Talk:Oriental

Derogatory Context

There is no mention of the derogatory context of the word, and the geographic range of it's derogatory definition. Is it derogatory now everywhere? -NeF (talk) 11:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not derogatory in common use in the UK, as far as I'm aware, though I believe that the Oxford English Concise Dictionary does warn against its use.

I disagree - I think oriental is definitely derogatory in the UK. While it's probably not used intentionally to offend, it's intrinsically tied to ideas of the 'inscrutable Chinese', the 'exotic East' and the generalised eroticisation of a whole continent. See Said - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism. TheFlounder (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am Chinese American and I absolutely cannot stand when people use this word. Please say Asian instead, or just the country the person is from, and leave the use of "oriental" to the 19th century. Krymson (talk) 16:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I'm still not happy with this - particularly the assertion that "many Far-East Asians continue to refer to themselves as Oriental" - this seems completely unfounded. A googlesearch for "I am oriental" comes up with just over 1,200 results - or virtually none, in the big scheme of things. Most of these results are of the "I Am Oriental Lady Looking For Nice Man " variety - in other words, the exact eroticisation of the mysterious east that I refer to before. Can that claim be substantiated please?130.88.247.238 (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inanimate objects (vases, rugs) are Oriental, People (Japanese, Chinese, Korean etc.) are East Asian or Asian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drewnamis (talk • contribs) 14:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK an "Asian" person normally means someone with south Asian ancestry (most obviously the "BBC Asian Network" radio station) and "Oriental" is about the only catch-all term available for people with east Asian ancestry. The term hasn't attracted the kind of criticism and demand for banning its use the way some have - for instance there has never, AFAIK, been demand for the School of Oriental and African Studies to change its name. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What need for a catch-all term? I'm sure it's not intended as such, but using oriental as a catch-all term sounds like code for 'yellow' to me. And I think the O or SOAS refers, as noted above, to rugs, vases, art, literature - not to people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.247.238 (talk) 16:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Just to back that up - SOAS specialises in "the laws, politics, economics, languages and humanities concerning Asia, Africa and the Near East and Middle East" (see link above) - notably, not 'oriental people'. As a catch-all term for people of east-Asian ancestry, I might suggest 'east Asian'. But then I also think you should examine any statement grouping together Japanese people, Chinese people, Thai people, Indonesian people etc. very carefully before making it as it smacks at the least of generalisation, if not casual racism.

I find this discussion offensive. 98.169.243.231 (talk) 11:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]