Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Oriental Ori-fucking-ental.
And “Hunchback“. And “Minority“. And “Niggardly“.
There. Sue me.
But for the love of furious monkey ruttin’, stop demonizing words.
[update: Ye Olde gets Ye pissed, too; likewise Blow Hard
update the second: Here are some related posts]
This was a funny article even before I got to this bit below.
“Many Asian Americans are unaware that the term
Ah, but they MUST demonize words. When Fascism comes to America, it will come from the Left. And it will exercise mind control via the prosecution of language.
You know, I think that they have decided that the term is offensive because it is (as the definition lower down on the Dictionary.com page says) dated, and old-fashioned. So that might make people think that anyone using it has a) is an old fuddy-duddy, and b) is therefore a racist bastard because [sarcasm on] everyone _knows_ that everyone in the past was racist [/sarcasm off]. Therefore, Oriental is offensive. What it really means is that history is being successfully rewritten, in order to keep anyone from looking too much to _past_ examples for advice or guides on how to do things (except for certain, carefully chosen ones of course, *cough* Karl Marx *cough*); instead our vision must be kept on the rosy future that progeressives are mapping out for us.
Grrf. Sorry for the typos. This sort of thing makes me too mad to type straight.
To avoid conflicts (actually, to avoid liability for conflicts; the conflicts still exist), law firms will construct a “Chinese wall” which purportedly prevents attorneys who are “conflicted out” from working on particular projects. Here’s the kicker: a judge here in San Francisco wrote an opinion stating that the term “Chinese wall” (widely used by lawyers and judges) is offensive to Asians. I cannot remember the reasoning, but I will try to find the link.
Following up on my post above re: Chinese Walls, I am quoting the concurring opinion in Peat, Marwick v. Superior Court, 200 Cal.App.3d 272 (1988):
“I concur in the opinion of Justice Haning, but write separately to comment on the apparently widespread use of the term “Chinese Wall” to describe the type of screening mechanism discussed in this case. While our opinion uses the term “screen,” both the parties and the trial court used the term “Chinese Wall,” which seems to have become a term of art. I write to express my profound objection to the use of this phrase in this context.
The origin of the use of “Chinese Wall” in the context of confidentiality is unclear. Evidently, the term was casually coined in some appellate opinion, then picked up and used without question or explanation by courts and commentators. The unquestioned use of the term was perpetuated by a leading note on the subject, The Chinese Wall Defense to Law Firm Disqualification (1980) 128 U.Pa.L.Rev. 677, which is otherwise analytical and informative. (See lead opn., fn. 2, p. 878.)
The enthusiasm for handy phrases of verbal shorthand is understandable. Occasionally, however, lawyers and judges use a term which is singularly inappropriate. “Chinese Wall” is one such piece of legal flotsam which should be emphatically abandoned. The term has an ethnic focus which many would consider a subtle form of linguistic discrimination. Certainly, the continued use of the term would be insensitive to the ethnic identity of the many persons of Chinese descent. Modern courts should not perpetuate the biases which creep into language from outmoded, and more primitive, ways of thought.
It may be sobering to recall that little more than a century ago our own Supreme Court held that persons of Chinese ancestry could not testify in court against a person of Caucasian descent. In People v. Hall (1854) 4 Cal. 399, 404, the court, speaking through Chief Justice Hugh C. Murray, declared that “[t]he same rule which would admit them to testify, would admit them to all the equal rights of citizenship, and we might soon see them at the polls, in the jury box, upon the bench, and in our legislative halls.” It is worth noting, given recent events on the American political stage, that language and attitudes once embodied in a judicial opinion would now lead to the removal of a Governor, and membership in groups adhering to those attitudes could lead to denial of confirmation for high public office.
Aside from this discriminatory flavor, the term “Chinese Wall” is being used to describe a barrier of silence and secrecy. The barrier itself may work to further the cause of ethics in litigation; but the term ascribed to that barrier will necessarily be associated with constraints on the freedom of open communication. To employ in this context the image of the Great Wall of China, one of the magnificent wonders of the world and a structure of great beauty, is particularly inappropriate. One can imagine the response to the negative use of the images of the Eiffel Tower, the Great Pyramids of Cheops, or the Colossus of Rhodes.
Finally, “Chinese Wall” is not even an architecturally accurate metaphor for the barrier to communication created to preserve confidentiality. Such a barrier functions as a hermetic seal to prevent two-way communication between two groups. The Great Wall of China, on the other hand, was only a one-way barrier. It was built to keep outsiders out–not to keep insiders in.
It is necessary to raise a clenched cry for jettisoning the outmoded legal jargon of a bygone time. If the image of a wall must be used, perhaps “ethics wall” is more suitable phraseology.”
Judge Low was desperately looking for things to whinge about that day, doncha think?
My—head—hurts.
(I’m even more pissed to find out that editing a post in MT loses the trackback info. Or at least it does for me. I have posted a question at the Movable Type support forum on this.)
The first sentence of the original article really hurt my head. Read it and weep. And gnash your teeth.
Shh! You can’t say what you just said, because it might mean something that you don’t mean. You have the right to remain silent, and if you waive that right then whatever you say, can and will be used against you. We think we mean it.
I’m still trying to figure out what, if anything, that sentence was supposed to mean. Bring on the Newspeak!
I am forever grateful that this kind of garbage hasn’t gotten far in Hawaii, where this kind of PC garbage hasn’t gotten far. But I grew up in Washington, and I remember trying to caution my wife, whose ancestry is half Okinawan, that using the word “Oriental” was an invitation to trouble in the PC precincts of the University of Washington. (She used it anyway, of course.)
Speaking of bad sentences, my attempt to revise the first sentence of the second paragraph of that last comment didn’t work too well. : (
I have known plenty of Asians–both East and South–and they have <i>never</i> referred to themselves as Oriental. And they’ve all taken Oriental to be an offensive term when used to describe their ethnicity.
I mean, this isn’t some hidden secret cooked up in legal theory camp or something. I don’t see any problem discussing Oriental rugs, or ‘Oriental studies,’ but though racial nomenclature is based as much on fancy as fact, it amazes me that so many are amazed that ‘Oriental’ is a passe term when applied to an ethnic background.
Putting the Washington State case aside for a second, it’s a bit bizarre to hear a bunch of white people (yes, I assume, but c’mon) yammering about why Asians shouldn’t mind being called Orientals. I assume that you all wouldn’t blink an eye if someone called a black guy colored? Or a Negro?
And if this case did involve the word “Negro,” I can just imagine fuming, knuckle-headed bloggers taking it away: “So a word that’s good enough for Martin Luther King isn’t good enough for Cornel West? [snicker].”
Well, I guess there will be no more public viewings of ‘Murder On The Orient Express.’
To Glenn, I am OFFENDED that you have referred to me as a ‘white.’ I am not white. My skin is not the color of piece of copy paper. I am a Caucasian. Also, I am sure by using the offensive term ‘white’ you are defaming albino people everwhere, who are not responsible for the pigmentation of their skin.
The victims await an apology for your blatant insensitivity.
My wife is Japanese. The word doesn’t bother her one bit.
As a writer, I’m against any attempt to ban words. Because you can’t. You just end up giving them more power.
Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro Negro
There. No one died.
I guess you won’t mind if I call you kike or hooknose, eh Goldstein? After all, aren’t those words as well?
You just did, Shawn. But you should be worried about <a href=”http://baseball-reference.com/c/chacosh01.shtml”>your curveball</a> and not my nose.
Intent is what gives language its power. Delivered the proper way, any word can be used as an insult or a compliment. Shawn’s childish display just reinforces that idea.
Um—yeah, Glenn, you’re assuming we’re all white. How do you know? Is there a special “ethnic” way of typing?
Snark aside—I already acknowledged that the word “Oriental” when referring to race is pass
Glenn,
Two points:
1. Some people are offended by the word in large part because they’re looking for something to be offended about. Demanding use of the up-to-date, politically correct term for an ethnic group is a way of demanding attention for those who claim to speak for that group. In this case, that claim seems to be very weak, and framing this kind of word games as some kind of civil rights victory is just silly.
2. I don’t know where you live, but in Hawaii (population 60+% Asian/Oriental), the term is not offensive. As noted in my previous comment, I had to warn my wife about mainland sensitivity to the term, and she are one.
Why is my “display” childish? Is it because those words hold more meaning to you than to others? If I am childish, how is plastering the word “Oriental” all over your blog not childish? Insisting that a group of people not be offended by a word that they for whatever reason find offensive is remarkably arrogant.
Oh, arrogant. I see. For using the word. Unlike, say, legislating it out of existence because some people are bothered by it “for whatever reason.”
You’re right. I stand corrected.
Hey, you know what might work? Let’s just skip the middleman here and pass a law against discomfort. And war, while we’re at it.
And by middleman, I of course meant middlehuman.
But in a non-hierarchical way, I trust.
Right. No class implied. Only locus.
Jeff, does that Shawn guy really rank in the top 10 for walking batters or is that just a lucky google search?
Actually, believe it or not, I agree with you regarding legislation of words. It shouldn’t be done; that much is obvious. However, I don’t think you should be posting it everywhere in some sort of pseudo-protest. It does nothing to get your message across, and instead, it potentially sends the wrong message. Most of the people posting comments seem to think the argument is about whether or not the word “Oriental” is offensive, rather than why it should or shouldn’t be legislated.
Oh, jeez…what’s gonna happen to me for all of my references to midgets on my blog? Is it offensive to call little people “midgets?” Am I doomed?
I can just imagine Billy Barty, that dude who plays Mini-Me, and Tom Cruise kicking in my door to serve me my summons. Eeeeek! The horror! The HORROR!!!
The protest wasn’t “pseudo,” Shawn. I make my livelihood with words. And I’m not “posting it everywhere,” I’m posting it on my blog, in the context of a story on legislating a word out of existence.
We give language its power. And I refuse to countenance those who attempt to legislate words away. I can’t control every possible interpretation of the marks I leave (that’s the nature of hermeneutics); but because of that, I don’t worry that certain people might take something I write the wrong way—though I try to leave the appropriate textual clues to guide interpretation.
Best I can do.
You know what the truly funny/sick thing about this whole argument is? That one half of you dunderheads are complaining about people (Asian people I assume) finding something to get offended about and the other half are grousing about how offended you are that someone would prefer that you didn’t use an outdated term with its roots in Orientalism which was a sort of field of study for Europeans to “understand” Asian culture through Western cultural paradigms.
In any case, its not your word so you can safely shut up and start in on bitching about the liberal media bias or whatever straw man you were shaking hands and baby kissing with before…
Oh, how trenchant. Goneaway knows his Said <i>and</i> is able to sneak “paradigm” into a usable sentence. And note how neatly he “unpacks” the “discourse” in order to reach the point where he feels he can safely draw a caricature of the discussion and then smugly drift back off to places where signifiers belong to certain groups. But not before literally performing the very straw man argument he accuses others of engaging in.
Yawn. That kind pseudo-intellectual garbage may get you laid in grad school, but around here it just gets snickered at.
Snicker.
Baby kissing a straw man? Ewww…
“its not your word so you can safely shut up and start in on bitching about the liberal media bias…” blah fucking blah.
Hey, goneaway? I hearby lay claim to the term “bitching.” You can’t use it anymore. I own it now. I own its ass! Anyone who wants to use the word “bitching&trade;” had better start sending me money.
Andrea:
You can’t copyright “bitching”! As a woman, you should be offended at the gender stereotypes that term evokes. Only one who is a product of the patriarchal educational system which views society solely through a Western paradigm would consider “bitching” as an appropriate word choice. Right, goneaway?
goneaway: highjacking a word or term and infusing the use of it with malice (see my posts regarding “Chinese Wall”) diminishes the significance of legitimate complaints of prejudice. At some point, the sheer volume of—excuse me—bitching eventually becomes white noise which drowns out the valid grievance.
Discussions of the word itself aside (are we going to have to start referring to it as “the O-word”? It follows, yes, if it’s supposed to be just as offensive as “the N-word”?)… What I want to know is, what are all these WA state laws that reference a particular ethnic background? I mean, are there special crimes that are only defined for Oriental->Asian citizens or something?
Peggy—
(By the way, my normal charge per use of the word bitching&trade; is $42.00, but today and today only I will only charge $39.99, payable in full or at the special Low Monthly Finance Rate of $17.44 for only three months! I am extending the special sale to another five minutes. CashorallmajorcreditcardsacceptedalsoCODnopersonalchecksorIOUsplease.)
That’s why I claim the word! I am Taking It Back!
My God! I also make fun of retards on my blog! Will they give me a cigarette and blinfold before they shoot me?
What? We’re only talking about ethnic slurs here? Well hell, everyone knows I hate Candadians; they smell like pine tar, say “a-boot” instead of “about,” and the word “Mountie” sounds like some sort of kinky gay thing.
Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks Canucks
This is fun, Jeff…don’t get me started on those freaking Lithuanians.
Yeah. Stupid Lithuanians—with their stupid wooden shoes and their stupid tulips.
Woodfooters, I call ‘em… I’m going to bed. Too much rum again.
Oh great, the “O” word. Is if it isn’t bad enough that Paul Shin actually said, “… the ‘N’ word.” Personally, I fear anyone in a position of power who is afraid to use a word, or fails to understand that words are neutral – the intent is where the problems lie. Removing words from everyday language does not remove intent, but simply shifts its focus elsewhere, or leads to the creation of something liberals love to bang their drum about – code words. For example, I know of some government contractors who, instead of just referring to someone as an asshole, comment on how tall a person is to each other. (So, if they were to remark to each other that someone was very tall, well you get the idea…) Now, we’ve already established that it is not acceptable to use the word asshole in this environment – shall we remove the word tall now because it, too, has be burdened with an added definition and a negative intent?
On the flip side of the argument, some individuals refer to each other as niggers as a term of kinship or comaraderie. Again, here, it is all a perspective of intent.
Attacking the words, instead of the thoughts, is similar to treating the symptoms but not the disease.
Hummm… I guess since I’m of Asian origin, I should offer my two cents in this whole deal…
While I do get annoyed by being called “oriental” (Besides, I just LIKE the word “Asian”) —not because of the bad connotations, but because when people call me oriental, they actual THINK I’m Chinese, which I am not—I think it’s rather ludicrous for the government to start erasing the actual word like it never existed. Who do they think they are? God? Did they rip off a copy of 1984 and decided to take Big Brother’s role in “re-educating” the masses?
Idiotic.
I second Doug Dever’s last sentence. I don’t have any more intelligent things to say.
Mygod some people lack clues. Don’t demonize words?
Asians are not demonizing this word. The word has been demonized by others, by history, going way back. Don’t blame Asians for that! Or even clued-in non-Asians, for that matter.
The white (caucasian, whatever) owner of this blog should go live in Asia for a while, and feel what it is like to be called a (insert local term for “foreign ignorant never been out of Kansas until now jackass” here). Then if you still insist you don’t mind, fine; but don’t force your victimhood on everyone else.
…And then Alex ends his scold with the self-parodying, “but don’t force your victimhood on everyone else”—precisely the point of my post.
I don’t know how to respond to something that defeats itself so utterly. And in so few words! Bravo.
Andrea: “Incidentally, the same argument can be made for the word “Negro.” I am not aware that the word is considered offensive either, merely old-fashioned enough that no one uses it any more lest they want to sound weird.”
Absent-minded cunt.
Oh, sorry, you don’t find that *offensive* do you?
Hey Aaron!
How can I send my donation to the United Cunt College Fund?
I hate to take the middle ground here…but here goes.
No one here can deny that racism is still a prevalent and very destructive force in the lives of many people. Unfortunately, government is thought by many in the general public to be the arbiter of morality. The phrase “It’s not like it’s illegal” is often used to justify some ethically questionable activity. When the government is seen using a term like “Oriental,” and that term CAN be greatly offensive to people, it must step carefully. Any action by the government that can be seen as choosing one moral vision over another is frought with danger.
Keep in mind also that this law only bans the usage of the word in Washington State public texts. It certainly makes no attack on literature, or even individual expression. It demonizes a word only in the fashion that the forced seperation of church and state demonizes religion. Is not mentioning religion in schools tantatmount to government dissaproval of religion?
In an era where the media seems to think we need role models in government offices, people ascribe far too much significance to government actions.
However, in a pluralistic (at least obstensibly) society, the government has to take care not to choose the side of any one group, lest it inflame already problematic inter-racial relations.
Excising a word from public texts is the first step on a slippery slope to a wider ban. Look at the NY Regents Exam (a story I’ve linked to in the original post), which sought to remove from literary excerpts language which made any person potentially “uncomfortable.”
My problem is with the fundamental misunderstanding of language that such decisions represent and further. Society finds itself with things like hate crimes or “free speech zones” on college campuses because of stepping stone decisions like these.
Oh to be Coriolanus now!! Shakspeareans in the house?
Oh yeah Andrea?
Well I claim the term, “Butt Pirate”! Woo Hoo!
“Oriental” is a useless word when applied to race, since technically I think it includes everybody between Turkey and Japan. Likewise the word “Caucasian,” which –again, technically– describes everyone between Ireland and Bangladesh. Both should be abandoned in favor of the terms “Asian” and “white.” Not that these terms make any more sense in and of themselves, Eurasia being a rather large continent, and white a rather large color, but they are the terms of our time, removed from the baggage of history and pseudo-science.
I think “Oriental” has always been offensive when applied to Chinese people –like, that’s where the negative connotations come from somewhere in our nation’s past, but the where and when of it I don’t know. Maybe it’s because “Oriental” was used in reference to some of the crasser portions of our cultural past, like your Fu Manchu/Yellow Claw/The Mandarin types, the Amos & Andys of Asian America. I dunno. Obviously legislating the word out of existence is nonsensical –you can’t have an Oriental food market? Or an Oriental rug?– but, hey wait, now that I actually read the article they’re just updating public records to use the word Asian instead of Oriental when referring to Asian people –something the Census already does. So what’s the problem? That they’re officially calling Oriental a bad word? It’s unnecessary, and possibly oversensitive, but not much more than that. Asian is just what all the kids are calling themselves these days, and Gary Locke is just committed to being a particularly hip governor. I have no problem with this.
One more thing to keep in mind is that it doesn’t matter what the people who actually live in Japan and the Philippines or whatever call themselves –they’re not Americans, their priorities are not our priorities –who gives a crap what they’re calling themselves? This switch to Asian is just one more step in the hammering out of an Asian American identity –something that does not exist in Asia– a tricky thing to do in a culture that has traditionally been biracial.
Here’s your cultural barometer: when Hustler came out with a magazine devoted to chicks-with-the-epicanthic-fold, it was called Hustler’s Asian Fever. Where Larry Flynt leads, I can only follow.
“So what’s the problem? That they’re officially calling Oriental a bad word? It’s unnecessary, and possibly oversensitive, but not much more than that.”
That’s plenty for me, Justin. Here’s the simple calculation I go by in these matters: Official stamp given to “correct” speech by way of legislation = really really bad.
Removing the word Oriental from all govt. docs?—no problem with it (other than that it denies history), but hey, whatever floats your boat. Just please, no laws. No laws = no precedents to be “extended” and no “interpretations” to be misapplied.
Justin, first “puta” and now this, you must be a closet diction freak as well.
While I agree that “Asian” is better word choice (and probably what most everyone posting here uses in conversation), I disagree with you on a few points.
Did “Oriental” actually become an offensive word at some point because of its actual meaning or because in our earlier history we were racist against Asians. If it’s the latter then we’d have to ban every word that ever described a group we were previously racist against, probably including “Asian” as well.
Also, it doesn’t even seem likely that great numbers of Asians take the offense people have been implying by putting it on par with “nigger” or “kike”. Or, much more to the point, “coolie”. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be acceptable usage for everything but people.
While the main point is the stupid legal codification, I’m still not sure how “Oriental” is intrinsically offensive.
Justin Slotman wrote: “This switch to Asian is just one more step in the hammering out of an Asian American identity….”
Probably true. But why, exactly, is “the hammering out of an Asian American identity” something that the State of Washington or anyone else should think is a good thing? Why should anyone assume that a recent immigrant from the Philippines or Thailand has more in common with a fifth-generation Japanese American than with anyone else in this country?
unless you are actually Asian, please don’t think you have a right to an opinion on this one. Yes, some Asians are not aware of the controversy around the word because the West still has a chokehold over much of the planet. But if I say I am offended by that word, I would hope you, as a non-Asian person would respect that because you are referring to ME and to a culture I belong to. If an Asian person does not mind the word Oriental, that person can use it. A Black person can say “nigger,” but just because he does, doesn’t mean I will overstep the boundaries and be arrogant enough to think I can use it too.
Jeff, wow. Your wife is Asian? That’s the old “but one of my best friends is Black!” excuse for believing some tenuous connection exempts us from all offense concerning <fill in the blank> issue.
As for Glenn’s comment about mainly white people being involved in the discussion…it’s true. Someone criticized his observation but did not refute it because she’s probably white too, or she at least *thinks* white. So no, there’s no writing style that is white, but there is a thinking style of whiteness. Like assuming you have every right to use words that you *know* are offensive to some and wash your hands free of any stings to your conscience because no matter what the people directly affeccted by it say, it’s not offensive to you. How fucking arrogant.
And when someone barely employs language designed for the sole purpose of discussing these issues, you write him off as ‘pseudo-intellectual.” Are you just threatened by those who don’t resort to “Ori-fucking-ental?” I see you’re shooting for substance, real substance.
But how typical. Those already comfortable in the current system that is grossly unjust always fight any kind of change that might make them re-think their self-preception and position in the world. I’m sure a lot of people in the South who used the word “nigger” as just a neureal term to refer to Black people were highly distressed when those pesky liberals and coloreds began demanding they stop using the word. Oh, and “fag” and “dyke” and whatever else. Get over it. If it’s just a insignificant word to you, then give it up. No loss to you. But for the people it hurts, irritates, reminds of past and present oppression, it *is* significant. Significant in a way you apparently refuse to acknowledge as valid.
Well, Scottie, the best thing you can do with that donation is to shine it up real nice, turn it sideways, and. . . give it to Andrea.
Sorry, Yoon. Just so happens my wife IS Japanese—though I can assure you I didn’t marry her just so I could have an excuse to go around calling Asians (a Latin word, incidentally) Oriental (a French word, I believe).
Making the argument that the government shouldn’t be legislating words out of existence is different than claiming I’d go around calling people names. If you haven’t figured that out by now, I can’t help you.
Your comments—which presume to essentialize “whiteness” as some inherently malevolent force of oppression while simultaneously suggesting it is whites who are acting arrogantly (as opposed to you, who’ve reduced billions of individuals sharing nothing but a lack of pigment into a simple, homogenous group that “thinks white”)—well, they defy coherence.
Unless I’m Asian I don’t have the right to an opinion on this? Did you really say that? Tell me you’re joking! Should I not be grading the essays of my Asian students? Should I not have an opinion on the writings of Martin Luther King? Or Ghandi?
As for substance, I’ve written hundreds of words on this subject here and elsewhere—including a bit on how I believe language works. For you to pick out one word I wrote and point to it in an attempt to suggest that my entire argument is somehow non-substantive is plain silly—though quite in keeping with the complete misunderstanding of language you consistently exhibit in everything you write.
Yoon’s “unless you are actually Asian, please don’t think you have a right to an opinion on this one” has got to be the most bigoted comment I’ve seen yet on this post. Yoon, you’re overreaching badly here. Your ethnicity does not give you the right to speak for Jeff’s wife, or my wife, or any of a vast number of people whose ethnic extraction is from the same (rather large) continent as yours.
Yoon, how far does this break down? Does this mean that only Asians of Chinese descent can discuss the offensiveness of “Chink”? Only Mexicans can debate “beaner”? What about “cracker”–is outrage over that term reserved for Southern whites? Why should you have any say about use of the word “nigger”? Should the various American Indian groups that have been pressuring San Diego State to drop the name “Aztecs” stop because they are not Aztec?
While your phrasing is very polite, it is possibly the most arrogant statement I have ever seen in the comments here, and Jeff has a knack for promoting controversy sometimes (sorry, Jeff). And your comment about “thinking white” is so incredibly mired in stupid, bigoted identity politics that I have no idea where to begin refuting it.
Controversy? Me? Pshaw…
I can’t believe you’re still using *that* word. Don’t you realize it’s been BANNED? Sssssshhhh! They’ll hear you. Oh no! Here they come!!!
Aaaaaaaaaaaaargggghhhhhhhh
Who’s the one offended? My God! Am I supposed to feel some kind of sting because now a bunch of white people are offended by my statements?
II wasn’t speaking for anybody’s wife (did you read my initial post? Or is my Englsih not good enough for you?) I’m speaking for myself. And specifically about the word Oriental and how it affects me as an Asian woman.
For those of you who really are shocked that there is such a thing as ‘thinking white,” wake up. It’s not skin-color, but a legacy an individual consciously chooses to accept or reject.
….Yeah yeah yeah, go back to where I came from.
Um… Yoon? Is the way <i>you</i> communicate supposed to be evidence of “thinking non-white”? For the sake of the 99.9% of the people in the world not descended from the passengers on the <i>Mayflower</i>, I sure hope not.
Oh yeah—and Aaron: taste my chocolate salty balls.
Yoon,
I’m not offended by your statements. I think they’re asinine, wrong-headed, and 20 or 30 other pejorative adjectives, but I wouldn’t say I’m offended by them. At least not in the “that hurts my feelings” sense. Maybe in the “I’ve got dog shit on my shoe” sense, but that’s different.
As for going back to where you came from, I assume you come from the US (California?). Most immigrants seem to have better things to do than identity politics.
So, Yoon, what you are saying is that an Asian who doesn’t share your worldview is not an authentic Asian? That they “think white” and are therefore traitors to their race?
(I think this is where we are to begin discussing coconuts, bananas, oreos, and snowballs, but I could be wrong).
Folks:
One way to combat the feeling of being offended, is to develop a sense of humor. Some folks in my world are kinda miffed about the pejorative use of the word *gay* used by today’s youth:
“That’s so gay” meaning “That’s so lame”.
Given our host’s fondness for words, labels, and the meanings attached to them in and out of context, coupled with his exposure of and to the scholarship in the area, I thought you guys might get a kick outta this:
http://www.washblade.com/forum/cartoons/dykes/010810a.htm
Explaining gay subculture within the greater context of American culture ain’t always easy, but it can be done, and sometimes it’s funny.
Cheers,
Ray Eckhart
Re: Oriental etc.
Reasoned debate, I see.
Andrea, I am not a cruel man. Being your research here: http://www.africana.com/Articles/tt_019.htm (Dozens, The)
Perhaps after years of careful study and apprenticeship, you might possibly come up with something worthy of response.
May Melek Taus smile upon you.
Oh, and you might want to look into a topical cream for that salty thang. That sounds nasty.
Yoon,
What a beautifully constructed set-up. If you are Asian/Oriental and you use the term “Oriental,” you’ve bought into the white man’s structure. So, really, really authentic Asians would only use the term “Asian.”
Meanwhile, if you’re insulting to white people, and they take offense, well, that’s just their problem, ain’t it?
Well, I’m sorry, but as an American of Chinese descent, let me say that YOU do not speak for ME. I have long found the whole bit about “Oriental” versus “Asian” to be, at best, an absolute waste of time, rearranging terminological deck chairs when there are far bigger issues facing the Titanic. And as one who grew up w/ quite a bit of racism directed at him, I think I have at least something of a leg to stand on, in this regard.
But lecturing and hectoring have rarely been a useful avenue of engagement, even before raising the subject of whether one learns from such an approach or not.
Zhiji, zhibi.
You know, for someone who keeps insisting I fuck off, you sure do spend a lot of time over here, Aaron. Now go away. You haven’t offered an interesting thought yet—here or on your own site. Even your link to “The Dozens” is laughable; I mean, when I’m a prick, I like to think I’m being a prick because that’s what I want to be—not because I’m controlled by the oppressive forces of history acting against my “race” that both explain and excuse my boorishness.
Though it is convenient, I’ll give you that
goneaway was right when he called this a circle jerk. Anyone who doesn’t fit the square is dismissed as “uninteresting” or having a “complete misunderstanding of language.” Handy.
I must say that I did agree with part of what Dean wrote. There *are* larger issues we need to be working on instead of merely this one. But I’m sorry to say, Dean, that the sentiments expressed here suggest that when it really comes down to it, these brilliant and witty people will provide even stronger opposition. It’ll come like a stab in the back if you don’t keep watch. And Dean, did I ever say I was speaking for you? Retain what you read. That goes for everyone here who so egregiously “mischaracterizes and misinforns.” Jeff deserves the lifetime award for that one.
Despite pleas for my resignation as a teacher, I will remain on. Don’t worry though, your kids are safe. You’ll ship them away to a right-wing prison and the only diversity they’ll know is from the one or two pictures in their textbooks or a blurb about the “Red Scare.” But they can close the book, never fear, and all will be right in the world again.
Go away, Yoon. You’re just embarrassing yourself now.
By the way: pointing out that Aaron has offered nothing interesting to the discussion (scroll through, I haven’t removed anything he’s written. Or visit his site if you prefer, where he’s equally uninteresting on the subject) is not being dismissive. It’s being <b>descriptive.</b>
Ditto my characterization of your (well-documented ) misunderstanding of language, evident in arguments you yourself make but no longer even bother to defend. Several commenters have addressed your points and offered counter arguments, but again, you’re content to speak in riddles and strings of snarky non-sequiturs rather than address any substantive points.
And that’s because you can’t. Which is in turn because you have no idea what you’re talking about. Don’t blame me for that: I mean, I didn’t make you daft. I simply pointed it out.
And please, don’t remind me that you’ll go on teaching. I have to deal with the products of your misguided pedagogy every fall…
Jeff: What I mean is, what’s the difference between the state of Washington doing this and the Census combining categories that were once “Hindoo” and “Chinese” into “Asian”? It’s just recognition of the public’s changing need to call themselves something or another. “Asian” is an improvement on “Oriental” because most college-educated Americans think Oriental is a bad word. As to why…..
My Esteemed Fellow Dictator And Beacon To His People, Blow Hard: My theory is that Oriental is like a fall guy word, intended to retroactively embrace past and present actual racism against Asian people in this country –to try and make into the n-word of Asian people, even though it was never used like that at the time. And even though the abuses against Asian people were nothing like the abuses against black people. I think it goes back to (again) living in a nation that was always black-white, and did not have a cultural role for Asian people. Turning the O-word into the N-word is an attempt to tap into the history of black people in the United States, even as Asians in other ways try to fit in with the white history of the United States. God that’s a crappy sentence, but my pont is there’s not enough Asian history in America for Asians to have a clear role yet, or universal acceptance, but the switch to “Asian” is part of it. To use Oriental now is simply to be ignorant, unless, like Jeff, you’re using it to make a point.
Don Lonborg: My post, of course, assumes that America is organized along racial lines in at least a cultural way –and definitely a demographic way– and will remain that way for some time. I’m not saying it’s a good thing or bad thing –I think it’s a good thing– I’m saying the way we think of race in this country, an Asian American race has to exist, even if it does not exist in Asia. It’s like that old issue of Action Comics where Siegel and Shuster were born on an Earth without a Superman and under alien domination, so they materialized him out of thin air –because Superman has to exist in DC Comics. Likewise, Asian people in race-obsessed America.
Justin: I take all your points. But excising the word out of the historical record (“‘Oriental’ will be stricken from all government documents”) is a different thing altogether than deciding that—for purposes of racial description—the word should no longer be used in any subsequently drafted government text (unless, as you say, there’s a discernable point to using it) And we don’t need legislation to tell us that. What legislation <i>can</i> do, however, is provide the ground for extrapolated rulings—a school text is a “public” text, for instance—and that’s a slippery slope I’d prefer to avoid.
But beyond the particulars, my point all along—and you seem to be brushing against it at times in your comments—is to the ‘why and how’ words like these take on and retain the power they do, and how we as a society should proceed given the fact that they <i>have</i> taken on certain connotations. My answer has always been to rescue the word—or rather, to rescue the signifier; others would have us purge the signifier on the alter of a connotation. And there are real consequences to how we decide these things.
To Justin:
Why, you are SOOO good to me! Why, w/ no part to play in America, as yet, you are helping me to forge a real identity. As though my being American is not enough.
“…there’s not enough Asian history in America for Asians to have a clear role yet, or universal acceptance, but the switch to “Asian” is part of it.”
By God, you’re as bad as Yoon. I, for one, want NO “clear role” in America based on my ethnicity. I ain’t here to get my piece of the welfare pie. What I want, is what Martin Luther King, Jr., wanted, to be judged on the content of my character and, in my work, the quality of my analyses.
So, please take your condescension, your presumption of what my part of America is supposed to be, based on my race, and blow it out yer ear (or preferably, up a lower orifice).
Oh, and btw, the term “Oriental,” you might notice, is on quite a few stores of Korean, Chinese, and Japanese ownership.
If you REALLY wanted to eliminate negative terms, far nastier epithets exist, such as “Chink” and “nip.” You’ll notice you never see grocery stores adorned w/ terms like that.
A little bit more problematic is “Chinaman.” Not as offensive as “nigger”, but still insulting. Probably the equivalent of calling someone, today, “Negro.”
All right, Jeff. Here’s the special needs child version. Let me know if you still have problems following along.
Andrea wrote that she was unaware of anyone (insert conditions here) using the word negro. Since she recently described me as a troll in her blog, this was slightly incorrect. I pointed this out, while also using what’s arguably the most offensive term for women in American English. This was deliberate, since to this point people had been tossing around negro and bitch, which have lost most of their potency over the years.
(Cunt is used pretty much as a comma in some dialects in England, though. Ever read the World Englishes anthology from UIUC’s linguistics department? Some of my professors had papers in it.)
The response to Scott was as much as his little joke deserved.
The follow-up to Andrea pointed out the use of word-games in the African-American community. Your misleading mischaracterisation of the dozens as the result of the “oppressive forces of history” is amusing, given what you’ve accused me of, but whatever.
And your last post to my site made me realize that you’re comedy go– that you are a unique and beautiful snowflake, with opinions too-often unheard by my audience of people of color, queers and women. You know, minorities.
Finally, please fire up a search engine or file sharing program and search for the following: “Meryn Cadell” “Spelling Bee” “The Sweater Song”. Much will be revealed unto you.
Here endeth the lesson.
Jason Slotman:
Ah, bu t if America is race-obsessed, it’s largely part because folks like the promoters of this Washington statute want a person’s race to be the most important thing about him or her. That used to be called bigotry when it was the white folks doing it. I agree that a multitude of ethnicities enriches the culture, but that doesn’t mean that you ought to try to homogenize everything from Japan to Southeast Asia to Mongolia to India into something called “Asian American culture.”
BTW, I took a quick look at the Washington statutes and administrative regs. to see how serious a problem this statute was solving. There were a grand total of three uses of “Oriental” or “Orientals” in the statutes. Two referred to and protected practices of “Oriental medicine,” and one was in an affirmative-action statute. There were seven or so usages in the Washington Administrative Code, containing such racist gems as protecting chestnuts from the oriental gall moth, defining the background color of the state seal as Oriental blue, and defining accupuncture.
The new law deals with this horrendous problem as follows: “All state and local government statutes, codes, rules, regulations, and other official documents enacted after July 1, 2002,
are REQUIRED to use the term ‘Asian’ when referring to persons of Asian descent. The use of the term ‘Oriental’ is PROHIBITED.” [Emphasis added.] That’s seriously creepy.
DAVE Lonborg
Back again, Aaron? People will say we’re in love.
From “The Dozens”:<blockquote>Social scientists have for years theorized that the dozens is a release for a racially oppressed group, or a way of helping African American males project a masculine identity in a matriarchal culture. In recent years, however, researchers have tended to emphasize the game’s role in helping African Americans to resolve conflicts nonviolently and to deal with personal insults impassively, – valuable lessons in a racially hostile society.</blockquote>
What, so as long as its rudeness instead of violence we should all be thankful? How can you stomach such paternalistic, rancid tripe?
The rest of what you wrote makes no sense to me: “Beautiful snowflake”, “minorities”, your “audience”… I have no idea what any of that means. Gonna need the Cliffs Notes to that bit of sass too, I’m afraid.
And sorry, but I’m just not interested in decoding your wannabe-fraught allusions to the songs of a Canadian pop cult diva.
(And oh yeah. We have AFFT, my wife and I.)
Jeff: I thought the law didn’t affect public documents retroactively, but only applied to future releases from Olympia. Going back in time to change words is obviously ridiculous, but I didn’t think they were doing that–so I don’t think there’s a slippery-slope problem in this case.
But, you’re right, debating the law itself is beside the point –it’s just something symbolic and (probably) calculated cynically to get votes, as Dave Dave DAVE Lonborg made clear in his followup. You’re worried about demonizing words, but why can’t we retire a word sometimes–like your crazy aunt who lives in the attic? If it’s embarrassing us, why can’t we put it away?
My dear Dean: You appear to have intercepted a message for The Bringer Of Light, And Grain, For His People, Blow Hard, and must insist you excise all memory of it from your mind after I remind you that I was speaking exclusively in cultural terms, and not in individualistic ones; as an individual American you have the right to place any part of my words, or our culture, in any orifice that requires them. No one has a clear role in the daily life of America, but in our culture there are roles, and history to be lived up to and fought against, and in terms of our culture Asian people remain out of place. This only speaks to certain restrictiveness within our culture–which is still less restrictive than anywhere else.
When they called Shang-Chi Chinaman in Master Of Kung Fu he’d take it in stride at first, and then kick their butts because they were obviously not individuals of character–their use of the word “Chinaman” proved it. And I’ve been reading too many comic books lately.
Dave DAVE DAVE DAAAAAVE: Oh yeah, I’m not saying our race obsession is a good thing, though I think it is good sometimes–it gives you something to be proud of just by virtue of being born. I am saying it exists, as evidenced by the people called Asian Americans and the white people and the black people. You’re right, though–the law is goofy.
If a word retires on its own, that’s one thing. Forcing it into a home where it’s sure to die alone—that’s another, I don’t care <i>how</I> nice the room is.
You may be right about the retrospective excision. The article I linked to says “
I can see that this is, as a dispassioned exchange of ideas goes, a shitstorm. As I’ve noted over at VodkaPundit, I’m [white][caucasian][a paternalistic, ethnocentric bigot] (choose one) and I have a couple of adopted girls from PRC. I’m wondering, why is it exactly that I am expected to adopt the latest PC label for a given ethnic group? I’ve pretty much declined the whole “African-American” thing; can you imagine if I insisted others fold my entire ethnic background into whatever label they used to refer to me? It’d get old mighty fast, lemme tell you. And I really cherish the memory of this interview I once listened to on NPR where the hostess referred to the interviewee as “African-American” when she was, in fact, just African. I’d try to be more accurate but I don’t recall which country she was from.
I’m all for a return to Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid. Or just no labels at all. Just think, no “African-American”, no “Stupid White Men”. Wow. Liberals would have to exert enormous brainpower figuring out how to race-bait if there were no PC racial descriptors.
I’d agree with you, David, but that would just “prove” that what we’ve got going here is an “echochamber” or a “circle jerk”—or whatever other dismissive label has been offered up as a way to avoid having to address the substance of the argument.
Thus far, all we’ve been given to work with from those dismissing arguments against the ban is, “It’s an Asian thing, you wouldn’t understand”—though it’s worth noting that such is the <i>minority</i> position among the Asians posting here.
The law is just silly and a waste of taxpayer money and the legislators’ time. As for the word itself–“oriental” is a perfectly good word with many entirely honorable functions. I don’t think using it as a substitute for “Asian” when referring to people, either as a noun or an adjective, is one of them. Why not? People who talk or write about “oriental people” or “Orientals” in the year 2002 tend not to be very knowledgeable. It’s simply a matter of correlation. The usage may be theoretically impeccable, but if I used the word “oriental” in that way, I would expect people to assume I’m not very intelligent. It’s the same calculation that goes into any question of usage. The only authorities are the writers and speakers whose use of language you find exemplary.
What’s wrong with Pete? He’s on topic, thoughtful, and mostly right (although there is at least one place, Hawaii, where the usage is more current). Get with the program, Pete, we’re busy slaying strawmen, feeding trolls, and talking past each other here. A little reasoned discussion is well and good, but don’t let it take over your whole post.
(Actually, before anyone else jumps me, I think this has been a pretty good discussion, and I thank Jeff for providing the forum and everyone else who’s had anything reasonably thoughtful to say.)
<blockquote>Back again, Aaron? People will say we’re in love.</blockquote>
No. Not love.
Quite the opposite, in fact.
<blockquote>(And oh yeah. We have AFFT, my wife and I.)</blockquote>
Yes, I know.
I was wondering how long it was going to take for <i>you</i> to find out. I don’t normally have to be quite so blatant.
Try to pay a little more attention to her, Jeff. After all, old habits die hard.
Be seeing you.
Back again, Toolshed? What is it with you?—can’t get enough of my hip milky goodness?
Go on. Get out of here. Get back to your “audience.” Go enlighten the peeps with out-of-context song lyrics and bad spelling masquerading as poetry.
And when next we meet, remember: <a href=”http://shopping.yahoo.com/shop?d=product&id=1921044769&subpage=main&clink=”>definitely wear lipgloss.</a>
The bottom line to this loony (and quite lengthy) thread is this:
If Jeff looked like Ann Coulter, and was of her gender too, I’d do him. What the hell, my sex life sucks anyhow, so come here, my Protein Wisdom studboy, and give us a kiss…
Does all this mean I can’t say “midget” any more?
Hey, Aaron:
Is it dark where you are? Does it smell?
Then maybe you should <i>pull your head out of your ass</i>.
Then go actually <i>read</i> my post and tell me where I said I was “unaware of anyone…using the word negro.” (Quote from your post.) Here, just to help you out, is the paragraph you skimmed without actually reading:
<blockquote>Incidentally, the same argument can be made for the word “Negro.” <b>I am not aware that the word is considered offensive either</b>, merely old-fashioned enough that no one uses it any more lest they want to sound weird. <b>The closest “derogatory” use of the word is when it is used in comedy or satire</b> by a character that is supposed to be clueless or ludicrous. <b>If “Negro” is supposed to be so offensive, then why hasn’t the United Negro College Fund changed its name</b>?</blockquote>
There. That help? I bolded relevant passages for clarity. Oh—and I am <i>aware</i> of your URL, and figured that your usage of “negro” fell within the designation “satire” (see above). Satire that falls rather flat, if you ask me (“negro” humor is so Seventies).
There, I’ve tried. It’s the best a cunt like me can do, eh?
If I looked like Ann Coulter and stayed male, I’d be Greg Allman, I guess.
Now zip that midget back up, DT.
“Get back to your ‘audience’?” Meaning, “Leave *my* audience alone – we were happy and homogenous before you arrived!”
Well Aaron, looks like the Uppity Negro and the Model Minority who refuses to bow into desired submission are not wanted in this country club.
Reactionary person that I am, I got fed up with a bunch of conservative assholes (who are not and never will be on the receiving end of the questionable label) getting upset over a state’s decision to change from “Oriental” to “Asian” in current pulbic documents. So I wrote the now infamous “unless you’re Asian…” line. Yet I’m a big girl, so though I don’t apologize for it, I will say that that is the only thing I may not have written if I were interacting with some reasonable individuals, of whatever color.
But it took this long before Mr. Jeff concedes that a state deciding to make this switch in the year 2002 ( because it recognizes the negative connotations the word posseses, even if some people looking in from the outside believe good-naturedly or ignorantly that “Oriental” just means “Asian or Eastern”), is not such a shocking or terrible thing? I thought teaching a bunch of high schoolers needed a lot of patience!
No one is out to “erase history” or prevent a misguided professor from grading essays by Asian students if he is an “expert” in the content the essays address (although I contend that you do not have a right to “grade” the legitimacy of their experiences if they find it wearisome or even *gasp* offensive to hear the “O” word still used to describe people instead of ramen because you are *not* an expert on that, no matter how many Asian wives you have).
I am (me, myself, and I…not anyone’s wife or otherwise) out to be the thorn in certain people’s side to make them rethink the words they choose to defend so vehemently instead of acknowledging the fact that words hold a world of meaning in them and that world of meaning isn’t always worth defending.
It wasn’t some spontaneous evil plan concocted by some mad man by the name of Shin to alter the language we use in current day public documents. “Oriental” has been outdated for a very long time. And how is it wasting our tax dollars to use “Asian” when new forms must be composed all the time anyway? We won’t be paying for some lonely and bitter scribe to go back and rewrite all the “Orientals” by hand!
Language changes. It’s nothing new.
And though I’m sure I’ll want to respond some more to whatever misinterpretations come next, I think I’ll refrain from doing so. You can breathe your sighs of relief.
Cue: Sighs of relief
I feel so, so disoriented.
Actually, I’d give Yoon a little more credit for that last post. I’m still trying to figure out what she’s so angry about, but when you set aside the “evil white man” stuff there’s an argument in there, so I’m going to take a shot a responding.
I fully agree that if the State of Washington or its political subdivisions find themselves needing to refer to people of Asian extraction, “Asian” or “Asian American” is a better term than “Oriental.” The available evidence suggests that they were doing so just fine before this law was enacted. So why was this law enacted? To pander to a racial constituency and to try to tell the rest of us how to use the language. I don’t like either motivation, and I suspect the same is true of most of the other posters who were ticked off by this statute.
But Yoon, seriously, I don’t think anybody’s out to get you here, and I especially don’t think that anybody’s attacking you because of your ethnicity. You may be having a different argument than we are, but we’re responding to your comments, not your history.
As I’ve lived in Japan and done business there for nearly 20 years, and married a Japanese woman, I thought I might be able to offer some thoughts on this matter.
But unfortunately I’m white, so apparently I can’t.
Rats.
Guess I’ll get myself back inter the holler and brew up some sour mash ‘shine. Man’s got ter know his place.
<p><i>Toren Smith is co-founder of <a href=”http://www.studioproteus.com/”>Studio Proteus</a>, translators of some of the finest manga currently available in the United States, including parts of <a href=”http://series.viz.com/nausicaa/index.html”>Viz Comics</a>’ english-language version of Hayao Miyazaki’s Eisner-nominated masterpiece, <a href=”http://www.nausicaa.net/”>Nausica&auml; of the Valley of Wind</a> (<a href=”http://www.diamondcomics.com/bookshelf/products/c_fant.htm#NAUSICAÄ%20OF%20THE%20VALLEY%20OF%20WIND”>Diamond</a> codes STAR01065, STAR01846, STAR04685, STAR06788).</i></p>
<p>Man, all the loa in the pantheon, I get posessed by frickin’ Larry Young. Where am I, anywa-*</p>
<p>Oh, I am <i>so</i> gonna kick his ass. . .</p>
<a href=”https://www.proteinwisdom.com/archives/Culture6.pdf”>Here</a> is the PDF doc of some notes and commentary I’ve put together on interpretation theory and word usage. These notes are geared toward a specific sequence of undergraduate honors seminars I taught a few years back, but they may nevertheless prove useful to those of you wishing to extrapolate out from them my particular take on interpretation.
The document is fairly lengthy and covers a wide-range of topics relevant to this thread, including a discussion on “race” and racial aesthetics, deconstruction, hermeneutics, semiotics, and intentionalism.
Don’t feel compelled to read it, especially if such things bore you. But don’t say I haven’t provided you with anything specific (you know who you are) on how I believe language to work.
Bored now.
<a href=”news:soc.culture.asian.american”>soc.culture.asian.american</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.japan”>soc.culture.japan</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.korean”>soc.culture.korean</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.vietnamese”>soc.culture.vietnamese</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.thai”>soc.culture.thai</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.china”>soc.culture.china</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.malaysia”>soc.culture.malaysia</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.cambodia”>soc.culture.cambodia</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.filipino”>soc.culture.filipino</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.hmong”>soc.culture.hmong</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.hongkong”>soc.culture.hongkong</a>
<a href=”news:soc.culture.pacific-island”>soc.culture.pacific-island</a>
Yoon was right. There’s just not that much diversity—of opinion or otherwise—in this discussion.
Jeff, why don’t you post your provocative little thoghts to the above groups, along with an invitation for people to come here for further sharing of ideas? After all, these are the people you’re talking about.
True, they might dismiss and ignore you as the obvious troll you are, but you never know until you try.
So go on. Hit the links. Let’s get this party started right.
Because if you don’t, I will.
Hmm. Well, I’m only half-Korean, so I can’t *really* contribute, but frankly, I prefer the term “oriental.” When I think, “Asian,” I think India and her cultural sphere. When I think “Oriental,” I think of (more or less) China, Korea, and Japan, and the rest of the Chinese cultural sphere. So the word (although this idiolect-ish sense is not historical) has a particular meaning for me. Asia’s so big, after all, and to lump it all together is rather stupid in my opinion.
I suppose one might take offense at the term anyhow, but seriously! Do white people really object to being called “Whitey” or “Gaijin” or “Gwailo?” When I’m in East Asia (the Orient-hah!) , they think I’m white, and I don’t particularly care what they call me. Sometimes they realise I’m a halfbreed, and there’s plenty of terms (derogatory) for that but nevertheless, I don’t particularly care. I’m not exactly in *denial* about what I am.
Oriental, as some have already pointed out for words in general, can only *really* be insulting if the word is uttered with the intent to insult. I suppose if one had bitter memories of being purposefully insulted in that fashion, then one might have reason to object to the term forever after, but otherwise, I don’t think it right to take offense. One is *free* to take offense, but that doesn’t make it sensible.
I recall (with embarrassment) one day when I was in high school, when I objected to a sort of themed garden party that my mother (1st gen. imm.) was putting together, by complaining that it smacked of “orientalism.” And she pointed out that that was the point.
Besides (While I’m droning on) look at that quote:
“In Europe and the United States, however, the term acquired a Eurocentric depiction of the worst of Asian habits and lifestyles.”
Worst of Asian habits or lifestyles? Like, uh, taking off your shoes when you enter a house, or maybe bathing regularly? Geez. No offense to white people (Gaijin! Gwailo!), but apart from the whole submission to hydraulic despotism thing, I’m of the opinion that ‘Asian’ habits were generally preferable to Western habits. Lifestyles, not so much because of the poverty of East Asia until this century, but stil . . . Unless one is suffering from some sort of ethnic insecurity, I don’t think the Orient has much to be ashamed of. I can sympathise somewhat with people coming from societies and lands on which civilisation has not left a particularly visible mark, but not with Asian people (yes, from India too) whining about White people looking down on this traditions.
-Taeyoung
I can’t understand where the comment is coming from either. It seems that all my life all I have heard about <i>Oriental</i> people was that they worked hard and their kids got good grades. If anything, their”lifestyle” has been held up as an example of what to imitate. Unless this is seen as insulting by some: “Don’t you dare stereotype me as hardworking and good at math! I’m as much of a lazy, do-nothing, beer-swilling, useless hunk of meat as any white kid!”
And I have read old newspaper stories (from the early twentieth century, say) where the word “Asian” was used in as much of a pejorative sense as “Oriental” or “yellow.” (For instance, talking about “the Asian menace” or the “yellow peril”—in fact, I would bet that “Asian” was used more than “oriental” because it had less letters in it.) The only reason “Asian” is being preferred today, in my opinion, is because of advertizing. No one seems to care that <i>both</i> words come from Latin.
Diversity! Because, God knows, diversity is an end unto itself.
Is Aaron for real or just an elaborate troll? It’s hard to tell who’s who withour your program…
Several reactions:
I remember when the word “homeless” was supposed to replace words like “bum” or “street people.” The idea was that this term not only was more “accurate,” but also less insulting. Yet, it didn’t take long for the term to be used in an insulting manner. (I remember once walking the streets of my fair city, and hearing a couple of nicely dressed ladies see a panhandler, and mutter, “Look at those <i>homeless</i>!” in that “Keep away from THEM” tone.
To Andrea, I’m afraid that there are some Asians/Orientals who do not want the “Model Minority” term applied to them. The idea that they are hard-working, etc., to these folks, both imposes an “impossibly high” standard (one which my parents actively sought to instill in us kids, but hey), as well as “the glass ceiling”. The latter, I’d venture, is not so much a function of the Model Minority aspect, but the “retiring” or “less assertive” element. I can understand the reluctance to embrace that, but I think there’s a lot o’ babies goin’ out w/ that bathwater.
Taeyoung’s comments, I thought, really hit a key element. If we are going to start parsing terminology (and I’m amused at Aaron’s list of sites, since none seemed to use the term “Asian” OR “Oriental” except “Asian-American”), then we actually can’t use either Asian or Oriental. The Taiwanese, you’ll note, have a separate site from both the Hong Kong-ese and the mainland Chinese. No doubt, Mongolians, Tibetans, Uighurs of Xinjiang and Manchurians might well decry that lumpen-chinoiserie element. So, one might well criticize Mr. Shin for imposing an inaccurate, overly broad term to begin w/. Stick w/ “Chinese-American”, Taiwanese-American, Hong Kong-ese American, Malay-Chinese-American, etc.
But where does Taeyoung fit, then?
Personally, I reacted the way I did to Justin Slotman’s comments PRECISELY because I believe that for Americans of Asian extraction (how’s that for relatively accurate but cumbersome), we have the opportunity to avoid sinking into this morass of hyphenation. That, since we are not automatically stuck into some racial category, and w/ a relatively good reputation, perhaps we hold out the best hope of forging an identity rooted in being AMERICAN, and that by asking to be judged by the content of our character, that we can show not only HOW it can be done, but that it CAN be done.
Dean, the only newsgroups using “Oriental” are under “alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.”
I thought a discussion of Asian fetish and rice-chasers would be hitting too close to home around here, and left them out.
Should I not have done that?
David, the answer to your question is yes.
My ancestry is Japanese, and I was born & raised in Hawai’i, so I don’t know what the excitement is all about. However, I am bemused by the fact that this discussion is dominated by non-Orientals, and that the name of the game is thrusting another label on us. I am not offended by the term, as it’s a little more specific than “Asian.”
Getting hung up on semantics diverts energy and effort away from the real issues facing people of Oriental ancestry in the United States today. We have made strides over the decades in leveling the playing field, but there is still residual discrimination when it comes to being considered for executive positions in Fortune 500 companies. I have personally heard that if you’re an Oriental, you’re not supposed to be fluent in English, have a congenital lack of leadership skills, and lack the capability of acquiring foreign languages. Since my parents were both native speakers of Japanese, I had to learn English as a foreign language, so you judge for yourself. We still have to fight stereotyping in the movies and on TV. And the controversy does nothing to ensure that we can send as many students to any university in the land on merit alone, without having to worry about quotas being assigned to other ethnic groups who are too lazy to secure slots in the leading schools the old-fashioned way, through hard work, parental support, and lack of pressure from peers to avoid academic excellence for fear of appearing white.