Cecil, much as I enjoy your thoughts, why do you continue to use the word ‘Eskimo’ to denote Innuits? Are you aware that this is the equivalent of refering to Afro Americans as ‘niggers’?
Yeah but Innuit Pies don’t have the same ring.
And even if it has acquired a perjorative sense in Canada (note that it doesn’t appear that the Alaskan “natives” (who cannot be collectively called Innuit because some aren’t) consider it perjorative), the level of insult involved is no where NEAR as great as that associated with the term “nigger.” To try and compare the two is once again to try and piggyback a different social issue onto the unique relationship that was African-American slavery and post-Civil War discrimination in this country. When you’ve been enslaved for a couple hundred years and sold as chattel, treated as the slaves here were, then put through another hundred plus years of treatment equivalent to what the “black” in America was subjected to, THEN you might be able to equate an offensive term used about you with “nigger.” Maybe.
Welcome to the Message Board, by the way. Take a look around, kick up your feet on the table, and stay a while. 
When commenting on one of Uncle Cece’s columns, it helps to provide a link, so we all know which one you are talking about. I presume you are talking about Why do Eskimo people stay there?, which was recently on the front page. Please do note that is a rerun, originally written in 1980.
This is possibly the stupidest thing posted on the SDMB in at least a week. The purpose of this board is to fight ignorance, not spread it.
In Alaska, Russia and Siberia “Eskimo” is the correct nomenclature which includes both Inuit and Yupik tribal groups.
In other countries, “Eskimo” has come to be seen by self-hating white people as a derogatory term generally due to false etymologies of the word.
[sub]ETA: And who the hell says “Afro Americans?” Clearly you must be a horrible racist. :rolleyes:[/sub]
Thanks to the post which explained things well, it gave me a few pointers and i think makes the case well. There is an issue here, as shown, this isnt an offensive word to some but is to others. Thing is, it seems one could classify it as a term to denote a specific racial group, no reason for that to be offensive. But, if a sizeable chunk of that ethnic group find it offensive, while others coudlnt care less, what does one do?
Fair point about piggy backing on a totally different issue, my bad!
Freido, dont know where to begin with people like you really, tempted though i am to enter your inane world of insults over debate i shall try my best not to allow myself to be dragged in. While my point, as i have already just stated, does overstep the mark and is indeed not entirely accurate, you write asif there was no point to be made and imply that i am an ignorant person for suggesting such a thing - the fact that a number of (insert appropriate ethnic word here)'s do find the term offensive means there is an issue, one cant simply ignore it as if it doesnt exist just because you happen to disagree. I will leave it up to you as to what is more ignorant, dismissing something out of hand regardless of contradictary evidence, then calling the speaker names, or taking on an issue and getting a few bits wrong and being open to that fact, although to be fair the answer is in the realms of ‘the bleedin obvious’ really isnt it? If people wish to dispell ignorance they must first stop being ignorant would you agree?
Hello, wilmaxwell. I knew that Inuit and Yupik were a bit more accurate than Eskimo, according to somebody. I hadn’t heard until now that Eskimo was offensive until now. The Wiki piece (and how authoritative is that?) says the offense is a mistake based on this “eater of raw meat” thing. If Eskimo actually meant that, then fans of sushi, ceviche, and steak tartare would all be Eskimos. Oh, yeah, Wolfgang Puck, the Eskimo!
A wee tangent: I once had a rescued American Eskimo dog. That’s a phony thing. Prior to the anti-German feelings of World War I, Eskies were called white spitz dogs. Clearly a northern dog, they’re neither American not Eskimo.
I grew up in Fairbanks Alaska and I never once heard an Eskimo complain about being called an Eskimo, and frequently heard Eskimos refer to themselves as Eskimos. Although “Native” was a more frequently used term of art, and you’d hear people complain about the Natives like you hear some people in other places complain about certain other ethnic groups.
wilmaxwell writes:
> Cecil, much as I enjoy your thoughts, why do you continue to use the
> word ‘Eskimo’ to denote Innuits?
If it’s so important to you to call a group by their proper name, isn’t it also important to spell and use their name correctly? Not only is there only one “n” in Inuit, but one calls the group as a whole the Inuit, not the Inuits, and one calls a single one an Inuk.
wilmaxwell, I didn’t intend to insult you. I found your original post comparing “Eskimo” to “nigger” a tad offensive, and responded in anger. Please accept my apologies for being a jerk.
I’m glad that you’re sticking around. This board can always use more people with knowledge and opinions to share.
A Canadian tourist in New Zealand was offended by the use of the word Eskimo recently: link
I definitely recall in university being told “Eskimo” was offensive. It was either in an Anthropology course in Texas or by a Canadian student in Hawaii, that much I cannot remember, but it was one or the other.
It’s clear that some Canadian Inuit consider the term offensive. It’s pretty clear that they are being mislead in their reasoning, but that wouldn’t be a first. But it’s also clear that this sensitivity to the term Eskimo is not universal among the Arctic native peoples, many of whom are perfectly happy to be considered Eskimo.
"If it’s so important to you to call a group by their proper name, isn’t it also important to spell and use their name correctly? "
not really no, people are rarely if ever offended by bad spelling, if someone sent me a letter saying ‘get lost yidd’ i would probably concentrate far more on the antisemitism than the extra d.
There were a great many ways to discredit the opinoion i voiced and some have done so quite adaquately and in doing so changed my mind. If you ever find the only criticism you have is spelling or grammar then you should probably assume you have nothing of value to contribute, unless its a spelling contest of course!
I would evaluate your argument by its content, not its spelling, i can only recomend you do the same.
Oh and i guess i should thank you for pointing out the error, it will at least prevent me from mis-spelling it nex time!
i did anthrpology at university which is where i got this from. On further investigation though its not as simple as it seems but i still think use of the word should be carefully applied and NEVER applied to discuss the people to whom the term is considered offensive.
This does beg the question though, if the only word to describe the native peoples of alaska, siberia canada and greenland is eskimo and a sizable group of those people find the word offensive then what the hell do you call the whole group? I dont have any form of answer to that!
Fair do’s, it was over the top and to be fair, i can see why someone would find it offensive given the varying history. I really should do more research before i make such bold statements, story of my life really 
Let me get this straight. You studied anthropology at college. They told you that “Eskimo” was an insult. This is wrong for several reasons. It’s only an insult among certain Canadians and Greenlanders, not among Americans. It’s not considered an insult among the Eskimos themselves apparently. Comparing using the term “Eskimo” to the term “nigger” is absurd for Americans. Nearly every adult American knows that “nigger” is an insult, while only a small proportion of Americans have heard the claim that “Eskimo” is an insult.
The reason that it’s considered an insult among some Canadians and Greenlanders is that the term “Eskimo” is supposedly derived from a word in another Native American language which means “eaters of raw meat.” This is a false etymology. Claiming that it’s insulting because it means “eaters of raw meat” is like the urban legend that it’s insulting to use the term “picnic” because it derives from “pick a nigger”:
So your anthropology department taught you a false etymology for “Eskimo” and then taught you that it’s insulting to use the term because of that false etymology. On the other hand, they didn’t teach you the correct spelling for the world “Inuit” and they didn’t teach you what the singular and plural for the word is. They also didn’t teach you that Inuit only describes a subset of the Eskimos. You’re claiming to be a little bit of an expert of what the Eskimo/Inuit are like, and yet you don’t realize that the term “Eskimo” isn’t universally considered an insult, you don’t know the true etymology of the term, you don’t know how to spell it, you don’t know how to make it singular and plural, and you don’t know what the subgroups of the Eskimo are.
Furthermore, you graduated from college and yet you have a lot of problems with spelling and grammar.
Not a real surprise these days, Wendell, sad to say.
From what I gather, calling a native northener an “Eskimo” is like calling an American a “Yankee” – some would say it’s accurate and inoffensive, some would say it’s inaccurate and inoffensive, and some would say it’s inaccurate and offensive, depending on where you live and how easily offended you are.
This is wrong, because not all Eskimo are Inuit or Yupik. It’s like saying ‘German’ and ‘French’ are more correct than ‘European’.
It’s as authoritative as the sources it cites, which are numerous and all listed on that very page. If you’re going to attack the source, at least attack the actual source.
Let’s call 'em The Cool Dudes! I mean, nobody’s gonna get offended by that, right?