Ourobouros strikes again.
‘Uppity’, applied to an American person of colour, invariably has the N word trailing, understood even if unsaid, in its wake.
A bit like ‘English’ and ‘oik/football hooligan/ drunk/ cowboy builder/ person of no education’ in France, for some people.
Please trust me, it isn’t acceptable, any more than my example is.
Do you see how unacceptable and rude that is?
If the word Uppity had the N word following of course that would be unacceptable simply by association.
The word uppity in the case of Megan stood alone and was used in the correct sense.
If you find that offensive Véronique so be it, personally myself and I am sure many others do not.
We shall have to agree to disagree on this one.
She is American and black, that is why it is unacceptable.
I’m neither if those things and nor are you I presume: the term applied to either of us would not be loaded, as it certainly is if applied to her, and it is disingenuous to the nth degree to pretend it isn’t.
I didn’t realise what a loaded term it is until it was explained by one of our language assistants from the US.
I’m not arguing with you… you find the word uppity offensive - I don’t. End of.
I recall that a few years ago in the US the adjective ‘burly’ was banned, it having been used, or perhaps over-used, in describing black male crime suspects.
burly
adjective
“I saw a burly figure approaching”
Nothing wrong with this word either imo.
WinCo Guy Gibson had a black Labrador dog named N*gger - its an historical fact. Just how crass is it that the WWII film The Dambusters had to be dubbed to take the dog’s name out?
I feel like some of us are living in a ghastly parallel universe where some words suddenly and arbitrarily become non-words. I remember this happened with “brainstorm”; with “the N-word”, though it was, apparently, okay for black people to use it to refer to themselves; then “coloured person” became unacceptable, for some reason, while “person of colour” was fine; now the hitherto unexceptionable “uppity”!
It just looks like virtue-signalling to me.
I don’t consider any of the terms you suggest as being offensive in any way.
“I didn’t realise what a loaded term it is until it was explained by one of our language assistants from the US.”
Isn’t that the madness of it?
I confess that I am in the Huh? What? group here.
If white southern racists were in the habit of describing blacks who stood up for themselves as “feisty” would that word now be considered racist?
I realise that words can change from descriptive to pejorative - the word spastic is a good example but “uppity” doesn’t feel that way at all; perhaps it genuinely has changed meaning in the US but it seems a bit of an odd one to have done that.
Yes, it might well, if the feistiness was deemed somehow inappropriate to be displayed by a person with less social power.
That has happened to the word ‘sassy’ if used to refer to a black woman, because it perpetuates a particular trope.
Guy Gibson died 75 years ago. Times have changed.
Presumably you don’t belong to a demographic which doesn’t see any harm in referring to people as Yids or Chinks or Bints or Ragheads? Or perhaps you do?
I hadn’t realised you are a Black American, sorry.
Has it though - even the Urban Dictionary does not list it as negative and the most detailed explanation of the negative interpretation suggests it retains, on balance, a positive connotation.
This is according to my assistant from Georgia, who is probably better placed than either of us to judge. 
She and another two (From SF and Boston respectively) are coming chez moi for a belated Thanksgiving, I’ll ask them all again then.
We will be joined by another two from Kenya and Venezuela, I’ll ask them what they think as well.
You suggested the words-- “A bit like ‘English’ and ‘oik/football hooligan/ drunk/ cowboy builder/ person of no education’ in France, for some people”–.could be deemed offensive. Those were the words I didn’t think offensive. Sorry if you misunderstood my perfectly clear statement.
TBH Sue I misunderstood you as well
(This thread really helps me understand why my daughter has had to take a course in “american english” so that she does not misunderstand and/or is not misunderstood - when she goes to US for her work on a regular basis. )
I confess I hadn’t realised Miss Markle was mixed-race until a controversy blew up. I do think her pronouncements are a bit mixed-up and precious, but that’s the case with her husband too. Their generation isn’t terribly logical in what they say and do (exhibit A: XR protesters trying to disrupt public transport). I don’t know if you can logically say that a member of the Royal Family is uppity, but the two of them seem unhealthily self-obsessed.
That may be because for many people, her ancestry is a matter of fascination.
And - here’s a thought - this whole debate is reinforcing the fact of that ancestry, though probably not intentionally (I wouldn’t put it past some of the UK’s tabloid press, though).
I’ve done a bit of online research, which is probably as reliable as any other of these sources (ie not).
In one article (https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2017/10/ungrateful-uppity.html), we have a paragraph beginning “Of course the term has long been used to disparage African-Americans”. It quotes one reference, but that’s how unjustified assertions work: you say “Of course it is” and people often fall in line.
Funnily enough, Merriam-Webster doesn’t mention uppity is racist: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uppity#other-words.
Nor does Macmillan: https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/uppity
Nor Oxford: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/uppity?q=uppity
It looks like this is a situation where someone thought something was offensive - like the “coloured person/person of colour” example - and everyone (led by Generation Z and the snowflakes) is too scared of being accused of being a racist not to agree.