With a nod to the thread “since when is the word queer not offensive” I pose the question “since when is the term Oriental demeaning to SE Asians?” I ask because I’ve been corrected by members of these various ethnicities and asked to use the word “Asian” instead (as an apparently more politically correct alternative). Doesn’t the term “Asian” imply such a broad range of ethnicities (ie. Slavic, Middle Eastern, etc) as to be inherently meaningless? And while we’re at it, was the term Oriental originally coined as an ethnic slur, and if not why is it all of a sudden offensive? Enquiring minds want to know.
The term “oriental” is now associated with racial, and perhaps racist stereotypes. Edward Said coined the term “orientalism” which describes this pervasive attitude of the West toward the East:
"The Orient signifies a system of representations framed by political forces that brought the Orient into Western learning, Western consciousness, and Western empire. The Orient exists for the West, and is constructed by and in relation to the West. It is a mirror image of what is inferior and alien (“Other”) to the West.
Orientalism is “a manner of regularized (or Orientalized) writing, vision, and study, dominated by imperatives, perspectives, and ideological biases ostensibly suited to the Orient.” It is the image of the ‘Orient’ expressed as an entire system of thought and scholarship.
The Oriental is the person represented by such thinking. The man is depicted as feminine, weak, yet strangely dangerous because poses a threat to white, Western women. The woman is both eager to
be dominated and strikingly exotic. The Oriental is a single image, a sweeping generalization, a stereotype that crosses countless cultural and national boundaries."
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Orientalism.html
I live in Hawaii, a very multi-ethnic place with lots of Asians, and I hear people, even Asians, use the term ‘oriental’ with no racist intent. It makes me flinch, but I think you have to have a postmodern sensibility to understand, or even care about, the controversy. You know, decolonize your mind and that sort of thing.
There’ve been several threads that address this very subject. Here’s a good one from GQ, with links to more: Oriental Asians. If I recall correctly, the phenomenon started on the west coast, back in the 80’s. Many of us in the center of the country missed it at the time, and are only encountering it now.
Excellent. Thanks for the feedback and link to previous thread. I figured it must be something that started on the coast and worked it’s way inwards. I don’t have a problem with disfurthering (is that a word? - is now) use of the term “Oriental” but find “Asian” to be an annoyingly vague substitute. And isn’t that what’s really so damn cloying about political correctness in the first place? Not the ideology behind most of the ideas so much as the school marmish “hand slap” mentality behind it: they’re really just looking for something to bitch about, are they not? Anyway, not to digress further, but if “Oriental” is increasingly considered off limits, it seems just as racist to use “Asian” as exclusively denominating those of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc. heritage for the simple reason that Russians and Indians have done just as much to advance civilization as the “orientals”, so why short change them?
It’s supposed to be vague. So was “Oriental”, for that matter. If you want to be specific, use “Japanese”, “Chinese”, “Korean”, “Thai”, etc. I don’t see the significance of getting hung up on what “Asian” used to mean; it has now supplanted Oriental as the word of choice. Simply use it as you would have used Oriental 30 years ago.
Personally, I think you’re the one who’s looking for something to bitch about. “Asian” has been in use in the U.S. for at least 20 years; sorry you missed it. If you are so resistant to change, perhaps you would be more comfortable calling them “Mongols”.
Why would that be racist? You are inventing ambiguity when there is none. I believe it was pointed out in a previous thread that the usage in the U.K. is different, but in the U.S., Russians and Indians are never referred to as “Asians”. How exactly does that constitute “short changing” them? You are hung up on what you want to call them, when the considerate thing to do would be to go by what they want to be called.
If I’m not mistaken, “Oriental” was at one time a term used to describe anyone from east of the “Western World”, from Japanese to Ukrainians.
What we used to call “Oriental,” I now call “East Asian.”
Orient just means East, no? Ergo, Oriental means people of the east. Why did someone decide to start getting angry about this?
For that matter, there’s nothing implicitly evil in the etymology of “nigger”, either, but the term is obviously a slur. So what exactly is your point?
"Personally, I think you’re the one who’s looking for something to bitch about. “Asian” has been in use in the U.S. for at least 20 years; sorry you missed it. If you are so resistant to change, perhaps you would be more comfortable calling them “Mongols”."
Apparently, a lot of people “missed it”.
The first formal change occured only last year, when Washington State passed a bill banning the use of the term “Oriental” in govt docs - limited to that state. And even within that state, many constituents (Asian Americans included) were unaware of the pejorative connotations. Cite:
The point is, it wasn’t obviously perceived as a “slur” in the same way as “nigger” was.
And negro only means black, right?
Oriental simply derives from the Latin “oriens”, meaning to rise, referring to the sun. The Oriental Region was originally restricted by 19th century scholars, most of whom knew some Latin, to that part of Southern Asia and its islands from the Persian Gulf to Wallace’s Line.
Similarly, occidental is from the Latin word “occidens” which simply means to fall, or subside. Again referring to the setting sun.
As practically no one who attends university today, as a student or lecturer, particularly in the Arts or Humanities faculties, would be aware of the origin of the words, it makes it easy for some Political Science Cabal, as part of a power play, to declare a word taboo for any reason they choose to conjure up. Whether those reasons are true or false doesn’t really matter if the ploy is successful.
The only people who take these silly mind games seriously are those who think attaining a Mickey Mouse BA degree majoring in Political Science (or Anthrop, or whatever) is a really big deal.
Personally, I choose not to use the terms “oriental” or “occidental” simply because four syllables are too cumbersome to use as compared to the shorter alternatives.
annaplurabelle,
Before something becomes law, it has to have been in the public conciousness for quite awhile. So I would say that Washington state passing such a law is NOT a good example of people missing it, but a good example of how common it is for people to find Oriental offensive.
Now, not all Asians find Oriental offensive. A few use the word themselves. Personally (I’m not Asian myself, but have a Korean son) I find it “quaint” and “old fashioned” - similar to my grandmother using the word Negro.
BTW, I have a lot of friends with Korean kids - in Minnesota - some of the kids are young adults. Adoptive parents forming interracial families tend to be very aware (perhaps hyperaware) f these things. Asian has been the perferred term for at least twenty years even here in the Midwest.
I will try to always use “Asian” when that is appropriate. If I can determine a nationality I will use that.
If I slip up and use “Oriental” just think of me as a stupid old guy who uses “Negro” because he never shifted gears forward into the present.
I can’t keep up. May I still use “black”?
Wha … ? I still say negroid, mongoloid, and caucasoid. I like -oid.
A Vietnamese friend once told me people are Asian, rugs are Oriental.
"Before something becomes law, it has to have been in the public conciousness for quite awhile. So I would say that Washington state passing such a law is NOT a good example of people missing it, but a good example of how common it is for people to find Oriental offensive."
To be honest, Dangerosa, I saw it as an example of a politician attempting to curry favour with his Asian-American constituents (read voters). It’s just a gesture - not something that’s likely to have any tangible benefit (except for the pols who supported it). But I might be more cynical than you are about the motives of pols…
"Now, not all Asians find Oriental offensive. A few use the word themselves. Personally (I’m not Asian myself, but have a Korean son) I find it “quaint” and “old fashioned” - similar to my grandmother using the word Negro."
I agree. FTR, I’m not Asian either, but I’ve lived on the border of Little Italy/Chinatown in NYC for many years. I’ve heard a lot of deliberate slurs against Asians (and everyone else!), but “Oriental” was never one of them. My main point for posting previously was that it’s counter-productive and unfair to malign someone for being unaware that it’s an “old-fashioned” term.
"BTW, I have a lot of friends with Korean kids - in Minnesota - some of the kids are young adults. Adoptive parents forming interracial families tend to be very aware (perhaps hyperaware) f these things. Asian has been the perferred term for at least twenty years even here in the Midwest."
AFAIK, the terminology change started in the aftermath of the post-Vietnam disillusionment (???). But again, I’m not sure there is any tangible benefit to the substitution of terms.
As an example, look at the progression from the obviously malicious “N” word, to the somewhat offensive “Negro” (only offensive because it was applied by the white majority), to the self-identification of “Black” (as in “Black Power” and “Black is Beautiful”), and most recently to “African-American”. It gives the impression that we/they have come a long way, right? Meanwhile:
Would it be helpful to substitute “African-American” for “black” in those statistics? I just think it’s a little premature to break out the champagne in our supposed “celebration of diversity”.
And in spite of being endlessly fascinated by Roger_Mexico’s cites, telling someone post-boomer generation to “decolonize their mind” has little real significance, especially when history is being increasingly re-written in politically correct terminology:
I’m an Occidental American. Don’t refer to me as white, as my true skin color is… wait. Dammit, I am just a bedsheet-white cracker.
Carry on!
I was quite sure when I posted that someone would bring that up.
My point is really a question. I know that the word “nigger” came from the word “negro” which means black. I also know that, while it might not have been meant that way at first, there came a time (sooner rather than later, probably) when it wasn’t just a mispronunciation, but an obvious slur of derision and hatred.
My question is just a expansion on the OP, really: when and how did ‘oriental’ get to be such a disparaging term? And why?
I know that the “n-word” is a deep insult because I have personally heard it used as such. I have never heard anyone using the “o-word” as an insult.
A lot of people don’t know the name of the Vice President, and others are unable to pinpoint the location of the United States on a map of the world. I’m not sure what it proves, exactly.
So what’s the argument here? A few of them use it, so it’s o.k. for everyone, and to hell with the majority of Asians who prefer the term “Asian”?:dubious:
I never thought it was. I would say it’s more comparable to “Negro”. There are certainly more hateful pejoratives than “Oriental”, but I’m not seeing as how that’s an argument for it being o.k. to use it. That’s like saying it’s o.k. for me to punch you in the face because it’s not as bad as stabbing you.