I normally don't like to draw attention to race since I think it is largely irrelevant and that people should be judge by their ideas and actions and not by any other superficial characteristic.

But there are sometimes occaisions where one must make reference to one's race for various purposes. In such instances, how are we to refer to people from China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, etc?

The common thing seems to be to call them "Asian". I'm sure that "asians" would preffer to be called whatever they are, such as Chinese, Japanese, etc. But to be quite honest, most of the rest of us (most Americans, any way) have a very difficult time discerning the differences in appearance between these (although I'd love to have a tutorial on how to tell the difference if anyone's interested ). So we're left to use some kind of term like "asian" (or the dreaded "oriental").

But is "asian" really a proper term? I mean, aren't people from India also asians? Or Russia for that matter? And yet when we see an Indian (not native-American... ACK!!! This is getting too confusing! ) we rarely, if ever, refer to them as "asian" despite the fact that they're from the continent of Asia.

So what do you think? If any "asians" would like to toss in their input, I'd really like to hear it. Is "asians" a good term, or is it not good because it is vague? Or does anyone care?

I think Asian and polynesian are appropriate broad terms for a region so diverse. I don't think the average person from that part of the world would take offence by it.

Being an Asian, I have not come across anybody that thinks "Asian" is derogatory. However, "Oriental" is a controversial term and should best be avoided, otherwise you'll be called an Occidental in return.

Well, I'd say if you don't know a person's exact national origin, Asian is perfectly acceptable. One of my bride's maids was Indian and said when she referred to herself as Asian people (always white people. never any other Asians) CONSTANTLY said she wasn't a REAL Asian. She said all of the Asians she knew thought it was correct to call herself Asian since, of course, she IS Asian.

Btw, Asian IS actually used to describe Middle Easterners (Russians would be considered "caucasian") in terms of classification for EO/OFCCP/AA stuff. Asian/Pacific Islander is actually the "real" term. American Indian is the term used for Native Americans (with respect to workplace stuff, again).

If you wanted to be really specific, I suppose you could say East Asian, just as Eastern and Western Europeans are often described separately. But Oriental, as it seems you already know, is not proper.

Ahh, but technically, aren't Russians, Arabs, Persians, Indians, Chinese, Thai, Korean, etc. all asians? Ironically, the Caucasus is WITHIN Asia. In fact, it's sort of right in the middle of it. So it's funny to call one group Caucasians and all the others asians when the whole area is asia. Why construct a special exception for those in and around the Caucasus? (And the former USSR certainly wasn't confined to that area by any means, but they're nevertheless called caucasians.)

Man, this whole racial labelling business is complicated and easily gets out of hand.

Speaking of which, if you really want to throw some people for a loop, point out the fact that the area around Iran and Pakistan is where the "Aryan" race is from! That's sure to stir the ire of those "Aryan Nation" fellows. In fact, "Iran" is named for this. See? Iran - Aryan? But again, it's all asian.

Korean, chinese, japanese and the south east asian ethnic groups come to mind as being asian much more so than the CENTRAL asian groups. As far as filipinos, the few I know, they consider themselves more spanish than asian. Most of their names are more spanish influenced than asian. then, there are the pacific islanders...

I've never really thought the word "asian" as a classification was derogatory at all. I'll have to pose that question to my korean neighbors. See what they think.

Even worse is the consequences of British Colonization that now Indians, the arab ones, are spread through out the world. For instance my family has lived in British Guyana in S. America for generations and now that we moved to America we are now asian, even though the majority of my family hasn't even been there for generations. Personally I just choose "American" under the census and other where I can since I'm so "Americanized" by East Indian standards, even though I'm proud to put the Indes in West Indes.

I'm called Caucasian or European even though my family hasn't lived in Europe for generations, and we certainly haven't lived in the Caucasus for a LONG time!

Personally, I tire of all these labels. But it's sometimes nice to know how not to offend people in given situations.

Many people use the term "chinese" to describe anyone of east asian origin. SO Asian and oriental are definately preferred to that since it doesnt seem quite so ignorant. I would use the term East Asian to describe what you talk of, since it covers China, Japan and Korea and the more southern states, vietnam and indonesia.

As to how do you tell the difference, i cant do it either, just as it is difficult to differentiate between european nationalities. No one should expect you to either.

Aaah, I think I understand....

Asians are Chinese, Mongolians, Koreans, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Malays, Thais, Japanese, Taiwanese (who are also Chinese, but don't tell them that), Surinamese, Sri Lankan, Singaporeans (don't call them Malaysian!), Timorese, Bhutanese, Nepalese and I've probably missed a few. Apologies

They get called that because they live in Asia...

However, also living in Asia are Indians who live on the subcontinent, which is probably large enough to give them a seperate name. Then we also have Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, who also live on the Indian subcontinent (and are physically similar) but we would not call Indian - or at least, not if we liked our teeth where they are.

Also in Asia is the Middle East, however we wouldn't call people from the Middle East Asian, because they're Arabs, apart from Iranians who are more closely related to caucasians...but we call them Arabs (because Arab = Muslim even though many Arabs are Christian and a few Buddhist) anyway...who knows why. If you live in Israel in the Middle East you are not an Arab, you are an Israeli, unless you are an Israeli Arab or a Palestinian, in which case you are Unlucky.
(Just for the record, people who live in the Middle East are Saudis, Iraqis, Omanians, Jordanians, Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Kurds, Bahrainian, Cypriots (who are Europeans), Iranians, Kuwaitis, Kyrgzstanis, Pakistanis, Qatars, Syrians, Tajikis, Turks, Turkmen, Subjects of the United Arab Emirates (okay, Arabs), Uzbeks and Yemenis).

Turks are also considered as Arabs, although they may become Europeans, if they can sort out a few Human Rights issues and stop persecuting Kurds (who aren't really Arabs and aren't really Turks, Iraqis or Iranians despite living in the Middle East in either Turkey, Iraq or Iran).
Most of the Russian land area is in Asia, so we would think to call Russians Asians. However, most Russians live in Moscow and St Petersburg, which are west of the Ural Mountains and so in Europe. If you meet a Russian you will think they look like Slavs, who are Europeans. Unless you meet Russians from the other side of Russia, where they look like Asians.

Europeans live west of Russia and worth of Africa. There are about 44 official countries in Europe. In fact there are 45 if you count the Vatican City and 46 if you count the UK, however as no-one in Britain will accept that they live in Europe, its best not to mention it. The British also live in Spain (Gibraltar) and in Argentina (the Falkland islands) where they should be South American if they weren't so British.
Of the 46 countries in Europe, only 4 actually opposed American activity in Iraq. Therefore it is as logical as anything else for Americans to believe that Europe doesn't like them.

Africa is the worlds second largest continent, has more people than anywhere else, and is less important than Switzerland in the eyes of the 'developed' world. Mainly because it is poor and can't buy our produce yet. There are 53 countries in Africa, and 50 times as many types of people. However North Africans are often also classed as Arabs and everyone else as Africans.

I believe there used to be people in North America, Australia and South America. Sadly they were mostly wiped out and replaced by Europeans (and now everyone else).

In conclusion, you can call people what you like. Whatever you say, it'll be innaccurate I always feel that is something is meant in a racist way then it is racist. People like to put things in categories, but in real life, most things can't be labelled very easily.

Apologies to Micronesians, Polynesians and all the other people who don't really have a continent to call their own. You're not missing out on much.

Well, this one confused my wife mightily- she is Russian, and kept putting "Asian" on questionaires, because that is where she is from LOL- or my South African friend that is white that keeps calling himself "African-American"- and my wife thinks of Americans as a seperate race, as do most non-Americans - so, good luck!

As an Asian (or Asian-American), a Southeast Asian, and Vietnamese person, let me share some anecdotes and opinions.

First, I do not consider the term East Asian to encompass Vietnam, Laos, Cambodian, Thailand, or the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore (the island countries). These I have always heard of referred to as Southeast Asia, with an interesting exception for the Philippines.

I've heard one Filipina muse about whether she was Asian or not. The comment earlier, that some people from the Philippines consider themselves Spanish rather than Asian befuddles me. My first question would be do they mean Spanish in terms of blood/genetic heritage or Spanish in terms of language and culture? If Spanish in terms of genetic heritage then shouldn't that be a European v. Asian labeling (continent v. continent instead of country/nationality v. continent)? Does this mean that the percentage of Spanish blood (the blood of the colonizer) exceeds that of native Filipinos and therefore Filipinos are now more European than Asian? If in terms of language and culture then any former colony would be a mini-replica of the colonizing power. Just because a colonizer's language and culture have come to dominate a region, I don't think that makes it's people equivalent in race to the colonizers. Spanish-influenced perhaps; a type of Creole culture, perhaps, but not Spanish in the same way that would evoke places like Madrid and Barcelona.

Second, I have not encountered the Indians-as-non-Asians label. Most of my acquaintances, both Indian and non-Indian, include Indians within the Asian category. The subcategory within Asian that Indians fit in is South Asian, which also includes Pakistanis, and Sri Lankans, although I'm fuzzy on the other countries nearby.

Finally, "Oriental" is considered a negative label by those who are aware of its origin and traditional uses. It's a Eurocentric term that assumes that the speaker's basis is in Europe and therefore Asians, coming from the east of Europe, are of the Orient (the East). It's use in America, where Asia is to the west not the east, doesn't make sense in terms of geography but does if one subscribes, or unknowingly follows, a Eurocentric view. It's also been used as a very derogatory term. I would describe it as equivalent to "Negro," although "Mongolian" might be the other synonym for Asian that most closely tracks with Negro. I don't think, if you're concerned with not offending anyone, that you'd be inclined to call anyone a "Negro" so my advice is don't use the term "Oriental" either.

On the subject of not offending, I don't expect people to know my specific ethnic background so am not offended when someone doesn't know. If you're interested, ask me. The only approaches that I get offended by are "What are you?" (I think this one's self-explanatory) and "Where are you from?" because there are so many different levels of where I am from that to reduce them to ethnicity is insulting. Should I always have to assume that my ethnicity is the most important thing to someone that I've just met, as such a question implies? An acceptable approach is "What's your ethnic background?"

Hope that sheds some light on the matter from one "insider" perspective.

I've never heard Oriental been used as a derogatory term, and I don't see why it's bad simply because it's eurocentric term. America, Australia, and Europe are frequently classified as "Western" nations, by themselves and by others, just as "The East" (middle east, far east, etc) is frequently used by the media usually without offending the sensibilities of those people lumped together under such a broad label.

You could, of course, always call me occidental. It isn't technically correct, seeing as I don't live in what's considered "the western part of the globe", but it's still gives a (very, very) vague picture of what my physical features and culture could possibly be like.

I don't see a problem with calling someone "Asian" because, as someone has pointed out, nobody bats an eyelid about clustering divesre peoples together under the heading "African" (or "European", for that matter).

As an aside, the discussion is somewhat clouded by the insistence of citizens of the USA appropriating for themselves a descriptor that appplies equally to everyone else on the two American continents (Brazilians and Inuit have as much right to call themselves "American").

And I don't buy the argument that "Oriental" is pejorative or that it cannot be used to distinguish between Asian races. While it's origins are certainly Eurocentric, so is the idea of "The West", the system of times and dates, geographical mapping, and so on. None of these are likely to change soon, and none of them imply the superiority of anyone (and if they do, it is the "superiority" of the British - not the "Americans" - whose dominance in times past gave rise to them).

For me, if a word sounds like it could be used in a sentence beginning "you stupid ____" it can be a pejorative and should be avoided in normal conversation to avoid confusion. I don't think "Oriental" works here, where something more overtly offensive ("chink" or "slope") definitely does.

In the UK, "Paki" for Pakistani definitely fits this criterion, no matter how much people protest. Indeed, I suspect that the word "Asian" itself is beginning to carry pejorative connotations in some contexts (as is "Muslim", for other reasons).

It should be remembered that words such as "east" do not only imply subjective direction. While Asia is to the west of the United States, it is still the Easter Hemisphere. And is therefore still the East, even if it is in a Westernly direction from your present location. Therefore, I don't see how "Oriental" is geographically illogical in the Americas.


Personally, I think any ethnic-descriptive term that gets used enough and is not sufficiently sterile (like hyphenated classifications such as African-American) will eventually be considered derogatory. It's sad, but true. I remember when Oriental was used quite nicely and practically nobody ever used the term "Asian", but somehow I guess somebody either used the term in a mean-spirited way, or somebody just decided they were going to take offense one day. For instance, "Negro" was a perfectly acceptable term several years ago. It was considered the polite and proper term, as it is a very formal description of their color. But then somebody decided it was too close to the degenerate form "nigger" (which I still don't see why it is SOOOO taboo since it is merely a corruption of the Spanish word for black). But give it time, even our most polite-sounding terms will eventually offend someone and we'll have to find a whole new set of terms.

My roommate is Asian, and although he prefers to be called Korean and my other friend tends to prefer Indian they accept Asian. I guess it is because they realize no one wants to make the mistake of saying the wrong nationality, especially with the tension some of the older generations of different nationalities have with each other.

However, I don't see how Orat thinks someone just "decides" take offense at names. Is it really such a blind world that someone doesn't realize all the jokes and rantings, as well as inferiority that usually the dominant group places on a word.

And maybe my history is a little off, but at what point was the word "Nigger" a polite and friendly word? If that is true I guess there are a lot of people I need to apologize to, because it turns out I wasn't being harassed, they were "just being friendly".

I think that words change as people under that word try to escape the negative connotations placed on it. I do, however, believe that we need to realize that the stereotypes don't die with the word, and that we - whatever race - should be proud of who we are and give pride to our name, regardless of what other people do with it.

I could call Corvus "Occidental" but that misses the point. "Occidental" does not have the history that "Oriental" does, and they are not equivalent terms merely because they parse out as meaning east and west from the Latin. There is a history of Europeans and those of European descent or influenced by European value judgments using the term "Oriental" to be something eternally different, eternally exotic, whether that difference is openly painted as negative (the evil, inscrutable Oriental) or superficially positive (the charms of Oriental girls) that actually turns out to also be negative (submissive girls that will uncomplainingly cater to one's every wish). It situates the Oriental as the perpetual outsider, the invader from the east.

If I were to call you an "Occidental" what associations does that call up for you? Probably not much because there's no controversial history attached to it. Since offense is a subjective process, just because you don't see the connections that does not preclude another from being quite differently situated, with different experiences to draw upon.

I would agree that "Oriental" is not on the same level as nigger, chink, kike, cracker, etc. It's a more subtle term. I don't think it's always been used to consciously degrade the one so labeled; some people who have used it did so with no ill-intentions and perhaps the best of intentions. I've had very sweet old white ladies refer to me as "that pretty oriental girl who speaks such good American!" However, that doesn't take away from its history of association with perpetual foreignness and inscrutability.

Also, I would question the assumption that no one bats an eye at the lumping together of all people from Africa as "Africans." This is one of my own failings - my lack of familiarity of even the basic geography of Africa so that sometimes I can't pinpoint the West African from East African nations, etc. I mean, don't you think it's telling that most Americans are familiar with the basic geography of Western Europe (can point out the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Scandinavian countries, etc.) and know squat about most of Africa except maybe South Africa (because of its former apartheid policy) and the northern African countries that border the Mediterranean and have interacted most with Europeans?

I think we're sort of agreeing here, because I think that offence is more important when it is taken that when it is given. If you don't mind people calling you "Oriental", then you aren't taking offence and so it is more descriptive than offensive.

It doesn't really matter whether then person using the word is doing it out of ignorance to your actual origin, to any offence they might give, or is using it to refer to your race rather than your nationality.

Which was my point on the use of "African" or indeed "European". Whatever the issues of ignorance or cultural superiority behind their use (and these are real issues), Africans and Europeans tend not to be offended by those words any more than Asians are offended by being called Asian. It might not be very precise or even accurate terminology, and it usually has more to do with race than geography - as has been pointed out, an Egyptian is more likely to be thought of, and (critically) is more likely to think of themselves, as "Arab" than "African". But it rarely causes offence.

UGA Boy:

Trust me, UGA Boy, it happens. I know a black woman who says that "gal" is more offensive to her than "nigger". She simply cannot tolerate people saying "gal" even when she knows full well that it is not intended derogatorily. So yes, people DO choose what to take offense to.


The word was "negro" (spanish for black) which was verbally corrupted by those who failed to properly pronounce the word into "nigger". It was not initially derogatory.


vinnah:

Hey, that sounds pretty positive to me!


I think you're greatly over-analyzing the issue. Only people with alot of time on their hands will reduce it to what you have here. I've never perceived any use of the word "oriental" to be negative. Much as I've never perceived "gal" to be negative, but that apparently doesn't stop some people from deciding to take offense.

My point is that the meaning of terms like "Oriental" do not lie on the surface. Of course the average person will not consciously think that Oriental means perpetual foreigner. The power of terms like these is not their surface meaning but their underlying references. This is the power behind advertising. It's not the surface stuff that hooks people in. Ok, let's go with the typical beer commercial. Party scene, pretty girls, cut guys, good times, some hot & heavy glances, beer. How does that connect with the average viewer? The average viewer is not the most attractive / desirable guy in the world; he probably doesn't even come close although he may have a charming lopsided smile. Average joe makes unconscious associations between beer and sex and may end up buying beer as a result. Do you think he says to himself, "Hmm, beer means sex, I'd like to get some tonight, and that's why I'm gonna buy myself a six-pack?"

Are you going to respond that viewer buys beer because he likes the taste and the ad is just a reminder that beer exists? There are definitely easier, cheaper ways to remind a potential customer that a product exists, and most beers that run these ads aren't so hot in the taste dept. There's a reason why some marketers spend money on hot models rather than run print ads.

Oh, and the submissive girl who caters to your every wish - I thought that one would draw a smiley. Personally, I'd go for the harem of studly guys who worship at the altar of vinnah but, hey, everyone has their own fantasy. Some fantasies just get more play time than others (Miss. Saigon, Madame Butterfly). Can't think of any Broadway or Hollywood examples of my preferred fantasy - perhaps you can help me out here?

On a more serious note, I thought the point of your beginning this topic was to help situate yourself in the other person's shoes, not just opine from your personal standpoint. Please correct any misassumptions on my part.

I understand what you're saying. However, you also have to realize that just because something has a subcontextual meaning to you doesn't mean it does for everybody else. To be 100% honest, when I hear "asian" versus "oriental", I don't think or feel anything different at all. There is absolutely no difference to me whatsoever, and it is perhaps time to consider the possibility that you may be one of only a few people who see other subtle meanings there.

In language, what is of primary importance is not what YOU think something means, but rather what the person to whom you are talking, or who is talking to you thinks it means. When someone says something to you, you should understand what they say according to what they most likely mean. Or when you talk to someone else, you should take their understanding of things into account when choosing your words.

That's why I want to know how asian people view the term "asian". But I also think asian people should understand what is normally meant by "oriental" when used by the average American. And I can guarantee you that the vast majority of people who would use the term "oriental" do not have any of the things in mind that you suggest are subtle meanings of the word. I honestly don't think most Americans have spent enough time thinking about the word for it to have those subtle implications.


Absolutely. My goal is to understand how my words will be understood by others. But understanding is a two-way street. I, as a white American, am not the only one who bears the responsibility of coming to an understanding of words and their intended meanings. It is just as important for the minority to be aware of what is meant by the majority's use of a given term. The minority cannot simply unilaterally set the linguistic terms of play, so to speak. Just because you are a minority doesn't exempt you from the need to see from someone else's perspective too.

While I want to be aware of other people's sensitivities, I don't think that is an excuse, nor is it right, for people to complacently expect everyone else to go out of their way to educate themselves about their sensitivities and insecurities. Unfortunately, I see alot of people who spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about themselves and their own feelings and very little time considering others. And what results is an overwhelming self-centeredness where they expect everyone to conform to their own exaggerated sensitivities and to carefully dance around them. Like the woman I know who obviously had too much time on her hands that she condured up a reason why "gal" is offensive and now expects others to magically know that she finds that term offensive and avoid it. I find that extremely self-centered and uncooperative.

So in summary, let's acknowledge that understanding must go two ways. Thank you for educating me as to the perceived meaning of "oriental" by some (who I believe to be hyper-sensitive). And please likewise understand that not everyone sees that word the same way you do. Not everyone (in fact, I'd say hardly anyone) has spent the time or consideration to grasp the subtle nuances of the term you suggest exist and therefore are completely oblivious to the meanings you perceive.

hmm just to add to the bottom. i think the 'gal' that person was referring to (if she wasnt playing)

is 'Gyal' she is probably of Jamaican heritage like me. In Jamaica we have a dialect called 'Patois' which came from slavery and mixing with other cultures like the french, Irish, etc.

Anyway in Patois the word Girl is pronounced 'Gyal' just boy is 'bwoy' however the word Gyal is now used in a derogative manner. A man would use it to demean a woman. Just like Bwoy would deman a man.

its really offending when a man calls u that. But i dont find it more offending than Nigger. actually i dont feel offended at the word Nigger.

1) cos i aint a nigger
2) cos the word has no power anymore
3) the blacks who refer to themselves as niggers are just as ignorant as the racist people that use it.

Its like someone said above. My dad is Indian. so i used to get called 'Paki' a lot.

In U.K we have a lot of Indians and they're all called paki's when people are being racist. But indians and pakistanis among themselves call each other Paki's.

I have Chinese friends who call each other Chinks.

I think we should stop using those words all together.

oh yeah to the Gyal thing. If im incorrect plz ignore me. I dont want to come across as a know-it-all.

edit: typos

I definitely agree with this statement. To look cross-eyed at a white person for saying the word Nigger when he/she was repeating what a comedian said on BET is very hypocritical.

Now there are definitely instances when people use words against minorities in a derogatory manner, and I definitely understand why minorities would be apprehensive to hear it from someone unlike their color.

But I just don't think we can say JAP, Nigger, etc. and expect it not to flow over into mainstream association, or even just conversation.

exactly.

did you know that In South Korea recently like in the last 10 years. Due to the influx of American Culture including MTV. American Hi Hop has become really popular. So popular that Korean hip hop fans sometimes refer to themselves as 'niggers' and approach each other like 'hey my nigger' its sad but true.

a Good example is like in the film 'Rush Hour' when Chris tucker walked past a black man and said to him 'whats up my nigger'

then Jackie's aloof character not really understanding the way or the word (or world) goes and says it to the bartender who i think was white (or mix-raced). It caused a big ruckus and a hge fight scene ensued.

Anyway u get my point. If Chris' character hadnt said it and just said 'whats up?'

then Jackie would have said that and no problems would have started.

I know its just a film but this kind of stuff happens all the time.