I have been reading quite a bit of the BBC on-line and for unimportant reasons have been catching quite a bit of the BBC world TV broadcast lately.
One thing that has confused me a bit is the many references to the London Subway Bombers as “Asians”. In the States this term has supplanted “Oriental”*, and “Asian” is used pretty exclusively to refer to ethnic groups with slanting and retention of the epicanthic eye fold like the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans etc. The Washington Post uses “Middle Eastern or Pakistani origin” to describe the subway bombers.
So a. is my perception correct - does Asian in the UK mean Pakistanis and Indians? And b. what is the proper UK term to refer broadly to ethnic groups/nationalities like the Chinese/Japanese/Koreans
*BTW this has become a term that is generally inappropriate to use State side – whether that is OK or not is a GD and beyond this thread’s scope
Your perception is more or less correct. In the UK ‘asian’ is commonly used to refer to people from communities that comprise pakistanis, indians, and people from that area of the world. However the word ‘asian’ outside the context of the UK is accepted to mean the same as the American use.
So the UK term to refer to groups like the Chinese etc is ‘asian’… All groups mentioned have their ethnic routs in the continent of asia.
While it is generally recognised that the term ‘Asian’ includes the Chinese, Japanese, etc., conversationally, ‘they were Asians’ or ‘they looked Asian’ nearly always denotes an appearance consistent with the peoples of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc, but NOT China, Japan, etc.
A friend who spent most of his life in Greater Birmingham and now lives in London happened to comment on this to me some months ago. American usage tends to equate “Asian” as ethnic appellation with the “Mongolic gene complex” … what would have been referenced some years back as “the Yellow Race.” (And please let’s not get into the validity or lack thereof of racial referents.)
With the 150+ year British raj in the Indian Empire, though, the U.K. tends to use the term to refer to a person from the Indian Subcontinent.
The US usage is the opposite - “Asian” means *east * Asian. Indians and Pakistanis are called Indians and Pakistanis, except by each other, when it’s “South Asian”.
In British usage, Asian can mean people from anywhere on the Asian land mass, although the press and everyday speech tends toward asian=Indian, Pakistani etc. Often the qualifier ‘Sub-continent’ is applied to Asian, stressing their non east-Asian status. East and SE Asian who are usually summarized as SE Asian or Chinese or Japanese.
As others have said, ‘Asian’ in general means Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi/Sri Lankan. However, context is crucial - it’s valid to talk of Asian exiles from Uganda, for example, even though they may have never set foot in Asia.
“Middle Eastern or Pakistani origin” is as potentially-inaccurate as any other term. Afghanistan is neither of the two, nor is Somalia.
Chinese, Japanese, etc. are terms used as they exist. There seems to be little call for a catch-all term that covers all of eastern Asia.
I fear that your average Brit is likely to call anyone from those parts “Chinese”.
Similarly, your average Brit on the street is in danger of calling anyone who appears to originate from the Indian sub-continent and thereabouts (including many who don’t, including a certain dark-skinned Brazilian) a “Paki”, though rarely to his face.
“Paki” is simply an abbreviation of “Pakistani” and used to be regarded as fairly harmless. I recall seeing an advert on Australian TV in 1985 for a triangular cricket tournament between “The Aussies, the Pakis and the Windies”. Neither “Aussie” nor “Windie” (as in West Indian) has any perjorative connotation but “Paki” has become a term of abuse and should now never be used.
I suppose it depends which streets you walk Seriously, though, I doubt that as many people would use ‘Paki’ in a non-pejorative casual context than ‘Asian’.
I innocently used “Paki” to an online Indian friend in London. She soon educated me. I had no idea it was offensive in the UK.
The “Asian” thing is something I’m only just getting used to, as here in Australia it tends to mean Chinese/Vietnamese/Japanese/Korean etc. Others are known as “Indian” (sometimes inclusive of Pakistanis, Sri Lankans etc), and “Middle Eastern”. We would only refer to these people as Asian if we were somehow talking about the continent itself. “Oriental” is never used here.
Dopers, please ignore this somewhat offensive display of ignorance. Seosamh’s “fears” are groundless…
Whilst there are many who will indeed behave as seosamh suggests, your average Brit is more than adept at distinguishing between people from Japan, China etc. and would most certainly not use “Chinese” as a catch-all term to describe them. “Oriental” is perhaps more common, but that too is fading out as people realise the possible offense that word may cause.
Likewise, we generally do not call all dark skinned people as “Pakis”, and not just because it is offensive, but also because we know that not everyone from the Indiam sub-continent is from Pakistan!
I will say that the second suggestion is more prevalent than the first, but it is in no way the behaviour of the average Brit.
“Asian” is sometimes used to describe people from SE Asia, but I’m not sure how many people would automatically think to include Chinese etc. people in that group, and it isn’t as common as be used to refer to just Indian, Pakistani etc. people.
And just where do you see this average Brit behaviour?
Are you British? Do you live here?
Seriously, I would like to know how and why it is you have formed this opinion.
It was your comments about the “average Brit” I found offensive - not the terminology used, in case that wasn’t clear. I think that on the SD we all realise that any “offensive” language used in a thread such as this will generally have no offensive intention, and is for illustrative purposes only.
Why is it you think that I don’t regularly encounter such behaviour, Dominic?
The assertion I am challenging is that the average Brit behaves in this way, as this is certainly not my experience, and GorillaMan appears to agree with me on at least one aspect of seosamh’s post.
I am in no way claiming racism doesn’t exist. Indeed, I am more than aware of how widespread racism is - in certain areas. That is not the issue at hand.
It may be seosamh’s experience that the average Brit behaves in this way, but at the moment we don’t know if s/he even lives in Britain and how or why s/he has formed this opinion, and how valid it therefore is.
It’s certainly my experience that an awful lot of people behave in exactly the way that seosamh describes, regardless of age and education. Maybe it’s just where I live, but even those with a university education regularly refer to the Chinese takeaway as the “Chinky” or refer to people from the Indian subcontinent as “Pakis”.
I guess it all depends on what you’re going to define as being an “average Brit”.
Someone I know (I hesitate to say a friend, more a friend of a friend) texted me earlier referring to suicide bombers as “Pakis”…
I still assert that the average Brit knows better, but this text has taken the wind out of the sails of my argument somewhat!
I fully accept (and always have - I used to deal with them on a regualr basis) that a lot of people behave in the manner claimed, but that is not necessarily the average Brit. As you say, Dominic, it all depends on what you class as the average Brit, or what your experience of British people has been.
“Chinky” can be different though - if it is a reference to the meal or the restaurant as opposed to the people. I work in the area of criminal law, and when racial aggravations to certain crimes were being introduced the various communities were consulted as to what they considered offensive, and in Lothian and Borders at least, the Chinese community stated that they did not find the term “Chinky” offensive when being used to describe the takeaway meal or restaurant. That’s not to say that every Chinese person (in Lothian and Borders or elsewhere) feels this way, of course.
I was raised believing it was perfectly acceptable to use that word for a meal, although NEVER for a person. However, I have made a conscious effort not to use that word any more just in case I do offend someone, even though I do not consider it offensive (for a meal).
Principally I don’t consider it offensive because I know I would not be trying to be offensive were I to use it. (A nice circular argument there!) The trouble, of course, is that it might only be me that would know I didn’t mean it offensively. Offense is in the ear of the beholder (beharker?) after all and the word isn’t so great a word that I would risk causing offense to be able to keep using it anyway!
Seriously, though, I doubt that as many people would use ‘Paki’ in a non-pejorative casual context than ‘Asian’.