I’ve gotten into a bit of trouble with a friend of mine over my use of “Oriental” rather than the more common “Asian” in conversation. When called on this thus far I’ve either dismissed it (“… Oriental-” “Asian.” “Yeah…) or given the disingenuous but very quick explanation that the words are functionally identical because they both roughly mean “east”.

I’ll now go into detail about my conscious word choice, to clarify my thoughts and to demonstrate I’m not just an asshole. Of course this in no way asserts that I’m not an asshole, if for no other reason than it’s nearly impossible to talk about these things without sounding like an asshole. I’m okay with being thought an asshole. Take that as a warning before you continue.

First, the two words are not the same, and the polite convention of using “Asian” to refer to people from or originating in the Far East is grossly inaccurate.

Asia is a specific landmass. Its boundaries are the Ural and Caucasian Mountains, the Black and Caspian Seas and the Sinai Peninsula on the west, the Indian Ocean in the south, the Pacific Ocean in the east, and the Arctic Ocean in the north. If that’s a bit much, just look at this. It’s huge.

Asia also contains a wide variety of peoples including Arab, Persian, Turkic, Indic, Mongol and Sinic. The term Oriental, at least the way I’ve always understood it to be applies only to the end of that list, particularly the final entry. Using Asian to mean the last one, or maybe even the last three to the exclusion of the others (and autochthonic and hybridized peoples I’ve neglected, this should not be taken as an exhaustive list) is not only incorrect, but unfair. Saudis are just as Asian as Koreans. Yeah, one of the asshole moments occurred in the preceding parenthetical statement, when I wrote off potentially millions of people as “hybridized”. I did warn you.

When you (a hypothetical you) say Asian do you mean Chinese? Japanese? Any combination thereof? What about Indians? Tamils and other Dravidian as well as native Hindi speakers? Hindi, by the way is an Indo-European language that possibly originated on the other side of the Caspian Sea. Is it a gross generalization that applies to anyone who has epicanthic folds? Maybe we should just call such people Epicanthic! Oh, wait, Indians generally don’t have them, and…. Yeah I’m going to stop right there (thank you, Wikipedia). But are Indians Asian? If so, why not Arabs? Are they white or something? Well, some say they are. Caucasian, at least. If you still use that term.

But really, think about it, when (hypothetical) you says Asian, who exactly are you talking about?

When I say Oriental I’m referring specifically to people originating or resident in the Chinese influenced lands (don’t get pissed about that, that whole area was influenced by China much like all of Europe and thus North America was influenced by Rome. Deal.) on the Pacific mainland coast of Asia. Is it a fuzzy definition? Oh, yeah. Is it more accurate than “Asian”? Definitely. Is it impolite? Apparently, but I don’t know why.

I can see two reasons right now. One is political correctness. Now, I realize that term is often swung about as a blunt instrument by conservative or populist minded Americans. I’ve no intention of going into any depth on the subject, but I can see some well intentioned adherent to McCarthyism of the left deciding that Oriental as a term carried too much baggage from the era of European & American commercial aggression. No part of that argument carries no weight with me. Of course, I have to cop to being a native of one of the aggressor states. Oh well.

I never bought into PC terminology. Redefining things doesn’t solve problems, it just makes it easier to ignore them and maybe feel better about yourself. I’ve always thought in terms of functionally correct, a balance in being specific and concise and as long as terms aren’t specifically insulting, hurt feelings are the problem of the person who carries them.

The other argument is murkier and I only mention it as separate because of the way PC is bandied about as a pejorative. This motivation seems to be linked to a certain disdain for perceived ethnocentricity and a related desire to be more in line with what other populations self identify as, or with. Maybe I’m the murky one on this. In short: descendants of Oriental migrants seem to like being referred to as Asian. Is that an offshoot or consequence of PC? I dunno. I wonder if Japanese or Thai nationals think of themselves in any way as members of a larger East Asian commonality. And where Indians and Afghans fit into that. Let alone Turks.

But it really doesn’t matter. Members of other ethnic/cultural groups can refer to those outside themselves however they want (although I encourage the not specifically insulting standard). Yes, I speak in defense of ethnocentricity. Humans are relative and subjective creatures with a limited sensory envelope. Attempts to build a universal or species-wide understanding are foolish and doomed to fail, if only from non-participation (as one example, I would take a stand against anyone practicing female circumcision, but I digress).

There is of course a limit to how far ethnocentricity should be taken. It’s natural for a Vietnamese to think Vietnam is awesome, likewise a Belgian about Belgium. But only a Texan believes that a Vermonter should think Texas is better than Vermont. In short, don’t act like a Texan, especially if you’re from Texas. Or Japan or Germany. Or Portland.

So, political correctness bad, ethnocentricity good. Just one last note on the cultural sensitivity tip: which Asian language the word Asia from? Ooh, sorry, it’s Greek, a European language. Yeah, trick question, but I guess you’re still participating in cultural imperialism. Sad.

Okay, that was a deliberate asshole moment. I couldn’t help it.

That’s my point. Asian is a bad word to describe Orientals, or Orientals/Mongols, or Orientals/Mongols/Indics, or whatever. If you have some other argument against that idea, I hate debating but feel free to comment.

On the off chance this gets Dugg or passed via links:
I just won’t care what people I don’t know think about me. Comments from strangers will probably be deleted, especially those without arguments.

Fans of Fox News or Lou Dobbs and sufferers of White Liberal Guilt Syndrome are specifically invited to not comment.

Commenting constitutes consent to be humiliated on the world wide web with potential eternal and widespread exposure. You’ve been warned.

Those I know personally are exempt from the humiliation clause.