Reply With Quote
Set up a Chinaman Scholarship and all will be well again.
Im talking about drawing a line in the sand. Across this line, you DO NOT... oh and dude, chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian American, please.
Set up a Chinaman Scholarship and all will be well again.
I always thought that Chinaman was a really bad comedian.
I don't give a what you call him, just keep him off my rug. It really ties the room together.
Steve Kerr a couple of years ago also called Yao a "7 foot chinaman..."
there was a minor stink back then too.
BFD.
edit: oops, wireonfire beat me to it...
Last edited by Bender; 11-04-2009 at 02:43 PM.
Maybe next Monday Mike Tirico will call Kyle Orton a cracker, just to even up the score.
The term came from how the Brits referred to the people residing in the American colony. That the rest of the world has picked up on how the citizens of that former British colony identify themselves doesn't make the term vague or inaccurate.
I always laugh when people cite it as an example of how arrogant we are as a country, as though the intent all along was to somehow rob the rest of the two contintents of their iden y.
That wasn't my suggestion.The term came from how the Brits referred to the people residing in the American colony. That the rest of the world has picked up on how the citizens of that former British colony identify themselves doesn't make the term vague or inaccurate.
I always laugh when people cite it as an example of how arrogant we are as a country, as though the intent all along was to somehow rob the rest of the two contintents of their iden y.
Regardless of origin, calling people from the U.S. "Americans" is vague like calling people from China "Asians." That's all I was saying. Had nothing to do with any notion of American arrogance or the accuracy or inaccuracy of either term.
Rick Kamla apologizes.
http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/11/04/n...er-apologizes/
Excerpt from that link in the post above.
"Chinaman" is a term first used in a derogatory fashion in the American West beginning in the late 19th century. Anti-Chinese activists in California and throughout the West used the term to classify Chinese immigrants as subhuman.
Anti-Chinese sentiment is a sad legacy of the industrial boom of California in the post-Gold Rush era. European American-dominated unions led a fight to deny Chinese families the right to emigrate to the United States, culminating in President Chester Arthur's signing of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882. The law not only restricted entry for Chinese families, but prevented Chinese men and women already in the United States from leaving and returning at a future date. The act was not repealed until 1943, and unlimited Chinese immigration was not allowed under federal law until 1965.
WTF is the big deal?
Just eat your watermelon and shut up.
like the chinese aren't some what racist themselves. they refer to black people as monkeys.
Yi isn't an American.Im talking about drawing a line in the sand. Across this line, you DO NOT... oh and dude, chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian American, please.
That is because you dumbazz never got discriminated before. You don't know how it feels like.
Why is Yi American? Because he's living there?
Somewhat?They are the most racist.
You mean like all 1.2 billion of them refer to black people as monkeys? That's news to me.
And you are absolutely right, just because some/all of them are racist, they deserved to be discriminated against. This tactic has proven to resolve all racial discrimination in the world.
Okay, you side with those that say that a word isn't socially acceptable as far as someone (how many, btw? 1 person? 12 of them? a few thousands?) thinks it's offensive. I've already explained why I think that logic is bizarre.
Once again, for millions of people the "thumbs up" gesture is tremendously offensive. Do you do it? Are you going to stop doing it?
How is that excerpt relevant? Nobody is arguing that Chinamen weren't perceived as infra-human at some points in history. Just like blacks, hispanics, indians, jews and whites. But that alone doesn't make those words derogatory. How many times similar things were wrote about jews? By the same reasoning, jew should be a forbidden word as well.
The problem with that excerpt is that the judge implies the sub-humanity of the Asians, not the usage of the word "Chinaman". Chinaman was the word used to describe people with origin in China, the word used in government do ents, census, etc., so it's natural the judge used it. It's like saying that "latino" is a derogatory term because some racists guys can write "I hate latinos, they aren't even humans". Just like the Judge used Chinaman in that sentence, people were using it in absolutely neutral ways, like "Mom, I'm going to marry Wu. Who? Wu, you know, the Chinaman that works for uncle Tim. I love him" or "Wang, the Chinaman who won the elections to the city council, announced..." or "Hi, my name is Yang and I'm a 20 years old Chinaman living in New York".
There was never an inherent pejorative meaning to the word, and only in the the late 20th century that myth was created. That's the point here. Not if there was racism or hate directed towards people from China. I still can't understand why is the Vietnam War relevant to this at all.
Typical procedure of PC weirdos: if you don't want to conform to my cultural zeitgeist and my set of behaviours, then you're an obtuse racist.
You don't even make sense. You say that Tony and Luol can dictate to me what is offensive or not, then in the following sentence you say they cannot dictate to others what is offensive or not.
Acting with common decency is to understand that if a word, gesture or whatever is seen as offensive by you it may not be by people with a different culture, so it's wrong to accuse them of lack of decency just because they don't follow your codes.
That's a brilliant analogy.
Red- That was really weak Allanon. I'd expect better stuff from you.
Don't hide behind the "You didn't explicitly state...." argument. You're a bright person and I find it really hard to believe that you couldn't logically deduce what I meant........
So you don't hide again:
In the scenario I outlined above it would indeed be offensive and discretion should become the better part of valor for you at that point, at least when you're in the presence of Tony or Luol.
Green- Again, you missed the point. Regardless of the term or historical implications (you could subs ute the word pancake if you care to), the problem arises when the person you're addressing voices an objection to the use of said term. It might seem a bit irrational to you (as it does to me btw...), but you don't walk in their shoes either and have no perspective on what effect that term my have had on or in their lives. To say that the term unequivocally shouldn't offend a Chinese person is tantamount to me saying "Allanon, you really shouldn't be offended when I call you a n****r in public from time to time." Uncouple the use of the term and it's historical/archaic status as in the end it's irrelevant to most of the people who would receive your message. So you're left with walking away or respecting their wishes while laughing under your breath.
Are you attempting to justify the use of a term the someone might find offensive because you find that the term is archaic and there's no longer a historical basis for that person to feel offended? If that's the case I'd strongly urge you to put down the gavel and robes for a second and consider the message you send with that stance.
As someone else stated succinctly earlier: To me the term (china man, France man, etc.) isn't offensive at all, but now that I know a Chinese person might find it offensive, I'll strive to avoid it's use in everyday conversation with a Chinese person. Simple logic for some, difficult pride for others.
Bizzare or not, if it's offensive to said person, what are you left with? Read what I posted to Allanon above.
When in the presence of someone who I know finds it offensive, then yes I won't do it. It's something called common decency. Your posts indicate indignation at the thought of having to conform to someone else's societal norms, especially if they cons ute the minority, yet you wouldn't afford someone the common decency of not having to hear you use a term that you know to be offensive to them? Give me mine, but you can't have yours....... Again, interesting logic indeed.
Last edited by Agloco; 11-06-2009 at 10:42 AM.
Green- Wrong. I say that Tony and Luol can dictate you what THEY find offensive. At that point your response to their objections would tell most people all they needed to know about your character.
Red- So this is your excuse to continue the use of a term known to be offensive to someone, in their presence no less? It doesn't seem you're one to compromise much. I'd be interested in taking a trip with you to any part of the world where the thumbs up gesture is seen as offensive. How long do those strong convictions last I wonder? You'll no doubt respond with some passage containing much bravado, but in the end I believe that your logic chip would kick in.
You speak of conforming to societal norms, yet you'd refuse to exercise one of the most basic norms (common decency)?
I have no problem with conforming to societal norms as long as they're reasonable. Let me try to explain it to you: your idea that if Luol announces that he finds the word "Englishman" offensive we should stop using that word is absolutely scary. It's on Deng to prove that's he's reasonable motives to find the word offensive. If I don't find his reasons compelling, then surely not I won't stop using the word. And being a Kantian, of course I'd never apologize for using a word if I meant no offence or ill, no matter how much others feel offended.
Word are precious things and its usage or not usage is a common heritage, that doesn't belong to the arbitrary reasons of a group of individuals.
Green- I'm certainly not advocating that you stop the use of the term altogether. If you look closely at all of my posts, they clearly state "In the presence of <insert person here>". What exactly would you do if Luol asked you to stop using the term (whatever it might be...)?
Red- You have this confused with a court of law. Neither Luol nor anyone else need prove a thing to anyone except themselves in the court of social perception. It's a big part of what makes communication one of the hardest things to be effective at, much less master. As much as I'd love to agree with your logic, I disconnect when you insist on the continued use of a term which someone finds to be offensive while in their presence.
I'd ask him "Huh? Why?"
No, I don't. The idea that we should restrain from using some words and label those words as derogatory because an individual says he's offended by them is totally unreasonable and unacceptable in a civilized society.
I believe you are avoiding an absolute commitment to your position. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't curious as to why at this point. So, I put it to you again:
Of course you'd ask him why, but then after his explanation what would you do? WOULD YOU CONTINUE TO USE THE TERM IN HIS PRESENCE? For purposes of answering my question, you can assume that his explanation was in no way satisfactory to you. A simple yes or no will suffice here. Afterwards, I'd also be interested in hearing what would cons ute an adequate explanation in your eyes.
Red- I would counter that the continued use of that word (in that person's presence), after you become aware that it is offensive to that person, is equally if not more unreasonable and unacceptable in a civilized society. I think you be hard pressed to fight the notion that you are acting as an instigator in that instance, regardless of how correct you are about language and speech rights in general.
Last edited by Agloco; 11-06-2009 at 12:24 PM.
Me: Hey Luol, how do you, as an Englishman, feel about monarchy?
Deng: Don't call me an Englishman, please.
Me: Huh? Why?
Deng: Because I don't like to be called an Englishman?
Me: Eh... Weren't you born in England? Aren't you English?
Deng: Yes.
Me: So, you're an Englishman.
Deng: Don't call me that.
Me: Why not?
Deng: I find that word offensive?
Me: Englishman?
Deng: Yeah.
Me: Why?
Deng: Because I do.
Me: Are you serious? Is this some Monty Python sketch? Since when Englishman is a derogatory word?
Deng: I think it is.
Me: For any particular reason?
Deng: Not really.
Me: Yeah, sorry pal, you're an Englishman. We can't change the meaning of the words because we feel like it. If you have a paranoia about being called an Englishman despite the fact you are actually one, you should seek medical care as soon as possible.
Very fashionable thinking, very politically correct these days. Rude child.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
