Quote Originally Posted by DanAronG View Post
Well boost, being an asian (I think) in a society that panders to the needs of everyone's littlest sensitivity it's no surprise you're overly sympathetic.
I am not Asian. And I think you are way off the mark, but I don't blame you because progress creates a sort of illusion of time. Society, in general, has progressed from being extremely insensitive, to being less insensitive. Since the status quo is at all times a state of insensitivity, then when there is progress it appears that everyone is being overly sympathetic.


Whilst I completely agree with your point, where does one draw the line? In the example you used above, you are stating that the historic derogatory use of the word has lead to the current offence attached to the term. I am fully aware through books, films and education of the way black people have been treated and the terms that have become offensive on the grounds of that. I do not use words such as Negro or any variation of it.
The idea that there has to be a clearly defined line drawn on the issue is a logical fallacy.. language is fluid and ever changing. If you don't care to keep up with it, then fine-- but know that there are words for people who don't bother to put any effort towards recognizing and acting in accordance with people's sensitivities... asshole, douchebag, etc.


I am not however fully aware of who may have dominated and controlled various different parts of asia or the terminoilogy such people may have used. You could argue that perhaps I should learn more. But I disagree. I don't intend to learn the histories of every dam country in the world, I have neither the time nor the desire. Or perhaps should we learn the history of every country and nation while in school? There are a hell of a lot of tribes and nations out there and it would probably be a bit too much of an ask to cover all of them, so maybe just groups who make up a certain percentage of the country you are educated in? But then what if we have an increase in immigration from a particular country? What exactly should be knocked off the syllabus to ensure a random group are not offended?
I do think that it is very sad how little we learn about world history in school... and yes I will argue that you need to educate yourself more if you wish to not come across as an insensitive assclown. Do you need to know about every little conflict that has ever taken place? No.. but a good start would be learning about the events and histories of things relevant to your daily life. Does the conflict between the Hutus and the Tutsis have anything to do with your day to day life? Probably not, and so I wouldn't expect you to know about each parties sensitivities and whatnot. But if you are going to involve yourself in events/groups/whatever where there is diversity, you should probably have a decent grasp of what is offensive language to the parties represented.

If a particular group doesn't want to be called a certain term, they should make sure everyone is aware of this and why and what they would like to be called.
yes, because minorities exist as singular entities-- singular entities that send out memos describing their sensitivities in detail...

Seriously though, people make mistakes and say offensive stuff... it happens, just learn from the mistake. You didn't know, now you do; act on the newly acquired knowledge.

I do not know how to differentiate between a person from Vietnam, Malaysia or Thailand based on looks alone. I do not know how to differentiate between black people from Botswana or Zambia on looks alone. I do not know how to differentiate between white people from France and Germany on looks alone. It seems it is perfectly acceptable to call the second group black, it is perfectly acceptable to call the third group white. I have no idea what I would call the first group accept asian, which gives no real idea as to who the fuck has robbed the bank.
Yes, as our society currently exists it is necessary to be able to classify people by race.. funny though that it is hard to imagine a scenario which does not involve criminal profiling in which it is a necessity. But what's your point? The fact still remains that some categorical labels are offensive.

FWIW, I never use the term oriental in describing someone and certainly won't now I know it's potentailly offensive. I guess my point is I think people can be a bit too sensitive. If a term is universally accepted as offensive (ie the "negro" example you used) and is still used then you can't complain when someone is offended. But if a word that is still used for decriptive reasons with regard to objects and isn't commonly known as being offensive is used and no offence is intended what so ever, then it is a bit pathetic to be offended.
Why are you so concerned with judging peoples right to be offended? If you feel that a particular person is overly sensitive, then try to be around them less. If you find that in general people are overly sensitive, then it's probably you who is the problem.

I can only imagine the term "American" will be next. I can't think of any place of origin that has as many negative connotations with it. The term American is generally associated with being loud mouthed, brash, arrogant, self centered, rude and liable to offend. If I was from Alaska say, would I really want to be known as American? Associating me with those gun toting, racist rednecks from the south?
As long as Americans are generally arrogant pricks, then in general Americans will not take offense, since they see the negative attributes they are being tagged with as positives. Think about the negative feelings people have towards rich people... they have these feelings, yet they still want to be rich themselves. Now think of a poor person... no one is thinking, "that guy is dirty, smelly and pathetic-- but I sure wish I was poor.. If I were poor, I'd be different!"

I am almost certain this post is likely to have pissed someone off. That's not my intention. I just go annoyed by the "white Englishman" comment.
I have not been offended, but I find it interesting that you were.. was I wrong in thinking you are a white Englishman? If I was not wrong, then why are you annoyed? Do you think my point is invalid?