U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2010, 11:45 PM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 13,474,780 times
Reputation: 6448
"Asian" I think was an ultimately confusing attempt to replace "Oriental." Although "Oriental" originally included Arabs, and anyone from East of Europe, it had reached a point of meaning "the ethnic group in East and Southeast Asia with epicanthic fold." (More offensively called "Slanty eyes.") However it became deemed offensive as it's used for objects and had an association with "Orientalism" which focused on the "odd" or "exotic" qualities of East/Southeast Asian cultures.

Still in some ways I think it's unfortunate "Oriental" died off because it makes more sense and works better. "Asia" is extremely broad and includes ethnicities or cultures that are more different than Europeans are from each other. "Africa" is even broader in some ways, but on the whole the US didn't get a significant amount of Pygmies or Khoisan or Malagasy or Masai. (France I think did get some Malagasy and even Pygmies) Anyway "Asian" as a term is, to me, borderline useless and at least some Asian-Americans basically agree. However I think no one has come up with a better replacement for "Oriental" or "Mongoloid", which was a word used for mentally delayed people so that one I understood as offensive without it being explained, so we're stuck with "Asian." I think some prefer using the actual nationality if you know it. (Japanese-American, Chinese-American, Vietnamese-American, Korean-American, etc)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2010, 01:52 AM
 
3,544 posts, read 4,685,822 times
Reputation: 1532
Quote:
Originally Posted by MimzyMusic View Post
Latino is not a race so much as a group of related cultures and ethnicities. When I hear "Asian" I think of East Asians and SE Asians, not so much Indians.
It's the opposite in Great Britain though. When people say "Asian" they are referring to Indians & Pakistanis mostly. They say "Oriental" for East & Southeast Asian. It's funny how Southeast Asian gets grouped with East Asian even though they are culturally more similar to Indians. (with the exception of the Vietnamese who are very Chinese-influenced)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2010, 02:22 AM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 13,474,780 times
Reputation: 6448
In some ways, but it's debatable.

Much of Southeast Asia is Buddhist and India is not, although Sri Lanka is. Burmese and Karen are Sino-Tibetan languages. Thai and Lao are in the Tai-Kadai family, which can be found in China but apparently not in India so far as I can tell. Khmer and Tagalog are Austronesian which doesn't seem to be associated to India or mainland China. (The aboriginal peoples of Taiwan are Austronesian) Cambodia and Thailand have had a fair degree of Indian influence at times, but I think the strongest Indian influence was in the past. The Khmer Empire had a strong Hindu element, but this declined and Cambodia now is reportedly over 90% Buddhist. The Cham were also strongly Hindu, but are today majority Muslim. I'm not sure Burma was ever Hindu. Still Southeast Asia is generally Theravada Buddhism which might make them more culturally influenced by Sri Lanka than East Asia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2010, 02:59 AM
 
3,544 posts, read 4,685,822 times
Reputation: 1532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R. View Post
In some ways, but it's debatable.

Much of Southeast Asia is Buddhist and India is not, although Sri Lanka is. Burmese and Karen are Sino-Tibetan languages. Thai and Lao are in the Tai-Kadai family, which can be found in China but apparently not in India so far as I can tell. Khmer and Tagalog are Austronesian which doesn't seem to be associated to India or mainland China. (The aboriginal peoples of Taiwan are Austronesian) Cambodia and Thailand have had a fair degree of Indian influence at times, but I think the strongest Indian influence was in the past. The Khmer Empire had a strong Hindu element, but this declined and Cambodia now is reportedly over 90% Buddhist. The Cham were also strongly Hindu, but are today majority Muslim. I'm not sure Burma was ever Hindu. Still Southeast Asia is generally Theravada Buddhism which might make them more culturally influenced by Sri Lanka than East Asia.
Khmer is not Austronesian. I think it's Austro-Asiatic. There are languages in India that are in that same language family. The type of Buddhism in SE Asia is more closely related to Indian culture. Buddhism came from India. Hinduism & Buddhism are closely connected, especially in that part of the world.

Indonesia & Malaysia also have strong Indian-influence. The Philippines did as well, but it's not really visible because of the more recent Chinese & Spanish influence
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2010, 03:23 AM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 13,474,780 times
Reputation: 6448
You're right. Tagalog looks to be Austronesian, but Khmer is Austro-Asiatic. I misread it.

It's been awhile since I read much on Southeast Asian so I was a bit off. Buddhism in India though had declined to a point it was largely limited to a few tribes and some places in the Himalayas before a revival among the "Untouchables." Still maybe I was underestimating the influence of India. I know Bali is quite Hindu.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2010, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Ohio, USA
471 posts, read 381,549 times
Reputation: 379
Latino is a race, Hispanic is not, there's a difference between Latino and Hispanic
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2010, 04:23 PM
 
3,544 posts, read 4,685,822 times
Reputation: 1532
Quote:
Originally Posted by CurlyFries View Post
Latino is a race, Hispanic is not, there's a difference between Latino and Hispanic
Latino is not a race, in original sense of the word. Race is generally not accepted anymore, but the races used to be:

Mongoloid- East Asians, Native Americans, Southeast Asians, Polynesians & Micronesians partially
Negroid- Sub-Saharan Africans
Caucasoid- Europeans, Middle Easterners, North Africans, Indians partially
Australoid- Australian Aborigines, Melanesians, Negritos of Southeast Asia, Ainus of Japan, Indians partially, Polynesians & Micronesians partially

Latin American has Mongoloid (Native Americans), Negroids (Africans), and Caucasoid (Spaniards, Portuguese, etc). I've also read that Australoids might have migrated into the Americas as well and mixed with the Mongoloids, forming Native Americans, but the Australoid element is much smaller than the Mongoloid element.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2010, 03:27 AM
 
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
60 posts, read 111,529 times
Reputation: 49
East Asians and Southeast Asians are related very closely genetically. Look up Haplogroup O. It's found exclusively in 95% of East Asian and Southeast Asian peoples, the mongoloids not the negritos/aborigines that live on some islands in the Philippines and Indonesia.

South Asians (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka) are considered Caucasoid or Australoid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Charleston
412 posts, read 475,320 times
Reputation: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWereRabbit View Post
Does an irish person have "anything in common racially" with a greek or a finn?
Of course they do. He's talking about phenotype. Now visulaize a Pakistani and someone from Vietnam..get the difference? No, Asian is not a race anymore than Hispanic is. Aisan is very broad term which is now used to replace the less PC.. Oriental, which usually refered to people with "slanted eyes" and was much more racially specific. Nowadays it seems the trend is to group according to geograhical regions or cultural affinities and not actual anthropological race.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2010, 05:19 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
1,372 posts, read 1,237,819 times
Reputation: 573
When people say "Asian" in America, they mean they're from China, Japan, Korea, Mongolia or Southeast Asia. When they say it in the UK they mean they're from the Indian sub-continent. It's really confusing, lol. Asia has a few different "races".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top