EStrict
Posts: 729
Joined: 1/11/2004 Status: offline
|
I have to admit I find this interesting. Words that are considered *slurs* in the English language (American) are stated such in the dictionary. Take for example: nigger, Chink, honky, spic, wet back.... Well, I might be able to find and/or think of others, but the point is each of the words about AS PART of their definitions states that they *often ofensive* or something to that nature. The word *Oriental* however, does not. It there are those of Asian heritage that find it so, it could be that it is no different from a submissive finding it offensive to be called a slave, or an eighteen year old finding it offensive to be called a child. I have used the word *Oriental*, though someone I would refer to as such may find it offensive, but when I use it, I use it with this dictionary definition: Main Entry: Oriental Function: noun Date: 15th century : a member of one of the indigenous peoples of the Orient Orient: 2 : capitalized: EAST Yes, the definition goes back fairly fair, and *Asian* is a newer, yet correct definition, but they are still considered *valid* words. I can so no logic in a correlation between referring to someone as Oriental to referring to someone of dark skin with what is a slur on their skin color and nothing more. There are slurs used that do have the some connotation for those of Asian heritage, but it is not Oriental.
_____________________________
Sandy Don't take life too seriously, no one gets out alive anyway...
|