PC = Polite

Great Debates
21

December, another source for calling Asians Asians rather than Orientals can be found in “Everything You Need to Know About Asian American History” by Lan Cao and Himilee Novas. I’d type it all it, but I’m too lazy and don’t want to violate any copyrights. Page xiii. Asian describes a person- Oriental describes a rug.

My son is Asian. He is too young to have preferences (other than what to wear - don’t let a toddler dress himself!), but I get to have preferences for him - Asian please. I forgive Oriental from people who don’t know better (my 85 year old grandmother). Actually, I forgive it from anyone as long as it wasn’t used with malice – I wouldn’t forgive someone for using Asian with malice either.

Technically, he is Korean. And for people who know that Korean is the preferred term. But other Koreans occationally think he is Chinese - and there is very much a racial hiererachy amongst Asians - you will probably offend a Japanese person if you mistake him for Chinese or Korean - so you are better off just with Asian unless you know. Since you know the nationality of your coworkers, refer to them as that (and lumping them together probably is rude - why would you ever refer to “all the white folk that I work with”).

Also, Oriental often refers (probably in the case of the Oriental Institute) to persons from the East (or things to do with the East like history or art). India and the Middle East are lumped together with Asians (China, Japan, Korea, Thailand, etc). Oriental, in that case, would be the best possible term.

If you don’t have a reason to refer to people as Asian or Asian-Americans you don’t have a reason to use the term Oriental either. I agree, if you can get around using any term, its better not to describe someone by race - especially a group of someones.

22

Absolutely except where, of course, the ‘group’ themselves have banded togehter and refered to themselves as ‘other name’.

In general, yes, I would prefer to only refer to folks in individual manners. In my work, unfortunately, I am required to obtain demographic information. One form I am required to use deliniates the options: “African American”, “American Indian/Alaskan native”, “Hawaiian Native/Other Pacific Islander” “Asian”, “White”, “Hispanic/Latino Ethnicity”.
So folks of mixed heritage are forced to select one. The form I devised simply asks for “Ethnic group” (of course, when I fill out my report form, it’s of the same ilk as the one above, but at least I let the person make the selection). Once a guy wrote in “alcoholic”. He was telling the truth. (:wink: ).

The issue comes up at all in two ways (that I can think of). One is if one is attempting to describe an individual so that some one else can regognize them. Then, I would personally attempt to use those traits that would most quickly and easily identify that person (‘you know, John, the guy with the purple mohawk’ vs. “John, 5/10, blue eyes, neatly trimmed fingernails”). In those cases, I may select a broadly conferred ethinicity if it’s readily apparent.

The other time the issue may come up, is if the group themselves, for whatever reason identify themselves as a group with that name. So, for example, the groups I linked to.

As far are there any who don’t like to be called that? I’m sure there are. But, for example, I don’t like to be called “ma’am”. I won’t be offended if some one does, I’ll merely tell them (as I do) “I’m not old enough to be called that, thanks”. IOW, one still is better off using the more formalized version, than a slang alternative. Here’s a brief statement as to why the term ‘Oriental’ may be seen as offensive.

23

Wring – Thanks for the further cite, which I reproduce here:

**Q. Why is the term “Oriental” offensive to Asians?

A. Orientalism was a movement in the 19th century in Europe that exoticized and differentiated people of Asia and the Middle East. These ideas placed individuals residing in this area in an idealized world considered savage and barbaric. To call an Asian person “Oriental” places them in this ideal.**

This is the kind of baloney that makes me see red. It’s so preposterous that it insults our intelligence. In fairness, maybe the silliness of that quote isn’t as evident to young people.

I’m 58 years old and quite interested in discrimination, especially since I’m Jewish. I’ve never heard of orientalism. Until recently, the word “Oriental” was the ONLY word available to refer to someone of Asian descent. For me, it was, if anything, a word of praise, since I was fortunate enough to have some Asian-Americans in a math class I once taught at Berkeley. In the mystery literature of the 1920s and 1930s, Charlie Chan was a hero, and Mr. Moto was at least very competent. For racists (including “Orientalists,” whoever they were), it was a pejorative. For both sides, there was no other word.

Similarly for “Jew.” We all know that there were fascists for whom the word “Jew” was pejorative, but the Jewish people have no need to change our name on their account. I don’t know who these “Orientalists” were, but I’m sure they didn’t murder 6 million people.

When organizations promulgate fake justifications, I get upset. We are being jerked around.

24

Fuck the question.

Like any other philosophical movement, political correctness carried to ideological extreme is a bad thing. What I notice again and again in these discussions, though, is the tendency of those critical of PC to damn the concept because of the extremes of practice. One might similarly damn Christianity for the Inquisitions.

The core idea of political correctness is that attention should be paid to the language we use so that offensive labels are not propogated without consious intent. Obviously, offense is in the eye of the beholder. Just as obviously, the liklihood of offense can often be inferred from past usage. I find no fault with the admonition that people should try to be aware of such things. It isn’t “just” language. It is language, the most powerful tool we have for fostering (or impeding) social cohesion.

25

phony according to whom?

Seemed to me that the person was reporting why she and folks she knew found it offensive. The fact that you don’t find it offensive is immaterial, IMHO.

I would, also, take your personal assesment of what you find offensive.

(yippee for preview) and of course Spirtis Mundi is correct.

26

I still think of PC as basically being polite and being sensitive to others in relation to your own worldview. It’s also about challenging your assumptions and the lens through which you look at things, historically and personally.

Outcry about things like celebrating Columbus Day, or using terms like Oriental, means that at least the historical (Eurocentric) view held by the majority of Americans is shaken up a little. It forces you to examine the perspective through which you are receiving information, and possibly seek out alternatives.

I am white and I was having a conversation with the other white women. We were talking about what “type” of man we liked. One said “Light hair with blue eyes.” At my turn, I said “A dark-skinned black man who’s taller than me, clean-shaven, blah, blah.” Their response? 'Why do you have a racial preference?" I didn’t want to get into it with them, so I just said that’s what I find most attractive. But it didn’t even occur to them that they had expressed a “racial preference” too. It’s ingrained that they would like white men so only a difference from that is a racial preference.

Being PC means you don’t assume anything, and you don’t take the status quo as normal or correct. You challenge what you think or assume and if that means you are on eggshells, so be it.

It seems that people complain about PC going too far, but then you hear so many stories about oppression, enough to convince you not much has changed. So how can we have gone too far?

27

If you’ve never heard the term “Orientalism,” I suggest you read the book of that name by Edward Said, and “The Chan’s Great Continent” by Jonathan D. Spence to see how Westerners
have exoticized Asians. I loathe the humorless intellectual tyranny of the left, but opposing it does not mean we get to go back to the good old days of racial sterotyping. Stereotypes,even positive ones,are demeaning because they characterize you as a member of a category instead of as an indivudual. Surely, december, you would be offended if someone complimented you as a Jew on how good your money handling must be.

28

Respectful speech and behavior is certainly laudable Esprix, but for me (and I suspect for other people as well) the term PC is associated with a lot of meanings besides “Plain Courtesy”. For me PC means censorship of ideas and discussion. Frank debates about sexuality, gender, politics and race all contain elements which some people might be offended by. From my perspective PC represses diversity and learning out of fear of offending people (and the litigation which might ensue). The following sentence from the Straight Dope probably wouldn’t be considered “Politically Correct”:

“The reality of violence against women is shocking enough–why make stuff up? Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time the facts have been distorted in defense of women’s rights.”

One example of the mis-use of political correctness can be found here:

http://www.wpri.org/WIInterest/Vol8No1/Still8.1.pdf

The above site discusses speech codes imposed on University of Wisconsin faculty. The wording of the speech code was so vague as to allow the investigation of a professor over nearly anything provided someone, (anyone) was offended by it.

One proponent of the speech code said that professors should be punished who offend during the course of instruction - even if there is no harm or intent.

In short, IMHO, PC has gone from the tenet

  1. Plain Courtesy

To the tenets…

  1. Individuals choose what offends them regardless of meaning (like use of the word niggardly)

  2. People should be legally liable/punishable for acts/speech that offend

PC may have started with some noble ideas, certainly racial and sexist epithets are highly disrespectful and shouldn’t be condoned, but punishing people legally (a direct assault to our right to free speech) because of perceived offense harms society far more then it helps.

Grim

29

This sounds like the “noble savage” depiction of Native Americans. As Native American people were either savage marauders terrorizing innocent pioneers, or elevated to a level above because of their system of beliefs, so Asians were depicted as bowing and scraping caricatures or elevated to “mysterious”, or at least very competent, heroes. And all as a foil to white people.

Another criticism of the word “Oriental” is that it is derived from “to the East”, meaning that places are named with Europe as the center or reference point.

So now there is another word. What’s the problem?

30

It is one thing to be polite and cognizant of others wishes. Common courtesy demands that we try and refrain from offending others. If Asians wish to not have the term ‘Oriental’ applied to them than so be it. Just because you may not see the harm doesn’t mean that no harm is done.

That said Political Correctness comes in when people take speech out of context, as SPOOFE mentioned earlier, and use it as a weapon. For example, in April of '99 David Howard of the Office of the Public Advocate in Washington said, “I will have to be niggardly with this fund because it’s not going to be a lot of money.”

To my knowledge the word ‘niggardly’, meaning stingy, has nothing to do with the word ‘nigger’ beyond sounding similar. Nevertheless a witch hunt ensued and David Howard’s resignation was sought. To quote The New Republic: “Words no longer have meaning_only consequences.”

This is not merely an academic discussion either. Political Correctness has real and lasting impacts. It can go beyond merely being polite to becoming a ‘thought police’. In Wisconsin a woman was fined $10,000 for refusing to live with a lesbian roommate (The Other Side of “Tolerance”: Victims of Homosexual Activism [Washington, D.C.: Family Research Council, 1997). In 1996 Brigitte Bardot was fined by a French court for complaining of “an overpopulation of foreigners, notably Muslims” and denouncing Muslim ritual slaughter of sheep as “torture worthy of the most atrocious pagan sacrifices” (The Guardian, December 20, 1996). I think my favorite was the college campus where men and women had to recite a pre-prepared litany if they wanted to ask for sexual favors so as to avoid unwanted language that might offend (I’m looking for the cite to that one).

Regardless of what you think of the examples above those people should certainly be allowed to hold those opinions if they wish. As for the college campus I think even they finally figured out it was beyond ridiculous and dumped it.

31

Gigi, you seem to be arguing that all uses of the word “Oriental” were pejorative, even the apparently positive ones. That would be a sensible reason to stop using the word (although IMHO it wouldn’t be correct.) However, that isn’t the reason claimed in the quote. Those people claimed that the word must never again be used because it was a pejorative for a certain group of Europeans 150 years ago. Give me a break!

As for the “From the East”, what do you think “Occidental” means? Is Occidental College in Los Angeles planning a PC name change? Should I cringe at being called a “Westerner”? Are we allowed to address “Eastern Bloc” nations. I know that this nonsense is being taught at major universities. Too bad for the students who got a sub-standard education in this area (including, sadly, my daughters.)

Goboy – I appreciate the recommendations for reading. I don’t question that Orientalism existed and that it had historical importance. But, Orientalism in Europe in 1850 isn’t a sufficient reason to give up the word “Oriental” in the U.S. in 2001, in my opinion. I don’t believe that it is the real reason. I think the real reason was political, in some way.

When I mention sub-standard education I have in mind people like Said. What a pity that students are taught to respect a proven liar. It seems to me that one aspect of modern liberal arts education is training students to believe whatever it taught to them, whether it makes sense or not. Students pay over $100,000 to learn how not to do critical thinking.

As far as the anti-Semites are concerned, I doubt they’d be any nicer to us if Jews were called something else, but it’s thought. Any suggestion for a more positive-sounding name? I suppose we could call ourselves Israeli-Americans. Of course, most of us have never been in Israel, but, then, most Asian-Americans have probably never been in Asia. Then I could defend myself against accusations from NBA players, saying, “Yes, those rotten Jews may have killed Christ, but I’m an Israeli-American!”

32

There was also Antioch College, who instituted a famous policy that students had to ask at each level of sexual contact.
“May I insert my tongue into your mouth?”
“May I place my hand upon your buttocks”
How romantic. :rolleyes:

33

I’m offended by people who lie to me and to my children, especially when they do so from a position of authority, such as Edwin Said. I’m offended by preposterous rationalizations and excuses.

I’m offended by unfair attributions of negative characteristics to groups I belong to, or to prominent representatives of those groups. E.g., people who say that Republicans aren’t compassionate , or that they want to poison the water or starve children. People who call George W. Bush a “moron.”

Wring – I appreciate your promise to take my assessment of what I find offensive. Unfortunately, today’s societal rules don’t follow your good will. My sensitivities are not among those prohibited by the “PC police” (whoever they are.)

In reality, PC gives very broad protection to certain sensitivities and ignores many others. It’s worth considering which things have gotten to be non-PC and how they got that way.

34

The words and attitutes we adopt are personal choices of style. What’s fashionable often changes. The “no-no” words change, but the meanings and the attitudes behind them seldom do.

PC is artifically induced conformity. A veneer applied to an unsightly mess, and then the problem is pronounced Fixed!
But nothing has changed with the actual attitudes. Just the words.

Then PC can become a weapon, used to castigate those not familiar with it’s massively complex and obfuscated byways, in short, those that have better things to do then deconstruct language.

PC. Pure Crap.

35

december. I agree that insulting overgeneralizations are an abomination. And, I think I have a decent record (at least here) of mostly refraining from the “of course as a conservative, you wouldn’t care about anyone else” type of thing. Surely, you would concede, however, that
A. Such mischaracterizations are done on both sides and
B. Such mischaracterizations are difficult to do upon quick viewing of a person (as oppposed to the quick mischaracterizations that some one who has physical features reconizable as belonging to certain minorities).
and
C. in any event, surely you wouldn’t think to contend that since some overgeneralizations and mischaracterizations go on for some groups, that we should cease any attempt at correcting any of them until **all ** of them were corrected?

We also agree that communication is an important thing to achieve. I believe, of course, that the mischaracterizations that we’re talking about impede communication, rather than enhance it.
(I am not familiar with E. Said, nor the book referred to , so will not comment on that).

The fact that you are offended by the NBA player suggests to me that you recognize the harm that words can have.

I don’t get the impression that you’re advocating the wholesale usage of racial and otherwise derogutory words. In addition, you seem to agree that offending others is something that we all should at least try not to do. So, what again, is such a bad thing?

And, while I appreciate the situations alluded to (re: steps for sexual contact at the one University and the other link provided), please, refer again to the point made by Spiritus that one shouldh’t argue against PC merely by pointing out the most flagrant and bizarre examples.

Scylla: Pre P/C there were A. People who used slurs intentionally to harm. and B. People who used slurs w/o intention to harm either because of ignorance that it was harmful or whatever. After P/C, at the very least, group B would now understand there were negative consequences, and would refrain. This is a good thing, yes?

Re: group A who will now, with PC be perhaps less readily identifiable, since they will be able to mask their bigotry with correct language - well you’re right, the PC wouldn’t change that. Should we then do away with it since it doesn’t correct everything, and go back to in addition to group A causing harm, group B causing harm?

36

Perhaps you should read Orientalism before you dismiss Prof. Edward Said’s work as lies. Perhaps you should even get his name right.

:rollseyes:

If you really think Orientalism is so preposterous, perhaps you should have a look at the textual sources for yourself. Would you even know where to begin?

37

In short, if you are a white, anglo-saxon, protestant (or maybe even catholic) and male then you aren’t protected. Indeed, this group constitutes the boogeyman from which all other groups must be protected.

I have found it interesting that while broad generalizations about protected groups are severly frowned upon broad generalizations about WASP’s is still a favorite pasttime.

I worked for a women’s organization which was largely populated by very active and very opinionated women’s rights types. That’s all well and fine but these very same people would casually trash men as a part of regular conversation. Men are all “pigs”, men are “inherently violent”, men “can’t be trusted” and so on were common refrains.

As one of the few men in the office I felt like a sheep in a flock of wolves and mostly kept my head down. When I pointed this inconsistency out to one of the women she said we (men) had it coming.

So, rather than standing above it all these women, at least, were as bad as any of the men they complained so vehemently about and found this behavior acceptable.

Frankly the name calling didn’t bother me all that much…I learned back in elementary school how to let that sort of stuff roll off my back but had I said even a tenth of what these women were saying I GUARANTEE you I would have been fired (I worked in HR and was well aware of the policies and saw how vigorously they were pursued).

That was the real nightmare…ever afraid of what landmine you might step on next if you didn’t watch what you said closely (and believe me…it was unrealistically easy to say the wrong thing no matter how unintentional or innocuous it seemed in the surface).

38

Maeglin – thank you for correcting the name.

Said’s lies about his upbringing have been exposed in various sources. You can find them as easily as I can. Maybe you’ve been in college recently and read Said there; if so, it would appear that your professors didn’t talk about his dishonesty.

I don’t think Orientalism is preposterous. I think it’s preposterous to claim that the word suddenly went out of vogue here in the US because of something that happened in Europe 150 years ago. This can’t be the real reason.

And, this isn’t like the use of “Jew” vs “Kike.” “Oriental” was the proper word for people of Asian descent.

39

I agree with what Spiritus Mundi said. But I think PC has come to take on a new meaning, different than its possible, original intentions.

To what Mundi is referring is courtesy, is politeness.

When most people think of political correctness these days, IMO, they think of people who want to spell “women” with a ‘y,’ or of people opposed to the University of Georgia erecting a monument to its students and faculty who had died during war time throughout our country’s history, because it wasn’t inclusive enough.

gigi said:

**
No; again, I think that means being courteous. (Except for the “walking on eggshells” part. I don’t think that makes our society better.)

PC, as a lot of people perceive it, is all about making assumptions about people. It assumes that if you don’t think or speak as they do, you are bad or wrong or bigoted.

40

The extreme examples of PC I have seen have perverted how people communicate and in some cases made genuine understanding more difficult to achieve.

I imagine that all of us have witnessed situations in which someone misspeaks (I really hate this word as I think it’s the PC way to say screwed up) and the listener then gets a smug look on their face and proceeds to rub the speaker’s nose in it.

Used as a weapon in this way it can often be about words and not ideas. This is ignorant. Now don’t get me wrong words do carry weight, but there are people that just wait for you slip up and then use the mistake to shut down your whole argument instead of actually debating.

PC has created an uncomfortable arena in which to exchange ideas. Frank and earnest discussions are rare, even with a few beers involved.

To me PC has become the new inquisition. Once you slip up you get tied to a stake and set on fire. The extreme PC movement seems to be fueled by casualties. Nobody ever seems to pause and ask, “what did you mean?”