How ridiculous is the euphemism "African-American"

[birdlike 0]

I was thinking about this as I read the newspaper recently.

I was reading an article that could not refer to blacks as "African-Americans" because the blacks were, I think, Canadian.

So it got me thinking, ok, America is the only country where we feel like we are "doing the right thing" by going along with the black preference (is it even universal among black people in the first place?) to use "African-American" instead of "black." I mean, it has to be the only one, because you would not refer to blacks in England as "African-American" (duh!) and I can't imagine they call them "Black-Brits" or something dumb like that. I don't know that they call them anything but "blacks" there. Or Canada.

So given that America is the only place where PCism demands that we can no longer use "black" and have to use "African-American," can't we say definitively that it's fuckin' stupid? If the kind of black person who prefers and demands "African-American" goes to Canada and hears "black," does she get offended?

Let's hear your views about using this euphemism, please. I'm serious, I can't see how, in light of this hitch, it can even have survived as long as it has.

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[akarunway 1]

Quote

I was thinking about this as I read the newspaper recently.

I was reading an article that could not refer to blacks as "African-Americans" because the blacks were, I think, Canadian.

So it got me thinking, ok, America is the only country where we feel like we are "doing the right thing" by going along with the black preference (is it even universal among black people in the first place?) to use "African-American" instead of "black." I mean, it has to be the only one, because you would not refer to blacks in England as "African-American" (duh!) and I can't imagine they call them "Black-Brits" or something dumb like that. I don't know that they call them anything but "blacks" there. Or Canada.

So given that America is the only place where PCism demands that we can no longer use "black" and have to use "African-American," can't we say definitively that it's fuckin' stupid? If the kind of black person who prefers and demands "African-American" goes to Canada and hears "black," does she get offended?

Let's hear your views about using this euphemism, please. I'm serious, I can't see how, in light of this hitch, it can even have survived as long as it has.

Trolling trolling trolling nigger nigger nigger

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Andy9o8 0]

I'm going to bill you for my keyboard, as I just spit my coffee onto it.

[birdlike 0]

Shoulda turned your head to cough.

By the way, no, the post is not meant to be a troll at all. And I am not trying to get people to discuss that word.

I really just want to look at what I feel is the absurdity of using "African-American." I'm opposed to the entire "hyphenated-American" thing in the first place, but it's particularly stupid to apply "African-American" to blacks in America when no other country does this kind of thing to desperately avoid the word "black," and if you're talking about a black person in any other country, you're essentially stuck calling them black.

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Shoulda turned your head to cough.

By the way, no, the post is not meant to be a troll at all. And I am not trying to get people to discuss that word.

I really just want to look at what I feel is the absurdity of using "African-American." I'm opposed to the entire "hyphenated-American" thing in the first place, but it's particularly stupid to apply "African-American" to blacks in America when no other country does this kind of thing to desperately avoid the word "black," and if you're talking about a black person in any other country, you're essentially stuck calling them black.

You really do miss the 'good ole days' when you could call a spade a spade, don't you?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Quote

Shoulda turned your head to cough.

By the way, no, the post is not meant to be a troll at all. And I am not trying to get people to discuss that word.

I really just want to look at what I feel is the absurdity of using "African-American." I'm opposed to the entire "hyphenated-American" thing in the first place, but it's particularly stupid to apply "African-American" to blacks in America when no other country does this kind of thing to desperately avoid the word "black," and if you're talking about a black person in any other country, you're essentially stuck calling them black.

You really do miss the 'good ole days' when you could call a spade a spade, don't you?

I guess that if I were being asked to do some deep thinking, I'd go the cheap route like you are going and just call the guy asking the question a racist and be done with it, rather than have to burn a few mental calories.

You can feel free to recuse yourself right now, no harm no foul, if you don't want to do anything but make cheap allegations when you don't know me or what you're talking about. I promise I won't even ask, "What happened to jenfly00?"

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[Baksteen 84]

You might argue that many (most?) of them have never even seen Africa but on TV.

Over here calling people blacks ('zwarten') has a decidedly racist flavour to it nowadays.
Instead you're supposed to call them either 'allochtoon' (alien) or Moroccan, Turk, Surinam or whatever. Which may sound just as negative depending on how you say it.

Bottom line, IMO it's you that's racist, not the words you use. (general statement, not directed at anyone in particular)

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[rushmc 18]

I feel all hyphenated (Insert Country here) labels are agenda driven. I am an American who happens to be (insert ethnic/race descriptor here) is the way it should be.

But doing it that way (the second way)does not support the "agenda".

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Shoulda turned your head to cough.

By the way, no, the post is not meant to be a troll at all. And I am not trying to get people to discuss that word.

I really just want to look at what I feel is the absurdity of using "African-American." I'm opposed to the entire "hyphenated-American" thing in the first place, but it's particularly stupid to apply "African-American" to blacks in America when no other country does this kind of thing to desperately avoid the word "black," and if you're talking about a black person in any other country, you're essentially stuck calling them black.

You really do miss the 'good ole days' when you could call a spade a spade, don't you?

I guess that if I were being asked to do some deep thinking, I'd go the cheap route like you are going and just call the guy asking the question a racist and be done with it, rather than have to burn a few mental calories.

You can feel free to recuse yourself right now, no harm no foul, if you don't want to do anything but make cheap allegations when you don't know me or what you're talking about. I promise I won't even ask, "What happened to jenfly00?"

Guy #1: Why do you never have anything nice to say about my home?

Guy #2: Dude, you live in a sewage tunnel!

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[SpeedRacer 1]

At least "African-American" is more accurate than "black", just as "European-American" is more accurate than "white". Any anthropoligist will tell you there are no distinct & separate "races" or other ethnic groups that can be properly designated as "blacks" or "whites".

The whole black/white thing has been bullshit from the start. They never existed.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[AWL71 0]

I agree that it is stupid and driven by political correctness. It is even more stupid that you are considered a racist if you have this opinion. Since my family has mainly British and German roots I demand to be called a British/German American!

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

At least "African-American" is more accurate than "black"

Is it? What about people descended from Jamaican immigrants?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[SpeedRacer 1]

1) they were immigrants from Africa to Jamaica before they were immigrants from Jamaica to the USA.

1) They aren't literally "black"

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[diablopilot 2]

By that logic, I'm African-American.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[AWL71 0]

Quote

1) they were immigrants from Africa to Jamaica before they were immigrants from Jamaica to the USA.

1) They aren't literally "black"

Whites are not literally "white." Being called white does not bother me even though I am not white. Any given label only has as much power or meaning as it is given.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[SpeedRacer 1]

exactly.

black & white are ridiculous (and inaccurate labels) too.


edited to add: some people have said/implied that if Obama gets elected President it will mean some sort of great landmark or progress has been made in "race" relations.

I say that great progress will have been made when we no longer get excited about, or even give a shit one way or the other about someone's skin color.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

At least "African-American" is more accurate than "black", just as "European-American" is more accurate than "white". Any anthropoligist will tell you there are no distinct & separate "races" or other ethnic groups that can be properly designated as "blacks" or "whites".

The whole black/white thing has been bullshit from the start. They never existed.

Concur.

It’s been well established that the number of individual genetic differences within a “race” (or localized population) are greater than between “races.”

And not dissimilar to Oriental vs Occidental labels.

---- ---- ----

Imo, the objection to use of "African-American" is a contrived controversy to deflect from talking and thinking about more substantive and more difficult issues that frequently do not have single, simple causative independent variables or single points that *any* person or group can pinpoint for blame: infant mortality; primary education, including greater exposure to lead-based paint (which negatively impacts neurological development & exposure is 5x greater for black children than white children); absence/abrogation of responsibility of too many black fathers; and economics, including income disparity, access to healthcare, and (child) poverty rates.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[billvon 2,435]

"African-american" is not a euphemism. A euphemism is the substitution of an offensive or unpleasant phrase with one that is inoffensive. So unless you think either "African" or "American" is unpleasant, it's not a euphemism.

[Steel 0]

Quote

Quote

And not dissimilar to Oriental vs Occidental labels.

---- ---- ----

Imo, the objection to use of "African-American" is a contrived controversy to deflect from talking and thinking about more substantive and more difficult issues that frequently do not have single, simple causative independent variables or single points that *any* person or group can pinpoint for blame: infant mortality; primary education, including greater exposure to lead-based paint (which negatively impacts neurological development & exposure is 5x greater for black children than white children); absence/abrogation of responsibility of too many black fathers; and economics, including income disparity, access to healthcare, and (child) poverty rates.

VR/Marg

Its funny that you linked this because I let it go that day becuase I didn't want to keep going back and forth. None the less, I think your arguements were completely spinning circles going no where.

If Oriental can refer to objects from Southeast Asia, it would be logical to assume that it refers to people from Southeast Asia too. When you can find me an advertisement for an Oriental rug that was not built in a Southeast Asian country, then your arguement might make sense.

For the record once again, India is not in Southeast Asia, and is therefore not Oriental.

Below here is an expert that addresses the same issue. Its funny how it mentions the views in Europe verses the U.S. I was I in my birth country of Spain last week and was in what they referred to the Oriental Square. Its funny how everybody there was from Southeast Asia and none of them seemed to feel as if they were offended by being referred to as Orientals. Any below is the exerpt and here is the link if you wish to go to the page for more info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asians

Orientals and the Orient
The term "Oriental" (from the Latin word for "Eastern")[32] was originally used in Europe in reference to the Near East. It was later extended to the rest of Asia, but came to refer to Northeast Asians and Southeast Asians in the 19th and 20th century US,[33] where most Asians were Chinese (and later Japanese and Filipino). By the late 20th century, the term had gathered associations in North America with older attitudes now seen as outmoded, and was replaced with the term "Asian" as part of the updating of language concerning social identities,[34] which critics have derided as political correctness.[35] In Europe however use of the term oriental for a east Asian has no negative connotations attached and is commonly used since here 'Asian' is taking to mean a South Asian.

If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass.
Can't think of anything I need
No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound.
Nothing to eat, no books to read.

• Quote

[AWL71 0]

Quote

exactly.

black & white are ridiculous (and inaccurate labels) too.


edited to add: some people have said/implied that if Obama gets elected President it will mean some sort of great landmark or progress has been made in "race" relations.

I say that great progress will have been made when we no longer get excited about, or even give a shit one way or the other about someone's skin color.

Good point. I could not agree more.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[quade 3]

All euphemisms are ridiculous.

Who are we trying to protect by using a euphemism anyway? Doesn't matter, they already know what the euphemism stands for and if they are offended by the word it really means, then they -should- be just as offended by whatever euphemism is used in it's place.

If I use "the n-word" who -exactly- doesn't know that I mean the word "nigger". I completely agree that "nigger" is a horrible word and I only use it here as an example. If I'm going to talk about Michael Richards using the word in a comedy club and I'm going to quote everything he says -except- the actual word, then what's the point of even quoting him? Everybody knows the word I would mean by "the n-word" so if the meaning comes across without ambiguation, then it is essentially the same word.

Euphemisms are silly and do nothing except in the minds of people that are programmed to respond like a Pavlovian dog to a word. To everyone else, they -ought- to be just as offensive.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Icon134 0]

Wouldn't a Canadian technically still be considered a member of North America and as such still be able to be considered an "African-American"?

having said that I generally think of people as people... and everyone starts at the same level then moves up or down depending on their actions...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

say that great progress will have been made when we no longer get excited about, or even give a shit one way or the other about someone's skin color.

Bingo.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

having said that I generally think of people as people... and everyone starts at the same level then moves up or down depending on their actions...

interesting concept - taking people as individuals instead of bucketing them (or people bucketing themselves) into arbitrary groupings

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[nerdgirl 0]

Actually the Wikipedia that you cite supports what consistently I’ve written (& does not support your assertions).

Let’s revisit and examine. You quote the Wikipedia article on “Asian People”:

Quote

“Orientals and the Orient
“The term "Oriental" (from the Latin word for "Eastern")[32] was originally used in Europe in reference to the Near East. It was later extended to the rest of Asia, but came to refer to Northeast Asians and Southeast Asians in the 19th and 20th century US,[33] where most Asians were Chinese (and later Japanese and Filipino).

Where do you think the Near East is?

In addition to the examples disproving your claims that "Orient" = "Southeast Asia" (Orient Institute, Oriental Express), where do you think the Mizrahi ('Oriental') Jews originate from? (One more example ... I can keep providing them as they occur to me.)


Back to what I wrote previously

Quote

The Orient is/was historically any & all places east of Roman Christendom from the Middle East (including the Levant) through southern Russia along the Silk Road (including Persia & Afghanistan) north to Manchuria and south through the Philippines. The British colonials referred to India as part of the Orient.

That pretty much sounds like the Wikipedia quote *you* cite.

And what I have asserted consistently: That the ambiguity of the term “Oriental” is part of why it’s not a particularly useful term other than as a historic artifact or mild invective


Since you prefer Wikipedia, perhaps you missed this from the entry you cited:

Quote

According to Sharon M. Lee in her 1998 publication, for many non-Asian Americans in the United States (in 1998) Asian American means Oriental, Chinese American or Japanese American. This is due to the Chinese and Japanese immigrants being the first Asian immigrants into the United States.[9]”

(I.e., history is important when considering evolution of language, as I've written before.)


Or from the Wikipedia entry on “Oriental Studies”

Quote

“Oriental studies is the academic field of study that embraces Near Eastern [where is that again?] and Far Eastern societies and cultures, languages, peoples, history and archaeology; in recent years the term Asian studies has mostly replaced the older term. European study of the region had primarily religious origins, which has remained an important motivation until recent times. Learning from Arabic medicine and philosophy, and the Arabic translations from Greek, was an important factor in the Middle Ages.”

“An institutional distinction between East and West did not exist as a defined polarity before the Oriens- and Occidens-divided administration of the Emperor Diocletian's Roman Empire at the end of the third century CE.”

“In most North American universities, Oriental Studies has now been replaced by Asian Studies localised to specific regions, such as, Middle Eastern or Near Eastern Studies, South Asian studies, and East Asian Studies. This reflects the fact that the Orient is not a single, monolithic region but rather a broad area encompassing multiple civilisations.”

Quote

For the record once again, India is not in Southeast Asia, and is therefore not Oriental.

No one ever said it was …

I tried to use an example of an inadvertent mistake I made while I was moderating discussions between Indian and Pakistani nuclear physicists and military officers on the Kashmir conflict in Moscow in July 2003. The geographic label was not relevant to what was being discussed in Moscow; use of an innapropriate word was problematic for communication. Additionally, I chose to not stubbornly persist or rationalize, but instead acknowledged the error and refocused on the issue. In this conversation, I tried to use it to illustrate how problematic the use of imprecise (or wrong) labels is. Previously I did not go into this pedantic exegesis because I thought that was obvious; I apologize for the misassumption on my part.

Since you bring up the use of the term "Orient" in the context of India, however, where do you think the British P&O line terminated? The East Peninsular and Oriental Steamship was the main line for British travelers to India during the last century or so of British colonial rule, named because India was considered part of the Orient.

Much of the objection to the use of the term Oriental can actually be credited to/blamed on British Colonials in India, such as Thomas Macaulay, who was the architect of Britain's Educational Policy in India and who wrote:

“We must do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, words and intellect. I never found one among Orientals, who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. It is, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in Sanskrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England.”

Sanskrit is a classical langauge of India, not China, Korea, Japan, Thailand, Cambodia or any of the areas of East Asia or Southeast Asia.

Where do you think Orient Technologies is located? Mumbai, New Delhi, Bangalore … showing the historical artifact of Orient as an identifier for India. Orient Technologies doesn’t make rugs; they are an IT company.


It comes down to you wanting to hold on to use of word that makes it difficult for you to communicate precisely because of its ambiguity. Someone else pointed out that for large number of people, it’s considered offensive. You reacted dismissing that assertion. (Very few people like to be challenged as being offensive -- altho' there may be a few who seem to take pride it -- and even fewer like to be told they’re wrong. Myself among them. I’ve patiently tried to show why it’s problematic geographically, culturally, ethnically, and historically. Sticking to the topic. If you want to use of a word that makes it more difficult for you to communicate, that’s your choice; that does not make your assertions accurate or precise.

Or to quote [birdlike] “Man, it's very frustrating that I have to spend most of my time in SC chasing down and explaining why bad analogies are bad.”

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying