Well, here’s an example of someone who needs to do that:
I don’t think there’s such a need. I’m observing that many people believe there is such a need, otherwise these terms wouldn’t be in our vocabulary. I’m also arguing that “Asian” really isn’t an improvement over “Oriental” because they’re both terms for racial constructs, and they don’t even correctly represent what they’re supposed to describe.
I’m also predicting that “Asian” will eventually go the way of “colored” or “Oriental”. People will eventually realize that all these terms are references for racial constructs, but rather than abandoning the construct, they’ll just come up with a new word. There is a term for this: euphemism treadmill.
I love the irony that I apparently someone is apparently offended by the suggestion that some people get too easily offended!
Yeah, that’s fine if you have an ongoing relation with someone, or the person you wish to describe is with you and you can ask their preference. But communication becomes more difficult if you have to seek consensus on every adjective/designation used WRT 3d parties.
You misunderstood me, then - I didn’t say I’d group Tamils by their physical characteristics at all, I said I’d assign the Tamils I do interact with (who I would identify by language more than anything else) to Asia as continent of group origin - then noted that that happened to not conform to your stated physical criteria for “Asian-ness”. I didn’t say I’d assign them to Tamil based on their skin, hair and eyes. This is the opposite order of what you’re talking about in your ironic example - first identify a group, then note the physical characteristics.
That’s true of *all *racist constructs.
As a racial descriptor? I should hope so.
“Asian” isn’t a new word, just now with extended meaning.
The E-Tor pejoration is an organic process, and perfectly natural. I think objecting to it is just useless. Personally, I love it. I mean, would you prefer we still called people “nigger” or “Chinaman”? No? Then you don’t object to the treadmill as a process, just specific instances of it.
Speaking of the term Asian, you said this: “I’m much more likely to use it of someone with skin darker than my copper tones, curly hair and non-folded eyelids.” Those are your words, not mine, in which you said you’re more likely to call someone Asian who is darker than you.
True. The scope of the OP is the Asian/Oriental reference, so that’s what I’m talking about.
Never said nor implied that it was.
I’m simply observing that “Asian” is just the next term up on the treadmill for this racial construct. Nothing bothers me about it. I do find it amusing when people congratulate themselves on using a different term as if that sanitizes the inherent racism somehow.
I wouldn’t use the word “consensus,” but the prevailing custom in the United States is to use the word “Asian” instead of “Oriental.”
Despite this well-known custom that has been widely recognized for certainly more than a decade, I have no doubt that some people are simply unaware of the preferred nomenclature, which happens and I don’t blame people for. But for each one of those people, there are several who are aware of the custom and are determined to say the custom is wrong for whatever reason. It is these people who are in effect insisting on calling my friend Jon even though they know he doesn’t like it.
It means the people who I do happen to call Asian (because they’re from Asia), will mostly be darker than me. Not that I’ll call them Asian because they’re darker than me.
You very much did:
Oh, yeah, I forgot, yeah - you were just being “ironic” . Got it. Sorry, I must read slow.
Personally, just the fact that people switch the term they use is a sign that they’re more woke, and that’s a good thing. Baby steps.
Can anyone explain the connotations of the word "Asiatic "?I’ve read it in Pacific War books as running amok or completely confused as the result of malaria
I said, I quote “they’ll come up with a new word” to replace it (the “it” in question being the word “Asian”). Of course, I could be wrong, it will probably be another repurposed term. I’ve seen people taking a stab at “East Asian” to lump together all the Asians who aren’t “white”. But please give it a rest with the grandstanding nitpickery; it’s sort of asinine to suggest that someone thinks “Asian” is a neologism, and there are no rhetorical points to be scored there anyway. Just let it go, man.
And my point (read slowly now) is that “Oriental” wasn’t replaced by a new word. “Asian” already existed, was already used by then to describe precisely the same thing that it describes now. It just became consensus that Oriental was more offensive than Asian. You can even see when it’s likely that happened.
Or it’s arrived at a resting place. Only time will tell.
Are Tamils White? Or East Asian?
Are the negritos of SE Asia “East Asian”? They’re not white, but they don’t resemble their neighbours at all. “East Asian” works fine for them as far as I’m concerned, but I don’t think it’d satisfy someone who thinks East Asian means ivory skin, straight hair and folded eyelids.
“East Asian” as a racial descriptor is just a step backwards to “Oriental” . Fuck that shit.
Yeah, and what’s this about “Country” music? Who’s “Country” are we talking about? It’s so US-centric! We need a better word for that, for sure.
And “New” York, “New” Jersey, “New” Hampshire, “New” Mexico, they’re all a couple hundred years old! They’re only “New” in relation to somewhere else, they should decide for themselves!
You joke but the logic sounds about the same to me. Again, I’ll use whatever term is preferred but it seems much ado about nothing. On the other hand, I never realized that Oriental was offensive or why because I never used it with negative intent so maybe I just need to wrap my head around it a bit more.
This is the most succinct explanation here. I don’t understand why people have such a difficult time with calling people what they prefer to be called. I’ve noticed more than once that the only people who seem confused and upset by the idea that calling Asian people “oriental” is rude are old people. Baby boomers, mostly. Times change, and saying “oriental” is rude now because most Asians have made it clear that they don’t wish to be called that anymore. “But the term used to be ok when I was younger so I’m going to keep using it!”- is a poor argument.
Funny enough, I have a friend named Elizabeth. She hates when people call her “Liz”. She’ll correct people when they call her that, but some people occasionally act like she didn’t mean or they don’t care and continue to call her “Liz.”
Using “Native American” instead of “Indian” is pretentious: never say in three syllables what you can say in six.
I observe a few maxims of grammar in this regard:
Prefer the short word to the long.
Prefer the familiar word to the far-fetched.
Prefer the single word to the circumlocution.
They are specifically derogatory, and that overrules the above points. When I was a kid I didn’t know what “Injun” meant, and as I got older I decided it was a sloppy word. I put “Redskin” in the same category as “paleface.”
