03-18-2017, 06:17 PM
(03-18-2017, 06:02 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That is just some BS line of crap off of NPR..
Yes, it was informative. The Orient is East and Southeast Asia, thus making people from that region Orientals.
When referring to Asians, it is a much broader connotation that is implied. The person in question could be Russian, Indian, Ukrainian, Mongolian, or any number of cultures. Like I said previously, it's just as wrong as labeling all Black people "African American", as they could be from Jamaica, Trinidad, any South American Nation, or a whole host of places. Labeling people based on their appearance is just, wrong..
Descriptive and labeling aren't the same thing. If I say I'm of European ancestry that's more specific than saying I'm Caucasian. Asian has been understood as referring to people from the Asian continent that would have fallen under the previous term of oriental. Indians, while part of the continent are referred to as Indians and Afghani's and Pakistani's are referred to as Middle Eastern. These terms weren't pulled out of a hat, they evolved and they really aren't PC, they're just descriptors. We use them to describe people because the definitions are shared and thus easily understood. African-American is not the same thing, it is an invented term that you rightfully label as PC. Not that it's wrong or bad, but it certainly didn't evolve organically and it is not a shared descriptor for many people. You are quite correct that the term would be misapplied to Jamaicans, South American blacks or actual African blacks.
Essentially the point being made is that descriptors help you do exactly that, describe.
