(03-19-2017, 12:33 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: I kid you not, while I was in second year high school geography in Brazil they taught a 5 continent model. When I said that I was taught 7 continents I was looked at like I had 2 heads.

(03-18-2017, 10:27 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: So.......ok.

Is it....

Oriental Massage Parlor ?
or
Asian Massage Parlor ?

Asking for a friend.

(03-18-2017, 07:31 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because America is in the full title of our Nation.  The United States of America.  We are a Nation of States, all united under the common flag of America.

Besides, why should people only from SE Asia get credit for being Asian? I mean, no one looks at the average Vodka chugging Cossack and thinks, "Hey, he's Asian, perhaps he could help me with my Math homework.".

(03-19-2017, 10:43 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Do you think of the average vodka chugging Cossack as Oriental?

(03-19-2017, 11:00 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: No, not really.  In fact, I don't even refer to people from SE Asia as Orientals.  I just thought this was a good topic that we could all have a little fun with. 

(03-18-2017, 07:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: No, it's not.  I asked a serious question.  All I have received are canned answers.  It's not my fault if people want to deviate and have a little fun with the thread.

(03-18-2017, 08:24 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You claim to give a serious answer, but I felt none of your heart in it.  I don't want google canned responses.  Tell me why you think it's wrong to refer to people from the Orient as Oriental.  Keep in mind, I'm an old dude and remember when folks from East Asia were just fine with the term Oriental.

(03-19-2017, 11:39 AM)GMDino Wrote:

(03-19-2017, 11:40 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Ok, so I was having fun with the topic.

(03-19-2017, 11:00 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: No, not really.  In fact, I don't even refer to people from SE Asia as Orientals.  I just thought this was a good topic that we could all have a little fun with. 

(03-19-2017, 08:10 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Did they use Eurasia, or did they nix Antarctica?

(03-19-2017, 10:20 AM)xxlt Wrote: It took 35 posts for someone to ask the obvious question.

Thank you.

And this makes it official. I am not moving, but I will be registering to fraudulently vote for you for King of Coshocton or whatever lesser office you run for, so your name better damn well be on the ballot.

(03-19-2017, 12:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The definition of the Orient has changed over time. One definition is the area east of Europe which could mean the Cossacks are Oriental or Asian depending upon which term is preferred. I think it is more common for the British to use the term Oriental and Americans to use Asian. Although I don't think there is any standard. I think it is just something that has changed over time and varies by location/culture. I think if we looked at the US Census it would probably list Asian as a category instead of Oriental. I have some trouble with Asian vs. Pacific Islander. These terms and definitions aren't set in stone and change.

(03-18-2017, 08:07 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Yet, Japan is still commonly referred to as the "Land of the rising sun.".

(03-20-2017, 08:49 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Sorry but that's   New Orleans.

(03-18-2017, 04:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Why is it considered bad form to refer to people from SE Asia as Oriental?  I understand that Asian is now the preferred term of reference, but I'm not sure it means what everyone intends it to mean.  When a person says "Asian", the common thought is a person of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc. decent.  But alas, there are more Countries in Asia, and those people look nothing like the stereotypical "Asian" person.  I mean you have people from Russia, India, and many more, and they look nothing like the people commonly associated as being Asian.

So, why can't we still use "Oriental" to differentiate?

(03-20-2017, 08:49 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Sorry but that's   New Orleans.

(03-20-2017, 10:16 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The word Oriental itself evolved from meaning anyone East of Rome (the center of the West), so basically all of Asian, to meaning just those from Far Eastern countries (China, Korea, Japan, etc). 

Why did it go out of use? I'm not sure. New York banned the use of it in government documents and I read a transcript abut some reactions to it here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112465167

The Asian culture columnist for a newspaper says that it isn't necessarily an offensive term (just from the Latin word for East, so it's like saying Easterner or Westerner), but that there was some baggage attached to it from older racist campaigns of the 1800's and early 1900's. The guy basically said it's not the biggest deal that needs to be addressed, but when he personally thinks of the word he imagines incense and gongs and all of the images of Asian from the early half of the 1900's. 

I think it just fell out of use much like how Latino is becoming a preferred term over Hispanic and Black is often times more preferred than African American. Inuit is preferred over Eskimo by some people because it's not a native word and Eskimo might have derogatory origins (it might mean "eaters of raw meat" or "excommunicated" (non Christian in a negative way) ) but it might also come from a french word for using nets, lol. 

Anyone from South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka) wouldn't be considered Asian in the US or Australia as that term is mostly reserved for East Asians, but in other places they would be called Asian.


It's just one of those things that evolved in US culture. Asian has taken the place of Oriental and we use more specific terms for those from South Asian. 

(03-18-2017, 09:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think it is the most Politically Correct term we can come up with to describe what used to be the Mongoloid Race, before identifying people by similar genetic traits became taboo.

Asian has become a race; as you wouldn't classify the vast majority of Israelis as Asian.

(03-21-2017, 09:22 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It didn't become taboo, what scientists currently do is look at similar genetic traits. What they do not do is look at a few physical traits because they got to the point where they could declare that there were no common gene clusters for the races and decided that they should stop basing things off what some eugenics toting social scientists declared hundreds of years ago before the concept of genes even existed.