"Jap" Used in Referring to Motorcycles

[ghaverkamp]

It looks to me as if he's trying to present evidence of a logical source, a single undeniable rationale to guide all behavior with regard to cultural sensitivity, one that encompasses yet transcends individual bias and experience, accounts for all of history and arrives at some neutral center. I don't think such a rationale exists. I don't think any one big picture exists either. Someone show me the big picture, and I guarantee I can show you an even bigger one. So for an issue like this, I think it really is all about drawing lines as Dave said.

 

I'm not trying to draw from any single guide to anything.

 

I'm suggesting that words, whatever their intentions or whatever the ignorance of the speaker, can have long-lasting negative impact in the aggregate. That some don't really care about that is very clear. That they think they can judge the wider impact of their words by a reaction or lack thereof by those around them is telling in its own right.

 

I'm suggesting that folks consider their words. If it makes folks happier to think that I'm trying to define an acceptable lexicon, so that they may defensively retreat into admonitions about thin skin and immaturity, so be it.

[Matts_12GS]

If the world involved only people who rolled with the flow, that might be a fine position to take.

 

Maybe there would be if people would quit looking to be offended by every @$%@$@$ thing around them!

[Deadboy]

Well I guess you missed my attempt at humor, so I will try to explain....The "spare me the speech" comment was in jest, I am as long winded as anyone and am sure my posts can be seen as preachy...not my intent but there it is all the same...

 

As for the other issue, that the "Fighting Irish" or the drunken cop or any of the other literally hundreds and hundreds of examples we can all think of all I can offer is that 2 wrongs do not make a right, and saying your "people" were victims of racism at one time justifies or excuses acting the same way to someone else (who in most cases had nothing to do with it) is why we have hate groups and the like in my opinion. Language matters, maybe not to you or me in a specific instance, but it does matter...hence the multiple posts/pages we have here.

 

One other point I will make before I drop this entirely is the Notre Dame mascot is in fact the mascot for a private, predominantly Irish school (or at least what was an Irish school when founded as far as I know) and was chosen by the school, not imposed on them by someone else....if a group wishes to call themselves the "whatever" who am I to second guess them...but that is a far cry from my labeling them without their consent...or refusing to acknowledge the validity of their objections when they mention them to me…

 

I will now go back to hiding from my black shadow....

[Dave McReynolds]

I'm suggesting that words, whatever their intentions or whatever the ignorance of the speaker, can have long-lasting negative impact in the aggregate. That some don't really care about that is very clear. That they think they can judge the wider impact of their words by a reaction or lack thereof by those around them is telling in its own right.

 

I'm suggesting that folks consider their words.

 

You're not really giving us anything to go on here, Greg, other than a penetrating grasp of the obvious.

 

I don't know that a single person here would disagree with what you've said, or that a single person here would include himself in the group of people that don't care about the impact of their words on others.

 

You've interpreted your words to mean that we shouldn't use the term "Japanese bike."

 

Others would interpret your words to mean that, while they would agree that term "Japanese bike" might have a negative impact on some, it's not reasonable to infer a slur on Japanese Americans from use of the term, so they should just get over it.

 

As I said, it just depends on where you draw the line.

[SageRider]

Do tell...why is "Oriental" now offensive? And what would the correct term-du-jour (hopefully I didn't offend any French people) be?

 

According to my Korean friend......oriental is a rug, Asian is what is preferred.

And an Asian wearing a rug would be???

[SageRider]

What would be offensive is if the store owner refused to to remove the sign and told the offended person to "grow up" if they requested it be removed...otherwise it is just an honest mistake....and a funny one at that....

 

I swear...some of you folks would be offended by your own shadows.

Exactly the point...

[tallman]

I swear...some of you folks would be offended by your own shadows.

 

Why? 'cause they're black?

 

I demand an apology from everyone on this board!

 

How about blond jokes?

 

Uh...nevermind...

 

James,

 

I gotta get me one of those.

 

On a serious note.

I work with young people who seem to fall on one side of this discussion.

They seem to get their vocabulary, and perhaps morals, from animated "family" shows.

If that type of vocabulary and the idea that offensive speech and stereotypes are good ideas is our legacy...

Yes, we live in a great country that allows exchange of ideas and very little censorship.

But, History has shown us, though obviously not taught some of us, where that path goes.

[SageRider]

I swear...some of you folks would be offended by your own shadows.

 

Why? 'cause they're black?

 

I demand an apology from everyone on this board!

 

How about blond jokes?

 

Uh...nevermind...

 

 

[SeanC]

I'm suggesting that words, whatever their intentions or whatever the ignorance of the speaker, can have long-lasting negative impact in the aggregate. That some don't really care about that is very clear.

Now I sense you're just trying to defend a position, painting any opposing opinion as that of the clearly uncaring. Well, it's not clear to me.

 

Yes, words can have a long-lasting negative impact; it doesn't mean they always do, that a negative effect is an inevitability, and it doesn't mean just because someone perceives they might that the potentially offensive language should be stricken from human discourse in its entirety.

 

That they think they can judge the wider impact of their words by a reaction or lack thereof by those around them is telling in its own right.

It really isn't. It's just human nature. In the marketplace of ideas, we all judge what is acceptable to us and what isn't. There's no single Sensitivity Code to which we defer our judgment.

 

Someone might say "Japanese bike" and I might not even notice it in context, and someone else might say it, but based on differences in context and other cues from the speaker, I might consider that person a Cartman-esque bigot. I make that judgment. I don't need a handbook on cultural sensitivity to make the call. Nor does anyone else.

 

I'm not defending the term, but I'm not saying it rises to the level of causing long-lasting harm to the aggregate either.

[ghaverkamp]

I don't know that a single person here would disagree with what you've said, or that a single person here would include himself in the group of people that don't care about the impact of their words on others.

 

Then you're reading a different thread. Because the bulk of what I'm reading says one of several, non-exclusive things: 1) I don't really care; 2) It doesn't matter, because I don't intend anyone to take offense; 3) Offense is only important at the individual level, and I won't even address larger impacts; or 4) It doesn't matter what I say, because people should toughen and/or grow up.

 

You've interpreted your words to mean that we shouldn't use the term "Japanese bike."

 

No. I've suggested there are very good reasons why people may take offense to it, in spite of the arguments here that their intentions are all that matter and that individual hide-toughening won't rectify the larger issues. I haven't told anyone what they should or shouldn't say. Now, that said, I won't use it, and I tend to form a negative impression of those who do use it.

 

As I said, it just depends on where you draw the line.

 

I think you're the one eager to draw lines. First, by butchering Frank's arguments regarding source and listener. Second, by insisting that I'm drawing lines. Now, I will agree that I consider "Japanese bike" to have offensive and derogatory connotations, and I don't believe a word of anyone who says they use it solely as an abbreviation; I fully believe those people are, at best, deluding themselves.

 

But those are my opinions, which are all I can argue. They aren't lines I'm drawing for other people.

[tallman]

Greg,

I agree.

Dang, that's twice now.

[steve.foote]

I'm not trying to draw from any single guide to anything.

 

I'm suggesting that words, whatever their intentions or whatever the ignorance of the speaker, can have long-lasting negative impact in the aggregate. That some don't really care about that is very clear. That they think they can judge the wider impact of their words by a reaction or lack thereof by those around them is telling in its own right.

 

I'm suggesting that folks consider their words. If it makes folks happier to think that I'm trying to define an acceptable lexicon, so that they may defensively retreat into admonitions about thin skin and immaturity, so be it.

 

Greg, are you using the term "folks" to describe people in general or, as Dictionary.com describes in its second meaning, a specified group such as country folk or poor folks?

[ghaverkamp]

Now I sense you're just trying to defend a position, painting any opposing opinion as that of the clearly uncaring.

 

That's a bit broad; I did say "some," after all. It is the stated position of many on this thread that they don't care. They intend nothing offensive, so they don't care.

 

Yes, words can have a long-lasting negative impact; it doesn't mean they always do, that a negative effect is an inevitability, and it doesn't mean just because someone perceives they might that the potentially offensive language should be stricken from human discourse in its entirety.

 

That wasn't my position, either. There are many formerly offensive terms that are used in everyday conversation. And I don't believe offensiveness on its own is sufficient reason for people not to use a term; I say plenty of offensive things everyday.

 

However, I can't buy into telling the victims and descendants -- many of whom were American citizens -- who were piled into American-run concentration camps because they were all "Japs" just like the enemy that they should now simply toughen up or grow up. That's about a lot more than just taking offense.

[Matts_12GS]

[quote

However, I can't buy into telling the victims and descendants -- many of whom were American citizens -- who were piled into American-run concentration camps because they were all "Japs" just like the enemy that they should now simply toughen up or grow up. That's about a lot more than just taking offense.

 

Sorry, but I think that whole argument got closed once and for all with the payment of reparations to those families, no?

 

Maybe the lawyers got too much of that settlement...

 

[ghaverkamp]

Greg, are you using the term "folks" to describe people in general or, as Dictionary.com describes in its second meaning, a specified group such as country folk or poor folks?

 

I don't imagine my intent should matter to you.

 

On edit, after reading the dictionary.com definition: Seeing as a I didn't specify a group, I'm not sure why you're suggesting an ambiguity.

[ghaverkamp]

Sorry, but I think that whole argument got closed once and for all with the payment of reparations to those families, no?

 

No.

[russell_bynum]

That's a bit broad; I did say "some," after all. It is the stated position of many on this thread that they don't care. They intend nothing offensive, so they don't care.

 

FWIW, that isn't my position.

 

I intend nothing offensive, and I think the OP should consider the context and all that stuff. And failing that, get thicker skin.

 

But I do care if he was offended. It certainly isn't my intent to offend him with that title. I consider "Japanese Bike" to be a good thing, and I certainly have no problems with (is it OK to say "Asian"?) people...here or elsewhere.

 

And despite the fact that I think it is a completely unreasonable request, I'm going to do my best not to use that term anymore...at least not around the OP.

 

However, I can't buy into telling the victims and descendants -- many of whom were American citizens -- who were piled into American-run concentration camps because they were all "Japs" just like the enemy that they should now simply toughen up or grow up. That's about a lot more than just taking offense.

 

That's where I disagree. That was 60+ years ago. That's like blacks today saying that they're owed something because of slavery that ended over a hundred forty years ago...or Christians demanding special treatment because of what the Romans did to them over a thousand years ago.

 

It seems to me that we're just perpetuating the hatred for the sake of creating more victims.

[Matts_12GS]

I would have thought so, but, this reminds me of nerdy Jamie's consulting thing from a few days back... I guess if there's still money to be made in making someone out to be a victim, and keeping that wound open so that there can be no healing then it's inevitable that people will do so.

 

What I find astounding is that so many of the same people promoting healing are the ones picking that scab so the healing is slower and the scarring worse.

 

Maybe staying in a holilday inn express last night didn't help that much after all

[russell_bynum]

What I find astounding is that so many of the same people promoting healing are the ones picking that scab so the healing is slower and the scarring worse.

 

+1

[steve.foote]

I don't imagine my intent should matter to you.

 

It would, depending upon which group you intended to include me with.

[TomK]

 

And we all know the answer to what he would ride.

 

 

Tim, you are too much. Wish I had a dream.

[steve.foote]

What I find astounding is that so many of the same people promoting healing are the ones picking that scab so the healing is slower and the scarring worse.

 

+1

 

+2 Well said, Matt.

[ghaverkamp]

It would, depending upon which group you intended to include me with.

 

It shouldn't matter to you in the least. After all, they're just words.

 

Because the definition requires that a group be specified, it should be crystal clear that I wasn't referring to country folk or poor folk. Maybe bad-at-reading-dictionaries folk...

[ghaverkamp]

What I find astounding is that so many of the same people promoting healing are the ones picking that scab so the healing is slower and the scarring worse.

 

Please explain. That sure sounds good, but I don't see any of that going on here.

[ghaverkamp]

That's where I disagree. That was 60+ years ago. That's like blacks today saying that they're owed something because of slavery that ended over a hundred forty years ago...or Christians demanding special treatment because of what the Romans did to them over a thousand years ago.

 

Man, yeah. That was all of 60 years ago that we rounded up a bunch of Americans, took away their property, and threw them into camps, all because of their ethnic backgrounds. Can't we just let bygones be bygones? Seen The Siege? Do you really think it's unrealistic?

 

Speaking of slavery, and since the term is in the news today, shouldn't 140 years be enough time for a black man not to take offense to being call "boy?" I mean, come on! It's been over 140 years.

 

Or, are you of the opinion that time has indeed healed all of those wounds, just as it must surely have healed all wounds of the interned Japanese?

 

Finally, you're not following along. It's not about special treatment.

[steve.foote]

It shouldn't matter to you in the least. After all, they're just words.

 

Of course it matters, you said is does.

 

Because the definition requires that a group be specified, it should be crystal clear that I wasn't referring to country folk or poor folk. Maybe bad-at-reading-dictionaries folk...

 

Make sure and point that guy out when you see him. Bad-at-reading-dictionaries folk are rumored to be quite crafty and tenacious.

[ghaverkamp]

It shouldn't matter to you in the least. After all, they're just words.

 

Of course it matters, you said is does.

 

It matters to me, and I feel it's worthwhile to consider the impact of what I've written.

 

But you've already said, "Call me anything you want . . . ."

 

So, it shouldn't matter to you what I meant.

[tallman]

That's where I disagree. That was 60+ years ago. That's like blacks today saying that they're owed something because of slavery that ended over a hundred forty years ago...or Christians demanding special treatment because of what the Romans did to them over a thousand years ago.

 

Man, yeah. That was all of 60 years ago that we rounded up a bunch of Americans, took away their property, and threw them into camps, all because of their ethnic backgrounds. Can't we just let bygones be bygones? Seen The Siege? Do you really think it's unrealistic?

 

Speaking of slavery, and since the term is in the news today, shouldn't 140 years be enough time for a black man not to take offense to being call "boy?" I mean, come on! It's been over 140 years.

 

Or, are you of the opinion that time has indeed healed all of those wounds, just as it must surely have healed all wounds of the interned Japanese?

 

Finally, you're not following along. It's not about special treatment.

 

Still w/Greg here.

Didn't know there was a SOL on remorse.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article416954.ece

I think the lessons of the past provide us with the opportunity to make the future better.

To seek the status quo in this area is to settle for less than we are capable of. IMO.

If the crucial element is time, just where do we draw the line?

Just because something was "legal" didn't make it right.

Making reparations does not erase the event from our history.

Failing to learn from our mistakes will lead us into a future where we reflect on just how sad our past has been.

Accepting an expression of prejudice as merely an unintentional consequence of the offended person's thin epidermis is not the way I want to interact.

YMMV.

[Couchrocket]

So, OK, I've been laying back a bit watching Greg carry the load.

 

Let me ask a clarifying question to all us white guys.

 

Why didn't we round up all the Germans in the US and toss them in camps? The answer to this question might be enlightening if you care to THINK!

[Hermes]

To stay on Frank's origional subject of this board's use of the word 'Japanese', with repect to foreign motorcycles:

 

I did a wee search for the last year with "Japanese " and found 102 occurences. The first 25 are all part of this thread. The remainder were in other threads. But within those threads the word "Japanese " was repeated within quoted text an average 2 to 3 times . Therefore 102-25/3 = approx. 25 original occurences in one year.

All of the occurences are innocent identification of motorcycles of Japanes origion. I could not detect any intentional racial (or other) slur.

 

Please note:

I am not promoting the word Japanese or any other identification that could be offensive to an ethnic, religious or any other identifiable group. However, given the exceptional mature and PC behaviour of our board members and the relatively rare and at that innocent use of the word Japanese, I conclude that Frank has gotten good mileage out of his Post and got us (unintentially ) focussed on a subject in which he has a vested interest; just saying..

 

Time to stop beating ourselves up? and go for a brisk ride were weather allows.

 

Jurgen

[russell_bynum]

Man, yeah. That was all of 60 years ago that we rounded up a bunch of Americans, took away their property, and threw them into camps, all because of their ethnic backgrounds. Can't we just let bygones be bygones?

 

Yeah, that would be great.

 

Obviously, we need to "make it right" (such that we ever could) with the actual victims. But descendants of the victims, and people who weren't even here at the time but come from the same ethnic background? No...they don't deserve anything special.

 

Speaking of slavery, and since the term is in the news today, shouldn't 140 years be enough time for a black man not to take offense to being call "boy?" I mean, come on! It's been over 140 years.

 

Well...again...it depends on the context and the intent.

 

Or, are you of the opinion that time has indeed healed all of those wounds, just as it must surely have healed all wounds of the interned Japanese?

 

If there are any formerly-interned Japanese here, then they most certainly have a right to still have emotional scars from those events.

 

Otherwise, yes...time heals all wounds.

 

We shouldn't forget what's happened, of course. There's no shortage of examples of people (of all races/religions/etc) doing terrible things to their fellow man, and we need to learn from that, honor those who were wronged, and do what we can to make it right.

 

Would you agree that, at some point, we should no longer be able to use something that happened in the past as a reason to victimize ourself?

 

I mean...is there any rational person who would think it is OK if I say that threads were people wish each other "Happy Hanukkah" are offensive because of the fact that the Jews demanded the execution of Jesus?

 

Or maybe I should say that anyone who expresses numbers using X's, V's, and I's is being offensive because it was the Romans who carried out the execution?

 

I think most reasonable people who tell me I'm being silly because that happened a long time ago, and none of the people involved are still around. Right?

 

So...is there an expiration date on stuff like this (and maybe we just haven't gotten there yet?)

[steve.foote]

It shouldn't matter to you in the least. After all, they're just words.

 

Of course it matters, you said is does.

 

It matters to me, and I feel it's worthwhile to consider the impact of what I've written.

 

But you've already said, "Call me anything you want . . . ."

 

So, it shouldn't matter to you what I meant.

 

But Greg, you've won me over. You've persuaded me to come around to your way of thinking. This may be a permanent injury...

[Matts_12GS]

Let me ask a clarifying question to all us white guys.

 

Why didn't we round up all the Germans in the US and toss them in camps?

 

 

Ohhhh I bet you're gonna say cuz they look like us!!!

As an American of Squarehead/Viking decent I think you too are playing into a bad stereotype of the bigoted white guy.

 

But hey, you're already upside down, you may as well turn on the smoke!

 

Hi Russell!

[ghaverkamp]

Obviously, we need to "make it right" (such that we ever could) with the actual victims. But descendants of the victims, and people who weren't even here at the time but come from the same ethnic background? No...they don't deserve anything special.

 

Who's asking for "anything special?"

 

For the rest of it, I don't even see the connection between what we're talking about and Roman numerals, Hanukkah greetings, etc.

[Huzband]

So...is there an expiration date on stuff like this (and maybe we just haven't gotten there yet?)

 

No, there's a whole cottage industry that has been formed around being offended, & Frank, Greg, et al, have clearly bought in to it.

[russell_bynum]

Who's asking for "anything special?"

 

Um...Frank?

 

I'm not supposed to use a word that has no inherent negative meaning except for the fact that it was used in a derogatory manner more than 60 years ago (long before I was born...and I suspect before Frank was born). I'm being asked to do something different because of that. That's special treatment.

 

For the rest of it, I don't even see the connection between what we're talking about and Roman numerals, Hanukkah greetings, etc.

 

Really?

 

As a Christian, that Jesus guy is pretty important to me...and those Jews and Romans went and killed him...in a quite brutal manner, no less. Christians were subsequently persecuted by a whole slew of folks...including the Romans and the Jews for years and years. In other words: "My people" were wronged by Jews and Romans just like "Frank's people" were wronged by "My people".

 

Yes?

[George Brown]

WOW, Frank. I can't believe this thread is still at the top of the Active Topics list. Lots of great comments and a few not-so-great comments.

 

One feeling that I get from this thread is that people in the USA are starting to get "fed-up" with PC being forced on them.

 

Yet at the same time, most really do not want to offend other people and are gratefull to have someone point out to them in a polite loving way when they do.

 

I don't think any of the 102 posts referencing "Japanese" on this board originated with me. Never-the-less, since I now know that word offends some I will try hard not to use it. Will I correct others that do? Only if I know them well and then in a quiet one-on-one fashion.

 

Thanks Frank for taking the risk and sharing your feelings. Lets Moto!

[Matts_12GS]

What I find astounding is that so many of the same people promoting healing are the ones picking that scab so the healing is slower and the scarring worse.

 

Please explain. That sure sounds good, but I don't see any of that going on here.

 

Greg,

As someone suggested, I'm looking at the BIG PICTURE here. It's not about this little old discussion board any longer. Our words mean things to the global community. Butterfly effect, etc? Don't you get chain emails man?

 

Seriously though, When I reference those picking at the scab etc, I refer (metaphorically) to members of the American community in particular who continue to a) insist that there is incessent racism in everything and that any time a non-white doesn't get what they want it's the white man's fault.

 

Now, my scab metaphor calls into question a practice often seen in children who pick at small injuries, exposing the wound to the air, sometimes infection, and causing their bodies to start the healing process over each time they do this. It delays the end to end healing "process."

 

Thus, every time one of these people who can profit from picking at the mental "scab" of slavery or racism or some perceived slight from the history of the white man they delay the societal "healing" that comes from moving on.

 

It would be wrong of us as a country to forget about the horrible things that we have done, especially once meaningful steps to correct them have been taken. It's part of our history good or bad and while times of rememberance are good and important, picking at these things daily is counterproductive to healing.

 

That's all I'm trying to say here. If we don't let this rest, we'll never get beyond it...

 

How's that?

[ghaverkamp]

I'm not supposed to use a word that has no inherent negative meaning except for the fact that it was used in a derogatory manner more than 60 years ago (long before I was born...and I suspect before Frank was born). I'm being asked to do something different because of that. That's special treatment.

 

It began to be used as a derogatory term during World War II. That doesn't mean it was last used as a derogatory term during World War II or that the effects don't still linger.

 

You've been asked to consider the connotations and impact of a term. I guess if you consider that special treatment for a group, then fine. Sure. Special treatment.

 

As a Christian, that Jesus guy is pretty important to me...and those Jews and Romans went and killed him...in a quite brutal manner, no less. Christians were subsequently persecuted by a whole slew of folks...including the Romans and the Jews for years and years. In other words: "My people" were wronged by Jews and Romans just like "Frank's people" were wronged by "My people".

 

"Happy Hanukkah" isn't a slur directed at Christians. Roman numerals don't slur Jews.

[Matts_12GS]

Never-the-less, since I now know that word offends some I will try hard not to use it. Will I correct others that do? Only if I know them well and then in a quiet one-on-one fashion.

 

I think he's got it!

[ghaverkamp]

That's all I'm trying to say here. If we don't let this rest, we'll never get beyond it...

 

And, we'll get there by freely using racist or ethnically slurring words? I gather you think the only vestiges or racism in the United States today are the formerly oppressed, who want nothing more than an ongoing pity party. I wish I believed that racial and ethnic bigotry were in fact things of the past, and that ongoing use of hateful terms didn't worsen the situation. But I don't.

 

Instead, I would argue that "Japanese bikes" and "boy" and "raghead" and many other such terms are the things that pick at the scabs, not attempts to limit the use of such derogatory language.

[russell_bynum]

"Happy Hanukkah" isn't a slur directed at Christians.

 

It is if I look hard enough.

 

But...whatever...you're dodging the real question by nit-picking the details....(dang lawyers )

 

Do you forsee some time in the future when it will no longer be reasonable for Frank (or his descendants) to be offended by the term "Japanese" (in a context where there is no malice/racism/etc intended)?

[Matts_12GS]

And, we'll get there by freely using racist or ethnically slurring words? I gather you think the only vestiges or racism in the United States today are the formerly oppressed, who want nothing more than an ongoing pity party. I wish I believed that racial and ethnic bigotry were in fact things of the past, and that ongoing use of hateful terms didn't worsen the situation. But I don't.

 

Instead, I would argue that "Japanese bikes" and "boy" and "raghead" and many other such terms are the things that pick at the scabs, not attempts to limit the use of such derogatory language.

 

Well Greg, I suppose if we as the RECEPTORs of those words would stop giving those who use them the POWER to hurt their sensitivities then those words will fall from favor for other ones that do offend. It's like Leslie said, life is a moving target...

 

We must change with the times, and if we keep holding on to that anchor of past hurts we're going to drown.

 

ok, I'm outta metaphors for now... Off to CA tomorrow... I'll buy the first round if anyone wants to discuss this in person...

 

 

Nahh, not really...

[ghaverkamp]

Do you forsee some time in the future when it will no longer be reasonable for Frank (or his descendants) to be offended by the term "Japanese" (in a context where there is no malice/racism/etc intended)?

 

I haven't dodged this at all. I've already answered it earlier in the thread, most specifically when I wrote, "There are many formerly offensive terms that are used in everyday conversation."

 

Of course things can age out.

[SeanC]

I find your argument and reasoning on this subject overly simplistic. You say you're not, but I believe you are in effect advocating a special lexicon, the negative impact of which I believe is far more harmful to the aggregate. For a more enlightened perspective on this particular topic, I found an interesting article here.

 

Here's a brief snippet of it:

 

I say "fortunately" because I feel that teaching people to tolerate the varieties of human emotions associated with words that in some contexts may be offensive is ultimately preferable to the rigid thought control that results from censoring words for their own sake. A hard-and-fast "no Japanese" policy on the part of JACL would carry the message that JACL's members are not very enlightened. A case-by-case approach would be more honest and effective.

[ghaverkamp]

You say you're not, but I believe you are in effect advocating a special lexicon, the negative impact of which I believe is far more harmful to the aggregate.

 

I don't see how you can possibly arrive at such a belief based on what I've written.

 

For a more enlightened perspective on this particular topic, I found an interesting article here.

 

Where "more enlightened" means "one more in tune with my own."

[SeanC]

I don't see how you can possibly arrive at such a belief based on what I've written.

But Greg, I'm responding not only to what you've written, but to what those words and underlying rationale actually mean. For instance, you may say you're merely suggesting people "consider" their words, but you've also taken a stance that it's never okay to use the term under discussion. In other words, you're not just suggesting people consider what they say, but rather, "consider it's never appropriate." And further, should anyone use the term, you will view them negatively.

 

So tell me again that you don't see how I could possibly arrive at such a conclusion of your position....

 

Where "more enlightened" means "one more in tune with my own."

Um, no. It means more thoughtful and less simplistic. I admired the writer's perspective on this topic because he seemed more interested in understanding the power of words than in controlling them or winning a point.

[steve.foote]

 

 

Six

[russell_bynum]

Do you forsee some time in the future when it will no longer be reasonable for Frank (or his descendants) to be offended by the term "Japanese" (in a context where there is no malice/racism/etc intended)?

 

I haven't dodged this at all. I've already answered it earlier in the thread, most specifically when I wrote, "There are many formerly offensive terms that are used in everyday conversation."

 

Of course things can age out.

 

OK. And what causes that?

 

Is it purely a factor of time, or does the racist/etc baggage attached to an otherwise harmless word get shed through it being used without racist or hurtful intentions over time? (or is there some other factor at play here?)

 

My feeling is that removing the word from our vocabulary isn't going to work nearly as fast as continuing to use it, without the hurtful intentions.

 

And for the record...I'm not blind to the fact that there's still racism and bigotry in this country. I just don't think that this is right way to deal with it.

[chrisd]

This might be interesting. A black football player is upset because, he claims, a black referee called him "boy". I understand where the OP is coming from, and while I cringe when I hear or see "Japanese" in any context, I can honestly say that the only time I've heard it (albeit rarely) here in Hawaii, where AJAs, (Americans of Japanese Ancestry), make up about 18% of the population, is when it was spoken by an AJA. What I think is interesting is how the NFL will deal with this, considering the remark, if it was made, was made by a black man to a black man. Could they come down less severely because of that?