sometimes recognizing that there are compounding factors besides race that contribute to the understanding and effects of the issue.

In NPR’s “Code Switching” podcast, Shereen Marisol Meraji, Natalie Escobar and Kumari Devarajan highlight how terms like POC and BIPOC become increasingly complex when we discuss the real products of racism. They state that, “Many felt that people using the term ‘POC’ were (intentionally or not) sidestepping the truth: That certain effects of racism — things like mass incarceration, police violence, inability to access good health care — disproportionately affect Black and Indigenous people. Not all ‘people of color.’”

I have seen this in my own experience as well. I am a generally White-passing Indian-Irish-American — whatever that means. I find myself, and others like me, at a pause for what we can identify with. As a person of color, I have a lot of weight on me from the oppression that is finally being highlighted by mainstream media. However, to claim the experience or unity with Black Americans would not be a true expression of my identity as a person of color.

The problem is that I feel confined to be either White-passing or person of color. Truly, I am both, but I am not fully either. I cannot claim the entirety of the POC experience because I have never experienced the culture or the treatment of all of the other races under that umbrella. 

If you put every “POC” student at USC together, the group would be so vastly diverse, we would quickly understand that there’s no way to appeal to all of them at once.

I understand the frustration with a changing world that is continuing to expand terms and labels. I believe Gen Z will be the generation to abandon labels like “POC.” We live in a culture that now accepts and celebrates the many, many identities we all have. We are a kaleidoscope of things, and that is good — or at least, it’s ok to admit.

“POC” is a crutch term, and it allows us to feel like we’re uplifting, representing or appeasing a community that is bigger than we can standardize. It’s ok to be specific, even if it makes the world that much more complicated. 
​​

The Daily Trojan published this opinion article about the complexities of race and whiteness that appeared in print on November 14, 2022. The version that was printed was an incorrect rough draft of the piece and this is the most updated and accurate version on the website.