Law Bans Use of ‘Oriental’ in State Documents

Law Bans Use of ‘Oriental’ in State Documents
By Sewell Chan AND Jennifer 8. Lee

Updated, 10:18 p.m. | More than three decades after the term “Asian American” or “Asian Pacific Islander” began to supplant “Oriental” in government documents, not to mention common usage, some New York State records still use the antiquated term.

Not anymore. Gov. David A. Paterson on Wednesday signed legislation that will eliminate the use of the term “Oriental” in reference to persons of Asian or Pacific Islander descent on all “forms or preprinted documents used by state government, public authorities or municipalities,” no later than Jan. 1.

However, the practical effect of the legislation is fairly limited, as few documents still use the word “Oriental,” which is widely considered outdated, and even, by some, offensive. Pressed for examples, Mr. Paterson’s office could only cite one, saying that the Division of Criminal Justice Services still uses the term on some rap sheets. (Marissa Shorenstein, a spokeswoman for the governor, called the legislation “really more of a symbolic victory” for the Asian American community.)

The legislation was sponsored by State Senator Craig M. Johnson of Nassau County and Assemblywoman Grace Meng of Queens, both Democrats.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/law-bans-use-of-oriental-in-state-documents/

and more particularly one with a degree in Ancient Near Eastern History and Culture from the Oriental Institute, I can tell you that it got its name ages ago, 1919 to be precise, when Oriental simply meant Eastern. It's a great place and a fabulous old building, in particular the basement labs and the really cool stairway up to the 2nd floor where the library, classrooms and offices are, although the museum with the Assyrian bulls and the mummies isn't bad either.

Context and meaning are what really matter. Any word can be used in a derogatory way.

It's hard to use the word Negro for example without it meaning something you might not intend it to mean (or might totally intend it to mean).

Bryant

At the ripe old age of 21, I'll take my chances at asking something that might be over my head.

Isn't African American today used in the same context that Negro was used 50 years ago? What is the difference? They both refer to someone living in the United States who's ancestral roots are in Africa.

The word Nigger, on the other hand, does has have some strong negative connotations to it. But, just because it has typically been used in a way that expresses disdain doesn't mean that it always will be. Many African American teens call each other Niggers. Do they have disdain for each other when they do so? No so much. Do they upset their elders when they do so? Probably? Is it right for them to be upset? It is hard to say.

If you know someone wants to be referenced a certain way, why wouldn't you choose to comply with their wishes?

and the last I checked no one, whether they thought the term was offensive or acceptable, volunteered that it was for "the persons for whom the word is being used to decide."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6518529

Personally, I think the word 'illegals' is offensive and would never use it. I would think very little of anyone who chose to do so.

When I was young, 'Negro' had replaced 'colored', which came to be associated with segregation in the South. However, 'colored' was much preferred to the word it replaced, 'n****r', which today can only be referred to obliquely, and not printed out directly.

Not complying with their wishes may indicate that the speaker is too old to change, as in Reagan's Q&A with school children, in which he used the already outmoded 'Negro' in one of his answers. I refer all these questions of terminology to what George Carlin said on the subject, basically that words are not the danger, but the thought and meaning behind them that they are intended to convey. It seems any designation of a less favored class of people takes on a derogatory air after a couple decades of use, as children grow up hearing themselves referred to as that class and discriminated against because of it. They naively think that by changing from n****r to colored to Negro to black to Afro-American to African-American, it will turn the page on discrimination and the situation will improve.

But getting people to change their speech patterns, such as from 'oriental' to 'Asian-American', is only a cosmetic fix on the underlying problem of xenophobia. If people are taught to celebrate diversity instead of fear it, then it really doesn't matter what you call some ethnic group because that difference is not a detriment, but an asset. The height of xenophobia is when you can take the word that people use in their own language when talking about themselves, like 'gook' or 'polack' and make it an ethnic slur in your own language.

But getting people to change their speech patterns, such as from 'oriental' to 'Asian-American', is only a cosmetic fix on the underlying problem of xenophobia. If people are taught to celebrate diversity instead of fear it, then it really doesn't matter what you call some ethnic group because that difference is not a detriment, but an asset. The height of xenophobia is when you can take the word that people use in their own language when talking about themselves, like 'gook' or 'polack' and make it an ethnic slur in your own language.

I love this paragraph, and agree completely with it. :thumbsup:

Though I had heard the term before, as you can imagine, it was not a term I ever associated with myself. I never did figure our if the people I worked with and for considered themselves to be "Oriental" or would have been as surprised by that term as I was by "Occidental". :)

There's being culturally sensitive, and then there's just being ridiculous. I think New York has just erased the line between the two.

It's Chinese Chicken Salad...

Wouldn't want to offend anybody's sensibilities.

for Asian!

!

and people are Asian.