Posted on 07/21/2002 9:00:30 PM PDT by Avenger
A question: when did the usage of the word "oriental" to describe a person fall out of favor among the PC thought police? I recall entering the university around 1990 and being told repeatedly that "oriental" was a racially deragatory term and that "rugs are oriental, not people." I had never heard of such a thing before this and I had been closely involved with a number of "oriental" people in varying capacities for years prior to this. What's up with this? Is there really anything negative about the word "oriental?" I believe that the term is "occidental" for Westerner and "oriental" for people from the Far-East. Does anybody have any thoughts about this? I am curious about the origins of all this.
By the way, don't forget "asian" is racially offensive because "food is asian, not people!" ;-)
But do keep in mind that the term "colored" was once OK (witness NAACP). But then that was bad, and you had to say "black". But then that was bad, and you had to say "African American". They keep changing the rules so that what you say is wrong, whatever it is you say.
Usage Note: Asian is now strongly preferred in place of Oriental for persons native to Asia or descended from an Asian people. The usual objection to OrientalSource: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.meaning eastern
is that it identifies Asian countries and peoples in terms of their location relative to Europe. However, this objection is not generally made of other Eurocentric terms such as Near and Middle Eastern. The real problem with Oriental is more likely its connotations stemming from an earlier era when Europeans viewed the regions east of the Mediterranean as exotic lands full of romance and intrigue, the home of despotic empires and inscrutable customs. At the least these associations can give Oriental a dated feel, and as a noun in contemporary contexts (as in the first Oriental to be elected from the district) it is now widely taken to be offensive. However, Oriental should not be thought of as an ethnic slur to be avoided in all situations. As with Asiatic, its use other than as an ethnonym, in phrases such as Oriental cuisine or Oriental medicine, is not usually considered objectionable.
That's the point of this whole thing... if the left doesn't have something to kvetch about, they aren't happy.
Would they prefer it if we used the term "Mongoloid?" I doubt it. "Slant-eyes?" No, I don't think so.
If I had to describe a person to a policeman or other govt spy right now, and he/she looked East-Asian/Chinese, I don't know what I could say that would both describe that race, and not offend.
LOL!!!! Aren't they all on the smallish side?
So let me understand this. It's ok to refer to someone as "African American" , referring to the continent of Africa, (even if they originate from the West Indies), but it's not ok to refer to the continent of Asia?
Is it still ok to say "European?" And I wonder if Canadians and South Americans (is it ok to call them South Americans??) object to the term something-American (as in Italian-American). After all, they are Americans too, in a way.
Actually, they are normally considered to form the boundary between Asia and Europe. Mount Elbrus is often classed as Europe's tallest mountain.
I think its after he killed his white wife and her boyfriend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.