-
-
- I used the term “Oriental” in a couple GQ threads, and a couple people have tried to discourage me from using it any further. I didn’t mean its use to be offensive, but I am wondering exactly what is offensive within any such term. (Actually I said “Crazy Orientals” but people pointed out the “Oriental” part and not the “Crazy” part, which makes me wonder…) -And my questions did get answered by people who knew, so I do wish to extend thanks for that to all who replied.
—Someone pointed out that “Oriental” is outdated, but the problem with that assertion is that the Orient is still there. -And it’s a useful term to me, because it expresses an idea of something from a region. If I say that I have a box with Oriental writing on it, that narrows things down considerably from saying that I have a box with an unknown type of writing on it. Just as if I said “African art”, that would give you a hell of a lot more hint at what I’m speaking about than if I just said “art”. I don’t remember ever calling any person “Oriental” but since I don’t speak any Oriental languages, I have no idea what they were calling me, and anyway, most every language has generic terms for groups of “outsiders”. When someone mentions “the U.S.”, I don’t start lecturing on how I am from Illinois, and there are many different states, and how demeaning it is to be referred to by a generic term. -Because frankly I don’t give a shit, and I know that most people can’t tell what state I’m from anyway, and so why raise a fuss? The stigma of being associated with the rest of the whole country just doesn’t bother me that much.
What is wrong with referring to a casual grouping of people decended originally from a particular region by a common name? And while we’re all here, why isn’t the term “Europeans” considered offensive? Have Germans/Italians/French ever balked at being included with each other? - MC
- I used the term “Oriental” in a couple GQ threads, and a couple people have tried to discourage me from using it any further. I didn’t mean its use to be offensive, but I am wondering exactly what is offensive within any such term. (Actually I said “Crazy Orientals” but people pointed out the “Oriental” part and not the “Crazy” part, which makes me wonder…) -And my questions did get answered by people who knew, so I do wish to extend thanks for that to all who replied.
-
-
-
- Re: “Indians”, -I suppose this might have an entirely different connotation if you live in Pakistan rather than the United States, but then I don’t speak Pakistani (or whatever, there I go again) so I dunno what Pakistanis call Indians. -(assholes?)
:::running away::: - MC
- Re: “Indians”, -I suppose this might have an entirely different connotation if you live in Pakistan rather than the United States, but then I don’t speak Pakistani (or whatever, there I go again) so I dunno what Pakistanis call Indians. -(assholes?)
-
MC, you don’t get out much, do you? “Oriental” is offensive for several reasons: “Orientals” are only in the East (for that is what “Orient” means) from a European or Atlantic coast point of view; “Oriental” also conjures up images of a yellow-skinned, slant-eyed, “Other,” like Fu Manchu and sterotypes are not useful; in addition, “Oriental” covers a huge range of cultures, languages, and ethnic groups so it is also, in addition to being Eurocentric and racist, wildly inaccurate.
This is just ridiculous. The United States is a single country with no real variations in language, race, or culture in any region. People in Illinois, New York, and Louisiana all speak English, they have the same history, and the same culture. The same cannot be said for China, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, India, Laos, Vietnam, Bhutan, and so on.
The term “Europeans” has never, to my knowledge, been commonly used as a pejorative word, whereas “Oriental” has.
Ands since I’m willing to bet that in my travels I’ve met a great many more folks from Europe than you, I can say that folks from Europe don’t mind being identified that way, but you confuse a German with an Italian at your peril.
Oh, folks from Pakistan speak Urdu, similar to Hindi (one of the official languages of India), but spelled in Arabic letters, while Hindi is written in Devanagri script. And, no, I’m not ignoring Pushtu, Sindhi, Baluchi, or any of the hill tribe languages, but they aren’t spoken outside their ethnic groups, while Urdu is the national language of Pakistan.
To my understanding a number of Asian-American groups have come out against the term Oriental on a number of bases: feeling it is connected with 19th century condenscation (‘oriental despotism’ and like terms) and racialized thinking. Note, my impression is this movement arose from 2nd and later generation people hailing from East Asia (Chinese and Koreans it seems) – native speakers of English as opposed to English learners. They appear to have developed an annoyance with the term.
The usage to my ears, orientals, has a vaguely musty sound, like I’m talking to some old colonial who refers to black South Africans as “bantus” in a most condescending way. Or folks who say “colored” instead of black.
What’s the harm? Asian isn’t hard.
You rather missed the point
(a) academically the term Orient isn’t used any more, it has been replaced by more specific terms, like South East Asia(n), etc.
(b) the physical existance of Asia is not the question, the representation is the question.
That is also the object of the objection as those who have come out against the usage, requesting Asian in its place, feel the old term carries a lot of baggage, bad baggage, that Asian does not.
You miss the point once more, there is a suggested replacement, Asian, for the descriptive adjective.
I can’t say that on any “objective” sense the usage of Asian is ‘better’ per se than oriental, anymore than ‘black’ is better than ‘colored’, however the words senses have evolved. Insofar as the suggested replacement aligns with current academic usage (including non-trendy areas such as economics, geography etc) what’s the harm? We don’t write about “Oriental” economies in economics, we speak of Asian Economies or East Asian if we want to be more precise.
So, the choice is there, modern educated preference has evolved. You can choose to use a somewhat musty old term with a bit of baggage or you can choose to use a term which appears to correspond to modern usage.
Well, that’s another question entirely. It can be useful but sometimes it hides more diversity than similarity, but that’s another
Yes, they have from time to time.
However, your question is more than slightly naive, the Europeans have been the ones driving the terminological and definitional train for a good few centuries. As such, they’ve been the ones applying the labels in large part. Naturally as sensitivity to Anglo usages rises, some folks may decide to ask for/demand relabelling. If it’s not harmful to clarity why not play along?
This is interesting. I was unaware that the term Oriental is now consudered offensive. Is this true? Perhaps its just a few PC extremists (there’s people offended at everything these days). I wonder if some people of the ethnic background being discussed can chime in and tell us what the mainstream position i.e. the feeling of most members of this group, is.
Some of the objections cited by Goboy seem very PC. Why would Eastern be more offensive than Western, which is widely used to describe Europe and America with nary a peep. And the idea that the term Oriental conjures up specific images is odd - any term used to describe a people will conjure up the popular image of that people, whatever it happens to be.
Also, the term Asian does not, AFAIK, describe the same ethnic groups. An Indian or Pakistani is Asian, not Oriental.
This is not a clarion call for increased use of the term Oriental - I could care less what people are called, and let them be called whatever makes them happy, within reason. But I’m curious as to the present status of the term, and the reasons for it.
Me, PC? (the loud sound of incredulous laughter) I am one of the least PC posters on this board and have been swatted by many folks for my conservative opinions. However, I do have a deep respect for English words and for respecting what people wish to be called and not called.
In additon, the term “Oriental” refers to everything east of the Bosphorous; why are rugs woven in Turkey and Iran called “Oriental” if not for that?
As for reasons why the term “Oriental” should be abandoned, check out this site.
(chuckles to himself “Izzy thinks I’m PC, it is to laugh”)
Unaware? Come on now, this very same issue has come up more than once in GQ and GD, in PC threads esp. I seem to recall your participation.
I’m reporting what I remarked on since my college days in the 1980s. I don’t believe it is a matter of “PC extremists”.
I think that without a statistically valid poll we will have a hard time knowing what the feeling of “most members of this group is”, and as I noted, my impression since the mid-1980s was that the impetus was coming from 2nd generation and after, so it’s something of an internal cultural issue.
Oriental was quite clearly used in fairly pejorative contexts in the past – terms such as “oriental despotism”, the ‘inscrutable oriental’ etc. and schools of analysis which assumed there was some essential something to the ‘slanty eyed folks’. The term occidental on the contrary was used as a positive ascription, as quite obviously all that was good and worthy derived from Western culture.
Such is the history of late 19th century and early to mid twentieth century racialized analysis.
Please, words carry implicit meanings. For example, colored, negro, both carry conotations, rooted in history, that is different from black. To pretend otherwise is to play a highly disingenious game.
Huh? Well, traditionally sub-continent people were described as “oriental” – one can see this usage by looking at works published through to say about the 1950s. Given historical usage there is no basis to say oriental excludes sub-Continental pops.
Both terms, Asian and Oriental, are vague terms. Either may include or exclude the sub-continent. In both cases the term has largely been applied to people hailing from East (to South East) Asia fitting the stereotypical image of East Asians.
I believe I have given you just that in my prior message.
It’s a fairly minor issue, what’s the harm?
I really don’t and I saw that last thread on Asia versus orient. I have a degree in Chinese. I speak Japanese (poorly, but I speak it) as well. My wife is Chinese and my daughter is a dual citizen (China and the US). I’ve lived in China, Taiwan, HK, China, Singapore, etc for over 15 years and I have settled in Shanghai. Kim is my all time favorite book, and populatated with all numbers of colorful Orientals and Asiatics (although for some unknown and completely erroneous reason has a Tibetan lama quoting Chinese at the drop of a hat). So, call me a bigot if you will.
Sure Asia and Asian works. But what is wrong with Oriental as well? Certainly 15 years ago Oriental was the scholarly word used. I admit it is kind of old fashioned sounding, but certainly as late as the 1980’s in the US, there was no backlash against the word. I had a couple of mixed ancestry girlfriends that thought the term “ornamental” was pretty cute and endearing. All the Asians I grew up with didn’t have a problem with the word. None of my oriental friends have ever in any way shape or form ever indicated that Oriental was not an acceptable term. Oriental American is awkward sounding I will admit, and perhaps that is where this whole brouhaha has stemmed from.
Asiatic and the “asiatic mind” give me a slightly distasteful feeling, and one I do not get from the “oriental mind.” What about the “mystical orient?” “Mystical Asia” just doesn’t have the same ring. Of course, I grew up in the home of a Pacific Theater WW2 vet and Korean vet, so I can promise you that Asians and orientals were not the words used in the household to describe people from or having ancestry from the Orient/Asia.
The English use Orient, Orientals and other derivative words in a somewhat different way than Americans, and I wonder if it’s PC in England as well to only use Asia? any one from the UK care to add to this?
So, call me a bigot if you will, but I’m not burning my diploma from the Department of Oriental Languages, University of California, Davis any time soon.
from the website goboy linked to:
well, what a compelling reason!!! since i don’t like the song “jack and diane,” i guess that means it will be forever banished, and anyone who plays it will immediatly be labeled a racist.
i can’t wait to sue the local radio station under the new hate crime laws!!!
[homer]In case you can’t tell, i was being sarcastic![/homer]
some people need to get a life and stop being offended by every little thing.
Is that so? If it is I have forgotten about it, but I would be very surprised if this is true.
I was referring to the statement (by goboy) that
With regard to this I pointed out that the term Western is an accurate and acceptable parallel.
The word is negative to the extent that it’s subject is perceived negatively. There’s no inherent negativity about it, and to the extent that people’s negative attitudes have changed the connotations of the word may change with them. Numerous words evolve over time.
I am referring to present day usage. Words evolve, as mentioned earlier.
MC, I was one who commented. I did not specifically refer to either one. The title was “Those Crazy Orientals and their Funny Writing.” It came across as pretty demeaning.
I have an idea. IF people say, please don’t call us Orientals, it offends us, why don’t we stop? It’s not going to hurt you to be polite to them, is it?
–John
of course, the entire quote was
The important aspects were, not only that ‘some’ people don’t like it, but that ‘many’ find it distasteful, that both in journalistic and entertainment industries, the term has been “Asian” for quite some time. That since people don’t wear signs on their heads saying “I hate the term Oriental” or “Call me oriental, just don’t call me late for dinner”, that since “Asian” does not have the negative connotations, that a polite person would select the term least likely to offend.
That you may have personal friends who have told you they don’t care one way or the other isn’t the issue.
If one is attempting to be polite in society, one addresses others in polite terms. So, for example, when one sees a clerk wearing a name tag that says “Charles”, one shouldn’t assume that he prefers “Chuckie boy”, and call him that. Of course, if you had previous dealings with him, and he told you to call him “Chuckie boy”, then that’s his preferred. It really isn’t any more complicated than that.
Oriental in itself is not offensive, and I would hate to see a store boycotted for selling “Oriental” and not “Asian-American” vases and rugs. But it seems to be that any ethnic or racial term from the past is bound to be associated with the racism of the past. “Negro” for instance is merely a synonym for “black” (unless you have a problem with Spanish words). However its use in the context of racism (“Negro school”, “Negro restroom”) left the word with a bad aftertaste in America. The same is true with Oriental, discrimination against the East Asians included “Oriental Exclusion Acts” for instance. Therefore the use of that word may remind people of the past and its burdens.
I don’t know if anyone has denied that no one should use terms that are offensive to people. I do think that if these terms are inoffensive to the vast majority of people being thusly described and are in common use, one might use them even if a small minority of hypersensitive people object - its difficult to satisfy everyone. Having been informed here that the term has fallen out of favor, I did a cursory search on the NY Times and New Republic websites for the term Oriental, and came up with many references. (I should point out that in the case of the NYT most of references were to proper nouns e.g. Oriental Basketball League (or such) that a certain player played in. OTOH, the NYT only shows the last 30 days.) So it seems to me that it has not fallen out of usage after all. All evidence to the contrary so far are claims of one website whose over-reaching rationales make them suspect. But I may be wrong.
but Izzy just as ‘no one has said we should use terms that are offensive’, no one has claimed that the word “Oriental” is no longer used ever. And when you state that you found the use of “oriental” mostly used as a noun, that follows exactly with the concept mentioned here and IIRC, one of the links as well that when describing objects or ** things** like, say a degree in Oriental literature or Jimi Hendrix’s Oriental style jacket the word “oriental” was fine, but when describing people, the preferred term was Asian, and you’ll note, also when checking out CNN’s ‘world’ section, they refer to ‘asian /pacific’ as an area.
So, it does seem that at least for CNN, the preferred reference is “Asian”.
wring, you are nitpicking. I said that most of the NYT references were proper nouns, not all (e.g. in discussing art, “such non-Orientals as …” refering to the artists). And TNR used it indiscriminately.
I don’t know if Asia-Pacific is the same as Orient.
you claimed to not have noticed that the term “Oriental” had gone out of popular usage when referring to persons of Asian heritage, then offered up
because you didn’t link to the usage we couldn’t see for ourselves evidence of your claim that it ‘has not fallen out of usage at all’. But you noted that ‘most’ refered to usage as a noun, as has been discussed.
So, it seemed prudent to me to do my own search. 'cause, you see, I can’t remember the last time I heard people referred to as “Oriental”. Hence, my search of CNN, gave most recent examples, where persons were referred to as “Asian” and objects, things etc were referred to as “Oriental”.
Did another search on ABC news site, and got
these
results
all things. Except for this one where Samuel Gompers is quoted, using “Oriental people”, circa 1900. I think, though that we’d agree that doesn’t count as current common usage.
My cursory search of major news outlets, found consistent usage is “oriental” for objects, “Asian” for people. So, if you’d please bring to the table, the links where you found current usage of the term “Oriental” referring to people, then, I’d be happy to take a look.
Think of the term “Oriental” as “Junior”. It’s a term your parents used, in good faith, when you were a kid of relatively little power. It picked up some negative connotations along the way, as in “Junior, you are in big trouble”. Now that you have reached adulthood, you would probably rather be called your first name (or whatever name you choose to go by) rather than the name that your parents kept calling you all time when you were too young and powerless to ask them to do otherwise.
And if the people around you are decent folks, they will smile and call you by what you want to be called rather than calling you “Junior” all the time.
I admit that I’ve lived in the Far East more or less since 1985, so I’m out of touch. The first time I’ve heard that Oriental is on the PC bad list is recently on the straight dope. That’s it. None of my acquaintences, friends or family have ever indicated to me that Oriental is a term they dislike or find offensive, odd or old-fashioned maybe but not offensive.
If someone I know actually said “I would prefer that you don’t use Oriental but use Asian.” I would respect their request and also ask the background for my own information. [I already gave my partial pedigree so I hope it’s clear I’m curious on the reasoning behind all this].
Can we hear from the teeming millions who either hail from the Far East or Sub-continent, or are decendants living abroad?
Dude, whats with the condescending tone towards MC??? Jeez. Now what are you talking about?? The US is based on ideology. It is based on the idea that all ppl are created equal(we are not here to talk about that right now), China, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, the Phillippines, India, Laos, Vietnam, Bhutan are all countries because chinese ppl have lived there for hundreds of years, or Korean ppl, or Japanese ppl, or Malaysian ppl, or Phillippino(dont they spell it Filipino?), or Indian ppl, or Laoian(is that right?) ppl, or Vietnamese ppl, or Bhutanic(Bhutanese?)ppl have lived there for hundreds of years. The USA is diverse! So are these countries! There is nothing wrong with narrowing down a group of ppl nationally or racially. It is just identifying ppl.