Does that only refer to Western foreigners or has the meaning expanded? I ask because the Japanese equivalent, 西洋人 (seiyojin), would never be used towards another Asian, while gaijin would.
Just watched an episode of “The World at War”.
There was Vannevar Bush discussing how the Allies could take out the “Japs” at a later time.
Probably just as well he is not in a position to contribute to this discussion otherwise the bleeding hearts here would get their tits in a knot.
I’m… not entirely clear why we should care what Vannevar Bush called the Japanese. Generally speaking, if I’m trying to determine what terms are considered polite in modern society, I don’t ask a guy who’s been dead for thirty six years.
It would be difficult to ask a guy anything when he has been dead 36 years.
And I see you are trying to turn the question around as to what is polite, not what is offensive.
It is not the same.
That word normally only applies to whites, the same with gwailo. Off hand I can’t think of a generic word for an Asian foreigner. The closest I can think of is “banana”, which means a westernised Asian, but that’s not quite the same thing.
Actually, I’ll add that there is a generic word for foreigner, 外國人 (ngoi gwok yan), that can be used towards another Asian. However, just like its English counterpart, it implies that someone is, well, foreign, and not one of us. It is an acceptable word to describe a tourist or other short-term visitors, but it is not PC to use it to describe those who have settled in for the long haul. To give some perspective, in my opinion at least, this word is actually more inappropriate than gwailo if used to describe another permanent resident in the country.
I don’t see the distinction between impoliteness and offensiveness being all that great for the purposes of this discussion.
Anyway, regardless of which one you’re talking about, there isn’t a lot of point in judging either by the standards of the 1940s.
Yeah, a couple of centuries ago, calling a man of honor a “pup” basically obligated him to challenge you to a duel and try to kill you. So Mr. V. Bush’s view if the matter is interesting perhaps but not important.
Yes, good job on getting my point, there.
It’s not? Can you explain the difference, as regards this particular conversation?
I really must disagree on this, though I see your point.
Paki has NOT been used as a derogotary term in the U.K.as such but as a much more manageble word then the full Pakistani.
Yes there are racists who have used the term Paki in the most derogotary and hate filled way, but if constrained to say Pakistani or Asian they would still fill the word with the same level of venom, hatred and contempt.
Whatever word they would use would convey the same message.
Yet a totally non racist pensioner cannot use the word in the U.K. legally because of legislation.
Which trivialises genuine racist speech and tends to cause sympathy fatigue in people who are not from Ethnic minorities.
Before you say "Oh yes thats easy for you to say because"etc, etc., I have actually experienced the same phenonomen myself more then a few times.
Extremist Nationalist Irish have used the term “Brit” when trying to insult me and have been surprised when I haven’t taken offence.
They have used the term,literally dripping with hatred, but that only shows whats in their minds, the term itself is perfectly legitimate.
Unfortunately there are those who walk the Earth looking to be offended and then wallow in self pity and those who aid and abet them by crying crocodile tears on their behalf so that everyone can see how much more "Holier then Thou "they are then the rest of common humanity.