Casdave, I think you’re in a different conversation. If someone calls me white, they aren’t generalizing. I am actually white, so it’s an accurate (and non-offensive) description. You seem to argue that it’s wrong to say “all whites do ___” therefore it’s wrong to use white as a descriptor of race. The first part is fine - stereotyping and generalizations based on race are bad. But it doesn’t follow that the descriptors themselves are offensive.
I’d disagree with that. I’ve never heard or seen anything to suggest that “Asian” as a word had negative connotations here in the UK - beyond of course the usual suspects who use any word to describe people with malicious intent. “Paki” is still a highly problematic word with what seems like a rough equivalent to “Jap” in the US - in the sense that it’s a natural shortening of a word that’s become corrupted by historically unpleasant usage - but Asian? I can’t say I’ve ever noticed that be a word to avoid.
Of course I’m happy to describe you with the level of specificity you prefer, but I wouldn’t have said, like TroutMan is saying, that “Asian” is a taboo word.
Would I be right if I guessed that you don’t work in fields like machine pattern recognition? I spent much of the 1990’s conversing with computer science researchers of several nationalities and to say that fuzzy logic is more appreciated in Japan than in U.S.A. would be an understatement.
And to caricaturize my comment by mentioning Genghis Khan is to ignore a “forest” I wanted to describe tersely, to focus on tangential “trees.”
I’ve been calling myself “middle-aged” but with my 65-year birthday coming up, I’m afraid “old” may not be far off. 
FWIW, I’ve spent most of the past 20 years outside the U.S.
OTOH, I confess that I spent most of the 1970’s in the Bay Area, supposedly the time and place of of the origin of Orientals’ incorrectness. My defence for not learning the rule? As I’ve hinted at in semi-autobiographical posts, my mental and social settings were atypical. :eek:
There’s really only two options: either you’re compelled against your will to read and comment on an internet message board, but you would prefer not to, so you’re just phoning it in; or you’re acting like a very lazy, willfully ignorant poster.
There’s no excuse for the second, but if it is the first, let us know and we will call the cops to free you from your tormentors.
Some people are occidental, some are oriental. And never the twain shall meet. And some people somewhere is no valid reason to shun a useful term.
Oh come on. Whatever fight there may have been has long been resolved- “Oriental,” for better or for worse, is not longer in use. Maybe that’s dumb, maybe it’s not, but it happened decades ago and it’s time to get over it.
Okay, in Japan more than the US might be an understatement–but that’s not what you said to begin with. You made it far more specific, which is exactly what I was saying you needed to do in order to avoid ugly stereotypes. Is fuzzy logic also far more popular in North Korea than in Poland?
It’s absolutely not. Stereotypes tend to comprise “forest” observations, and their pernicious effect is in generalizing from some examples to everyone with a superficial characteristic. The ideas you were touting about “Orientals” are classic racist stereotypes of folks from Japan and China. You shouldn’t spout racist stereotypes. And when you’re called on it, you shouldn’t freak out; instead, you should check yourself and see how you can act better next time.
Unfortunately the world is choc full of butthurt idiots who get offended at every little thing. The correct response to 99% of them is “shut the fuck up”.
As others have mentioned, those of us who grew up with a prohibition on the term oriental were all taught that it was perfectly fine to use to describe objects (a rug, a vase, a garden…), but that it was inappropriate for people. I haven’t heard of anyone who objects to the use of oriental to describe a type of design.
I am incredibly offended that you would use such an offensive, outdated, and sheer racist word as Occidental. You have lumped me alongside historical enemies and implied that I am incapable of non-binary thought based solely on my place of birth.
(FWIW, Intuitionist Logic rejects the Law of the Excluded Middle and was largely developed by… westerners).
[QUOTE=Tchen]
“With the anti-war movement in the '60s and early '70s, many Asian Americans identified the term ‘Oriental’ with a Western process of racializing Asians as forever opposite ‘others’.”
[/QUOTE]
The thing is, avoiding the word in question doesn’t actually change anything. We might say “Oriental medicine” is offensive because it implies that their medicine is mysterious or magical or has some “otherness.” So you call it “Asian medicine” or “East-Asian medicine” or (let’s say) “Chinese medicine.” But these all have exactly the same connotations of otherness, so precisely nothing has been gained.
My mom always said that is it a very old fashioned term used to refer to Asians, and I agree. It just seems so odd, I can see describing a rug as “oriental” but a person?!
I don’t know, I would have my eyebrows raised if someone was referred to as oriental.
Butthurt… LOLOLOLOL Sorry, but that word always makes me giggle loudly on this forum.
Have a great day, all! 
And yeah, the ‘butthurts’ really should STFU, IMHO, more often than not.
I think I responded properly, you’re just overblowing things because, I dunno, you have some issue with me I guess. Fact is, no one can read everything, people sometimes make heuristic judgements based on past experiences. Many times they turn out fine, sometimes they don’t. Why should I apologize for that? I had good reason to think that was the point of the topic, my explanation detailed my reasoning. Then it turned out it was a mistake, so I retracted it. Why do I need to apologize? Do scientists apologize for a hypothesis that failed? Or do they move on? Oh wait, now you’re going to think I’m smug for comparing myself to scientists rather than realize that I was using the scientific process as an analogy.
I will not limit my posts to just things I can bother to read. If someone posts in the subject title that they don’t believe in the holocaust, for example, I’m not even going to skim their thread before calling them an idiot. Sure, I open myself up to the small fraction of times when someone will make a provocative title with an opposite argument in the body of the thread, but those are chances I’m willing to take
Its the first, but I’ve already said too much. I hear footsteps
I didn’t have an issue with you before, but now that I know you’re a smug lazy idiot, I guess I do.
I just wondered if the Oriental market near me was all alone in the world.
Apparently not.
Googled Oriental market
About 875,000 results (0.38 seconds)
I don’t see anyone who has done this. Do you?
[Insert racial slur of choice].
But this…
That is comedy gold.
Barnacle sheepskin in the red promenade. Salsa rumba bolero.
May I mambo dogface to the banana patch?
I’m certainly no expert on cultural differences, but from what I’ve gleaned via books, intimate Asian acquaintances, and observation of political manouevring in Thailand, the “Asian” tendency to emphasize compromise or cooperation vs the Western tendency to emphasize competition and binary choices seems quite vivid.
(And, no; There’s no magic line on a map separating Occident and Orient, with which someone who emphasizes binary choices – i.e. a Westerner 
– could reduce my claim to petty “Gotcha’s.”)
There are noted Asian traditions of “harmony” as opposed to individualism. I don’t think that’s too horribly controversial. However, one argument that Zadeh tends to make is a linguistic one. He seems to argue that cultural concepts and the languages themselves are more “fuzzy” while English is more “binary”. I think that’s silly, most people get fuzzyness just fine. Whatever divide there is, I’m fairly confident it’s an academic one.
When I try to work with fuzzy logic, everybody understands what I’m getting at. However, there’s less work in the field immediately accessible to us. And more importantly: there’s far less data available. I’m trying to do fuzzy classification for a term project for Machine Learning, and the instructor is incredibly supportive, but she was right that it’s hard to find a good corpus of data in the west to even test fuzzy classification on.
Nobody is really opposed to the idea of fuzzy logic, nor do they have some cultural misunderstanding of it. Certainly some curmudgeons think it’s “probability in drag”, but most don’t. It’s almost pure academic inertia at this point. It’s simply far easier, and leads to far quicker progress to stick with iterative improvements on boolean multiclass classification and probability theory because that’s where most established academics’ expertise lies.
This isn’t limited to probability and multiclass classification. You can see pronounced differences in AI research even between the East and West coast of the US. There’s a lot of cross pollination, but the work you see coming out of Stanford or USC tends to focus on different topics and techniques than that of CMU or MIT.