And looking again this morning I saw the pajamas and the hands-position on the bunny. Definitely fell out of a time warp.
Yes, they were refering to the Japanese people. That’s who bombed Pearl Harbor, after all: Japanese people serving in the military of imperial Japan. The term “Jap” has never been used to refer only to the military of Imperial Japan. It has always been a blanket term from anyone of Japanese descent. What you’ve got there are headlines that identifed to the soldiers that attacked us by their race, not their profession or political affiliation. This is trivially easy to demonstrate, by the simple expedient of showing how the word was used in a non-military context. Which I’ve already done. Remember that headline I linked to? “Ouster of all Japs in California near.” Who do you think that was refering to? The Japanese military? You think Tojo was hanging out in Bakersfield?
Quite the opposite. This thread shows that the overwhelming majority of people in the US recognize Jap as a slur. Just because there’s one idiot arguing the opposite doesn’t mean there’s any actual controversy over the subject.
You’re an idiot. Here are a selection of actual newspaper headlines from the time period in question which clearly use the term “Japs” to refer to persons of Japanese ancestry, and NOT to members of the Imperial Armed Forces:
Clearly, your “historical context” claim is bullshit. Shall I continue?
Wait, so as long as one person (that is, you) claims that a word means a particular thing, then that proves that there is a debate about what the word means?
So ONE person can arbitrarily change the meaning of a word?
Look, you’re not making sense. Words have to have a shared meaning in order to convey meaning. Your particular idiolect is useless unless other people understand what you mean when you use it.
And “Japs”–both nowadays, and in WWII refers to the people, the government, the military and the ethnic group, all indiscriminately.
I’m sorry, but you’re simply not making sense.
Well to answer your last question first- I did not claim the right “to be able to use the term “Jap” without criticism”. I defended other’s right to do so, in an extremely limited context.
To address your first point, perhaps what your posts prove it that you want to join the ranks of those “holier than thou, those who have bestowed upon themselves the crown of arbiters of what is good, right and proper. Those who cannot abide any tint bit of straying from the ONE TRUE PATH. Those who are always right, and will let everyone know it over and over and over…” Sound familiar?
See, you make up a complete strawman, that I calim that the term “Jap” was only used in a historical context to refer to the Imperial Armed forces,then trot out som ecites to prove a point that I never made is wrong. Then claim you have one. Nice strawman. I never claimed that the term only and always referred to the Imperial Armed forces. Just that it sometimes did . Do you dispute that? Where are your cites showing that it never refered to the Imperial armed forces?
There is bullshit here, I agree.
Unlike you, who is always wrong and will let everyone know it over and over and over…
I’m not saying that you claimed it was ONLY used in its historical context, I’m saying that the “historical context” you claim never existed. See the difference?
So, your argument is what? That it’s okay to use racial slurs against people who are sufficiently evil? It’s okay to call the Japanese army “Japs” because of what they did to Nanking? Does that mean it’s okay to call Osama bin Laden a sand nigger, because of what he did to New York?
Yes, the term “Jap” was used to describe the Japanese military. That’s because the people who were using the term were racists. They were insulting the Japanese military by casting a slur on their ethnicity. Certainly, the Japanese military deserved all manner of insult, due to their conduct in the second World War, but you cannot use a racial slur against just one portion of a race. It insults the Japanese miltary by attacking them for being Japanese, not for the actions they took as part of an oppressive military regime. And if you insult someone for being Japanese, you are saying that being Japanese is a bad thing, regardless of any other sins they may or may not have committed in their lives.
Miller, I think the more pertinent question for DrDeth is whether we can call an evil white American white trash, since that seems to be a derogatory term he takes offense at.
Many of us would prefer that you didn’t. What possible reason could you have for calling someone trash, or disparaging their race? Are you that full of yourself? Are you that exalted?
And what of the US Army and Abu Ghraib?
And my point is, why bother? Why jump through hoops to try to establish the acceptability of “Jap” in a particular “extremely limited context” when the limitations you’re trying to define are totally arbitrary and anachronistic?
For Og’s sake, it’s not as though anyone has seriously accused Quartz of intending to insult Japanese people in general when he used the term “Jap” specifically with reference to Tojo’s soldiers. You don’t need to defend him by making up a convoluted rationalization why you think it ought to be okay to use the term “Jap” specifically with reference to Tojo’s soldiers.
Nope. But dude, if you think that pointing out that the word “Jap” is not socially acceptable equates to “not abiding any [tiny?] bit of straying from the ONE TRUE PATH”, you’ve got a serious disconnect from reality going on here.
Since DrDeth won’t even respond to my repeated question about the acceptability of referring to Mussolini’s Italian troops by the historically-attested derogatory terms “wops” or “dagoes”, I doubt you’re going to get a straight answer out of him on this one either.
And then you’ll have people asserting that “nigger” is simply the word “negro” pronounced with a Southern accent, or what have you. And that “negro” is merely the Spanish word for “black.”
I understand that the bunny is a great big pile of stereotypes, but can anyone explain the “Hoppy Easter” bit? I really didn’t get that part - I thought it was just a silly rabbit-related pun - but am quite happy to have my ignorance fought if anyone can explain it.
DrDeth,
I notice your location is San Jose. I don’t know what the local Japanese-American population is there; however, I do know there’s a sizeable population of Vietnamese-Americans in that town. Would you recommend going to one of the predominantly Vietnamese neighborhoods and use some of the terms that had been applied to the NVA? I’m fairly confident that the people in those neighborhoods would understand the word the way most people in this thread are understanding the particular slur you say isn’t a slur.
Um, whoosh? The link was to a thread started by DrDeth where a number of racial epithets were tossed around, and he showed some sensitivity to the phrase you take exception to. My point was his inconsistency, not a serious use of the phrase. And for purposes of full disclosure, my race and family background entitle me to “own” this particular epithet, if I really cared to. Which I don’t.
The best I can figure is that “hoppy” sounds marginally similar to how someone from one of various Far Eastern countries (or worse, someone affecting an “Asian” accent, which is, of course, now also seen as racist) might pronounce the word “happy.”
That one’s a stretch, but since we’re already getting hot and bothered over all the other stereotypical elements, why not throw that one on the ol’ outrage pile too!
Or “hoppy” refers to bunnies…you know, they hop?
Ah, so, honorable bonnie so vely vely hoppy! - Yeah, it’s offensive.
It would have been easy enough to associate the easter bunny with Japanese haiku without being offensive - just put in a manga-style rabbit. Here’s one: http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/982725/2/istockphoto_982725_believe_in_bunny.jpg But, no, they had to pull out all the stereotypical stops.
