"negro," in American English, is basically equivalent to "oriental," in that it's not so much of an in-your-face offensive slur like the n-word, but it's an outmoded term that only someone like your grandparents or perhaps great-grandparents would be caught using, and then swiftly corrected. definitely still offensive if used in the presence of the contemporary person who was being dubbed as such, though.
for more information on this topic among many others, I would suggest checking out the podcast "Moe Factz with Adam Curry," wherein "American Descendent of Slavery" Moe and famously Dutch-raised white American Adam Curry talk about such issues. every episode they play this Malcolm X clip that summarizes the idea for their show (and shows just how recently "negro" was commonly used—within my parents' lifetime!):
> First the white man and the black man have be able to sit down at the same table. The white man has to feel free to speak his mind without hurting the feelings of that negro. And the so-called negro has to feel free to speak his mind without hurting the feelings of the white man. Then they can bring the issues that are under the rug out on top the table and take an intelligent approach to get the problem solved—that's the only way that they'll ever do it.
Ugh, yeah, the discussion[0] on this is rather pigheaded. They almost seem to go out of their way to keep it racist.
There is also a very strong culture of hiding behind [citation needed]. Even if something is factually wrong, as long as you can't present a multitude of reliable¹ sources, the old name stays, even if it is glaringly obvious that it is not in current use.
1: What constitutes 'reliable' is of course defined by the Wikipedians who can simply put in more time than any casual contributor to hold of such changes.
In the German speaking part of Switzerland they where called "mohrenkopf". There is a raging debate if the Mohren part stems from Mohren, the dark-skinned people, OR the old German word Môre, which means wild pig.
But since it's en vogue to be woke, large retails are super quick to either change the name (Schokokuss, or chocolate kiss), or get rid of the product altogether.
I have talked with about every 'neger' I know about the word 'neger' and none of the negers had any objections to word neger in itself. And I talked about it with random negers too.
Just don't use it as a slur. The word is not much different than 'Belg' ( Belgian ).
The only people I know who get their panties in a bunch about the word 'neger' are virtue signalling white dudes and gals ( deugers ).
Even if they are completely fine with it, you can't generalise - the fact people around you don't seem to care does not mean it is a word that does not carry offence to some, or even the majority.
All swear words and insults are "just words", but their power to offend comes from context and history.
For example, the "c-word" is almost a term of affection in some groups in England and I barely consider it a swear word when in a pub in London, but is a proper pearl-clutcher in the USA and I'd never use it in front of my parents (one in California, the other in the UK). Context matters.
Well done for being curious, but don't assume your data means you have discovered a universal truth.
In polite Dutch conversation, print publications, television, radio, et cetera, the word is not bandied about, and addressing a random black person as 'neger' is certainly not recommended and will likely get you in trouble.
I haven't claimed anything like that in the slightest.
Not sure if "jew cakes" are racist but they sure aren't Israeli!
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/jew-cookies-a-dutch-dessert-s...
It is not really offensive, mostly, but also not a good match for the present day. Manufacturers probably won't hold on to the name for much longer.
Why could it not simply be integrity or conservatism? I for one like words like `negerzoen', & I don't really understand why anyone should be offended by them. (And I don't /think/ I'm a racist.)
An increase in awareness of racism and the impact of such names has led to it being abolished completely (the sickly sweet product is now known simply as 'kisses'). Nowadays that word is something you would only use to refer to the historic product name, or to explicitly show how you are 'resisting the woke trend'. It is now a word that that one older uncle might use at a family gathering, but otherwise it's pretty much gone and younger generations will marvel at it ever being used. Such is linguistic change.
An aside: oddly enough Dutch language Wikipedia insists on using this outdated racist word for the lemma on this treat, because (in my experience with on a variety of topics) Dutch language Wikipedia editors are rather conservative in such issues and seem to hate certain linguistic shifts. To this Dutchman it comes across as thinly veiled racism under the guise of encyclopaedic integrity.
This change happened alongside awareness of the change surrounding the 'N-word' in America, so recently in opinion pieces and public debate in Dutch people are using 'N-woord' in Dutch as well. But here something odd happened. The N-word refers specifically to 'nigger' in American use, which in Dutch has a rough approximation in the quite rude and outdated 'nikker', but nowadays here the 'N-word' seems to refer almost exclusively to 'neger' (or 'nigger' when used in English lyrics in a Dutch context, for example by Dutch rappers). Is this broadening of the scope something that happens just here, or is 'negro' also slowly falling under the definition of the N-word in the US?
The taboo surrounding the spelling out of that word leads to 'N-word' leading its own semantic life, which is sometimes a bit confusing. It doesn't matter much in the grand scope of things (both words are frankly unnecessary for the most part outside of historic contexts, and are broadly seen as racist), but I find it interesting nonetheless.