Quote:
Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter
xenorager is real correct about the term oriental, but it still has derogatory connotations as it was used as a encompassing term for people of a variety of ethnic backgrounds from a variety of different regions that white people designated to them because, frankly, white people at the end of the 19th centyr didn't care.
|
Well....
IMO, people need to get over it. It's like you can't say "Black American" anymore, you have to say "African American". Every other race (except caucasians) have politically correct terms that can be used to note their race or anything else about their background origins. I don't care for political correctness, but some of it doesn't make sense at all.
IE: using the term Asian could mean anyone from the former USSR to as far east as Japan. It's a stupid term and does the exact same thing that "Oriental" did. You have an even further range of people who are from asia and being grouped into the same category. For that matter, you have "Latino" as another one. Do you know how spread the latinos are? We're talking global, not just regional.
N E Rate....
You could argue racial symantecs as much as you want, but truth is that anytime you create a label, there will always be people mislabeled within that group.
BTW...
Funny story. I had an "African American" manager. She was from South Africa (where the majority of the population is white.) Because of her origins, she claimed African American, but people interviewing her would always expect a black person to come in, but instead they get her. I guess there are always loop holes to every label/stereotype/grouping. Go figure.