Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
I'm always puzzled that Americans seem to divide the world into 4 races - whites, Asians, Blacks and Jews. Realistically, the world is far, far more complex and suggesting there is a single "asian" people is counter-productive.
What do these people have in common?
1) A Muslim Pakistani soldier of Pathan origin, native language Urdu
2) A Flores Indonesian fisherman, Christian, of mixed Indonesian-Portuguese blood, native language Bahasa
3) A Cao Dao Buddhist Viet Namese doctor from Saigon, native language Viet Namese
4) A Buddhist monk from Pagan, Burma, native language Shan
5) A Hindu Tamil IT worker from Sri Lanka, native language Tamil
These people actually have nothing in common at all - not skin type, nor religion, nor language, nor lifestyle, nor genetic code nor ancestry nor common experience. Some may be natural enemies.
So why do so many Amercians' insist on referring to Asians and Blacks as if they were single people with single traits, habits, skills and faults?
Unfortunately, most Americans cannot tell where a person comes from by just looking at them. I agree that not all persons of a certain look or coming from the same hemisphere should be lumped together but is there really a way for us not to do this? Most of us probably don't even know what peoples are enemies of others or what differences there are in the histories and cultures. If we see a "black" person, we don't know that they may be from the U.S., the islands, or Africa. All we reference in describing them (if we don't know them or have talked to them) is to base it on their appearance. Same for anyone we think looks "Asian". It may be offensive to the people we label but unfortunately, it is what it is.
I can say I have never said anyone is Jewish unless they have told me they are Jewish. I don't think they have a typical "look" and I always thought Jewish was a religion anyway and not a race.
I don't know any Asians who are bothered by this term.
Just a few decades ago they were called "Oriental" or "Chinese" even if they were Korean, Japanese, Etc. If they were not Chinese they would calmly just correct the person and state the correct country they were from. Very rational. That was back in the days when a lot of people had a friend like "Data" (Jonathan Ke Quan - Very talented child actor from the 80s) but I think he was from Vietnam.
Because " Asia " is the continent from where they came. The same as " North American" includes Canadians. "Europe" includes Brits who swear they are not European. In fact Scottish and Irish hate to be called Brits. I know my relatives in England include India and Pakistan when they speak in regard to " Asian " whereas myself would only think of Oriental. I know it all seems so confusing and stupid to always try to put everyone in a catagory. I never knew I was considered a " Caucasion" until I came to the US. You should not have to put these catagories on any job or college application.
Obviously one could say the same thing about 'white.' What does the avg Greek from Megara have in common with a Sami reindeer herder from Finland? Or a Basque from Spain or France, or Russian from Vladviostock. But all are labeled as 'white.'
Even more ludicrous is the term 'people of color' which divides the world into 'white' and 'all others.'
I never understood it either, though from your numbers I would guess 3 and 4 could be lumped together into the same racial category.
There is nothing racially or culturally similar between someone from southern India and someone from Korea. I don't know why they are grouped together on the census as being the same. At the very least I think we should have an East Asian check box and a South Asian check box. Possibly a Western Asian check box as well as most West Asians (Arabs, Turks, Kurds) are very wrongly classified as white on our census.
Obviously one could say the same thing about 'white.' What does the avg Greek from Megara have in common with a Sami reindeer herder from Finland? Or a Basque from Spain or France, or Russian from Vladviostock. But all are labeled as 'white.'
Even more ludicrous is the term 'people of color' which divides the world into 'white' and 'all others.'
All of those groups you mentioned are white though (some Greeks and Russians maybe not). It makes sense to classify as the same.
I never understood it either, though from your numbers I would guess 3 and 4 could be lumped together into the same racial category.
There is nothing racially or culturally similar between someone from southern India and someone from Korea. I don't know why they are grouped together on the census as being the same. At the very least I think we should have an East Asian check box and a South Asian check box. Possibly a Western Asian check box as well as most West Asians (Arabs, Turks, Kurds) are very wrongly classified as white on our census.
Yeah, i would rather to label myself as east asian than the general term "asian" east asian, south asian,, southeast asian and west asian are entirely different groups
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
