Since when is the term Oriental offensive?

[Zoe]

CanvasShoes, you are one of the last people that I would consider bigoted or close-minded. I don’t even think you are close-minded toward what some people describe as “the PC patrol.”

Not knowing about other people’s preferences is no great sin. And in this case the preference for the word Asian seems at this point to be largely a scholarly issue. I don’t think that the word Oriental is seen as a slur, but I do think that we are in the process of change and that possibly it will be seen as a slur at some point in the future.

The word exotic has connotations that I had not thought about before and I don’t know first hand how it is perceived by different groups. I do wonder if there is a corresponding word for Westerners in various Asian languages. There are times when I definitely wouldn’t mind being called exotic – especially when it is followed by the word beauty! At sixty, I will take what I can get.

But I am familiar with the movie stereotypes of Asians that have been mentioned – the demur woman and the evil man. There is another quite opposite stereotype that has shown up more in the past: the “exotic” evil female – often referred to as the “Dragon Lady” and the excited chattering hysterical male that is often a houseboy or a laundry attendant.

So I have mixed feelings about “exotic.”

What I don’t wish to do, as has been implied here by some of the other posters, is to control anyone’s language. We folks who are often described as “PC” are often misunderstood in that way. AFAIK, most of us have no desire for contol. We don’t feel smugly superior. The whole point in speaking up about word choice and the connotations of words is to persuade others to be sensitive to the feelings of others as everyone strives for some measure of equality – not *superiority.

At least that is the way that I feel and that I think many other “PCers” feel when they speak up. But I don’t speak for anyone but myself. I know that I am not, as the OP originally suggested, just “looking for something to bitch about.”

The words I like best are those that inspire, sooth, challenge, encourage, sustain, teach, nurture and create merriment.

Disclaimer: I have yet to determine who posts in my name and curses from time to time. :smack:

[Zoe]

annaplurabelle: Your subsequent silence led me to suspect your motives were something other than “mistaken identity”. Can you understand that?

No.

“When you were subsequently silent, I suspected that your motives were something other than mistaken identity.”

If you had said something like that, I would have understood that you were accepting responsibility for your thinking – which, in this case, were mistaken.

That is why it really isn’t wise to make assumptions about someone else’s motives.

If silence bothers you, brace yourself.

[CanvasShoes]

*Originally posted by Zoe *
**CanvasShoes, you are one of the last people that I would consider bigoted or close-minded. I don’t even think you are close-minded toward what some people describe as “the PC patrol.”
Disclaimer: I have yet to determine who posts in my name and curses from time to time. :smack: **

Wow, thanks Zoe! I do try to follow the “Golden Rule”.

PS, I too would like to know who the cranky bitchy one is that occasionally sneaks onto my computer and posts in my stead.

[Esprix]

*Originally posted by Evil Captor *

… the problem that I and others have isn’t that we’re just dying to use the word “Oriental.” It’s the tone some of those on your side of the issue have that anyone who uses the term under any circumstances is ingorant in a "benighted’ sort of way, or more likely is a bigot. You will not admit to holding such views, but I think you DO hold such views from the tone of your posts.

You’d be wrong, but you’re welcome to believe what you like about me. Any “tone” you read in my posts was in direct response to the “tone” of some people in this thread who choose to remain ignorant, even when presented with facts.

I have encountered this attitude before: in fact, many of my liberal brethren adopt it so unconsciously and naturally that they refuse to even admit that “PC” exists, which is kinda funny since the ones who deny its existence who are generally its finest exemplars.

Again, when every single Asian person I’ve ever met in my entire life refers to themselves as Asian, and every Asian organization I’ve ever encountered refers to them as Asian, I don’t see how it’s “PC” to refer to them as Asian.

Frankly, the notion that a conference of academics (whatever their ethnic makeup) found “Oriental” to be offensive doesn’t exactly leave me brimming with confidence in the notion that it is – academics are notoriously twitchy and one-sided on issues like this, witness the torrent of bilge that typically streams from many women’s studies programs.

:rolleyes: So now we’ll take pot shots at “those twitchy academics” and “those uppity women’s studies folk?” If your attitude is against PC, then I’m for it.

Esprix

[annaplurabelle]

Originally posted by Zoe
No.

“When you were subsequently silent, I suspected that your motives were something other than mistaken identity.”

If you had said something like that, I would have understood that you were accepting responsibility for your thinking – which, in this case, were mistaken.

That is why it really isn’t wise to make assumptions about someone else’s motives.

My thinking were mistaken???

Cut the crap. You neglected to take responsibility for your mistake in mischaracterising me as someone else.

But we do agree on this: It isn’t wise to give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming your motives are benign. I will never afford you that consideration again.

Please spare me any future “encouraging” remarks and/or courtesy lectures, lest I feel the need to lecture you on hypocrisy, as per your selective courtesy (much like your selective quote editing).

If silence bothers you, brace yourself.

One can only hope.

[PeeQueue]

What I don’t wish to do, as has been implied here by some of the other posters, is to control anyone’s language. We folks who are often described as “PC” are often misunderstood in that way. AFAIK, most of us have no desire for contol. We don’t feel smugly superior. The whole point in speaking up about word choice and the connotations of words is to **persuade others to be sensitive to the feelings of others **as everyone strives for some measure of equality – not superiority. (emphasis added)

If you were more sensitive to people’s feelings you would phrase your “persuasion” in a way that doesn’t make them feel attacked. When teaching an equal something (very different from teaching a student), it is important to phrase things in a way that recognizes their equality in thought, otherwise the teaching is likely to be disregarded as arrogance. For example:

You’d be wrong, but you’re welcome to believe what you like about me. Any “tone” you read in my posts was in direct response to the “tone” of some people in this thread who choose to remain ignorant, even when presented with facts.

That last sentence nearly contradicts itself. It is very difficult to not read arrogance into it. Who, exactly, in this thread is choosing to remain ignorant here? I certainly haven’t read one post that stated that the poster would continue to use Oriental despite participation in this thread.

Generally, it sounds as if PC’ers believe themselves to be superior those who do not have their fingers on the pulse of PCness. It may be the case that they do not believe that, but if you are truly trying to spare people’s feelings, they will take pains not to seem to condescend.

PeeQueue

[Esprix]

Originally posted by PeeQueue

Generally, it sounds as if PC’ers believe themselves to be superior those who do not have their fingers on the pulse of PCness.

When the question is asked, answered, questioned, rebutted, and people still cop an attitude about it, well, snarky is as snarky does. It’s not my job to educate you, but I’ll volunteer to try - at least for a little while. As my good friend Steven once said, “I don’t have time to be your personal educational experience” - and sometimes (though certainly not the majority of the time), I feel that way, too.

Esprix

[annaplurabelle]

Originally posted by Esprix
When the question is asked, answered, questioned, rebutted, and people still cop an attitude about it, well, snarky is as snarky does. It’s not my job to educate you, but I’ll volunteer to try - at least for a little while.

What answers did you provide in your 13 posts here, Esprix?

Oh wait, there was this one:

I couldn’t say. Perhaps the next generation of Asian-Americans decided they wanted a break from their “Oriental” parents (and the stereotypes and baggage that comes along with it) to forge a new community identity for themselves.
But if you’re looking for the minutes from the National Asian-American Ruling Council Meeting, you’re not going to find them, because there is no such beast. Somewhere along the line the term was coined, used, and perpetuated.

No one seems to have a problem with that except you. Isn’t that interesting?

And yet, the facts turned out to be very similar to what you said would never be found.

Isn’t that interesting? :rolleyes:

[Evil_Captor]

Exprix, your last post is a picture of a man with his fingers in his ears crying “La la la la! I will not educate you! La! La! La! La!”

Don’t you understand, WE are trying to educate YOU about the “sound” of your posts? We think YOU are the one who needs educating.

[Esprix]

Originally posted by annaplurabelle

And yet, the facts turned out to be very similar to what you said would never be found.

Isn’t that interesting? :rolleyes:

Yes, actually, it’s very interesting. Of course, last time I checked a UC Berkeley conference on Asian American issues doesn’t constitute “The National Asian-American Ruling Council Meeting,” nor does it speak for and/or represent the entire Asian American community, but it’s interesting nonetheless.

The phrase was discussed, adopted by most, and the trend has continued. If you want a “smoking gun,” I suppose that would be the closest to it, but without the desire and actions of the community, it would have only been an interesting conference - nothing more.

I believe this has been my point all along. As I said:

Somewhere along the line the term was coined, used, and perpetuated.

The conference mentioned is probably the penultimate example of such usage.

Esprix

[Zoe]

PeeQueue:
When teaching an equal something (very different from teaching a student), it is important to phrase things in a way that recognizes their equality in thought, otherwise the teaching is likely to be disregarded as arrogance. For example…

Then you gave an example taken from something not posted by me. Do all of us “PCers” look alike to you?

BTW, I considered students my equals too. My job was to help them explore their own thoughts. That doesn’t mean that they couldn’t be incorrect about factual information or that I couldn’t be incorrect also.

All of us are ignorant of many things. “Equality in thought” doesn’t mean that we escape that.

[annaplurabelle]

Originally posted by Esprix
Yes, actually, it’s very interesting. Of course, last time I checked a UC Berkeley conference on Asian American issues doesn’t constitute “The National Asian-American Ruling Council Meeting,” nor does it speak for and/or represent the entire Asian American community, but it’s interesting nonetheless.

The phrase was discussed, adopted by most, and the trend has continued. If you want a “smoking gun,” I suppose that would be the closest to it, but without the desire and actions of the community, it would have only been an interesting conference - nothing more.

The conference mentioned is probably the penultimate example of such usage.

Actually, no. The conference resulted in the formation of the Asian American Political Alliance, which was the first known use of the term Asian American (the coining of which is credited to Yuji Ichioka, by numerous sources). The conference also resulted in a splinter organisation called Orientals Concerned. Here is a related cite:

The difficulty with this political identity stems, perhaps, from the original circumstances surrounding the term. Yuji Ichioka, now an Asian American Studies professor at UCLA, coined the term when he was a grad student at UC Berkeley in the late '60s. “When I used the term ‘Asian American,’ there were some Chinese, Japanese, a Korean, a Filipina. It did not mean that we had a common identity. It was used for a practical political purpose.”

The purpose was to combat the growing tide of racist sentiments directed toward citizens of Asian descent. “For a lot of us the Vietnam War became very serious,” recalls Professor Franklin Odo, who was a student at Berkeley at the time. “The fact that American society was able to carry out racist tactics against an Asian country made us brothers and sisters – whether we wanted to be or not.” So in 1968, Odo and Ichioka along with the few Asian American students at Berkeley formed the Asian American Political Alliance, the granddaddy, so to speak, of Asian American student coalitions. (Interestingly enough, not long after, a contingent of students at UCLA formed a group called Orientals Concerned. “We were not educated,” laughs Ronald Takaki. “Only later did we realize that it was a derogatory term.”)

Note the emphasis on “only later”. No smoking gun on that one - yet.

But it certainly disproves your contention that there was a pre-conceived desire to change the terminology because of the “offensiveness” of the term Oriental. It was a practical decision based on coalition politics. Nothing wrong with that, but it would be incorrect to assert otherwise.

BTW, I realise you were being sarcastic when you referred to “ruling council”. Still, I admit I did think of your remark when I found the original source. Close enough to be ironic, in any case.

[Esprix]

Originally posted by annaplurabelle

Note the emphasis on “only later”. No smoking gun on that one - yet.

The “smoking gun” I was referring to was when/where the term “Asian-American” was coined, not that it was deemed offensive.

But it certainly disproves your contention that there was a pre-conceived desire to change the terminology because of the “offensiveness” of the term Oriental. It was a practical decision based on coalition politics. Nothing wrong with that, but it would be incorrect to assert otherwise.

And I don’t believe I ever stated such a contention. Could you point out where I did so that I can correct that?

Esprix

[annaplurabelle]

*Originally posted by Esprix *
**And I don’t believe I ever stated such a contention. Could you point out where I did so that I can correct that?

Esprix **

Originally posted by Esprix
The phrase was discussed, adopted by most, and the trend has continued. If you want a “smoking gun,” I suppose that would be the closest to it, but without the desire and actions of the community, it would have only been an interesting conference - nothing more.

The conference mentioned is probably the penultimate example of such usage.

If you were implying something else, I apologise. I was interpreting it based on your emphasis of “desire and actions of the community” and use of “penultimate example” (which means “next to last”).

Clearly, it (the conference) was not the “penultimate example” of the use of the term “Asian American”. What “desire and actions” were you referring to, if not the terminology change?

[Esprix]

I apologize - I misused the word “penultimate.” I meant to say that could be viewed as one of the best (or perhaps first) examples of a group of people in that community using it to describe themselves. And the “desires and actions” I was referring to was, essentially, if the entirety of the Asian-American community didn’t want to use the term “Asian-American” instead of “Oriental,” they’d still be using “Oriental,” wouldn’t they?

Esprix

[annaplurabelle]

Originally posted by Esprix
I apologize - I misused the word “penultimate.” I meant to say that could be viewed as one of the best (or perhaps first) examples of a group of people in that community using it to describe themselves.

No problem. Funnily enough, I actually double-checked the definition myself to be sure I wasn’t misunderstanding you.

And the “desires and actions” I was referring to was, essentially, if the entirety of the Asian-American community didn’t want to use the term “Asian-American” instead of “Oriental,” they’d still be using “Oriental,” wouldn’t they?

Wellll, I’d say there’s a difference between wanting a change, and the acceptance of a change after the fact.

My last cite refutes the idea that there was a pre-existing awareness/consensus that the term Oriental was offensive. All the history/origin cites credit creating a political coalition identity as the impetus for the change.

The derogatory aspect of Oriental came into play “only later”. We’ve read the various explanations here, but again, they were put forth after the fact (i.e. after the coining/formal use adoption of the term Asian-American).

But certainly, I agree that Asian-American is the current term of choice for most people, and that it’s best to use the current accepted terminology to avoid the possibility of offending someone.

[Bongmaster]

IMHO the only people being offended by the term oriental are those too focused on race issues to begin with. I had NO idea anyone would find it offensive until this thread, to me it was just another way to refer to people living in Asia and the area around it. Oh well, add another one to the score card I guess…