<p>OP:</p>
<p>man ur pretty dumb if u don’t know what an asian is lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So from the beginning, “Asia” has essentially meant the eastern land beyond the reaches of Ancient Greece, and the future European civilizations that co-opted the Ancient Greek ethos. And throughout the centuries, that land beyond has expanded from Asia Minor (Turkey) to Persia to India to China…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are vast cultural differences among the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent, and East Asia. Why are these not partitioned off from “Asia” like Europe has?</p>
<p>Because it’s thousands of miles away. No one cares. It’s irrelevant to them. Just like it’s irrelevant to a California resident whether someone came from Ohio or western Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>There were vast cultural differences between the kingdoms of Scandinavia and the city-states of Italy. However, they recognized that they were overarchingly European. There are large cultural differences between the African Songhai Empire, the ancient kingdoms of Ethiopia, and the Bantu cultures of South Africa. However, you would probably refer to all of them as African. The same even applies where I live. Nobody would argue the great differences between Aleut, Athabaskan, and Inupiaq culture, however they are all considered to be “Alaska Native.” Broad terms can be useful, even when there are distinct subgroups. Would you be bothered if Martians referred to us as “Earthlings?” In fact, perhaps we should call them Olympus Monsians instead. ;)</p>
<p>I agree with Buddy.</p>
<p>For me, “Asia” refers to countries like China, Mongolia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, the Phillipines, Indonesia, etc. The Middle East and India are different in my mind.</p>
<p>Classically, I would say that the following countries are “Asia”:
- Turkey to Israel to Saudi Arabia, the Middle east… including Cyprus
- Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan
- India, China, and all countries east of India and south of China
- Mongolia, the Koreas, and Japan
- Siberia, or perhaps the part of Russia east of the Caucases</p>
<p>This all smacks of politically-correct grand-standing to me. I think it’s clear that there’s a thing called “Asia” and the people who live there are “Asians”. At the risk of sounding racist, you can often tell when people are “Asian” by looking at them. Of course, the same goes for Europeans and Africans. I’ll leave it to the imagination how one can tell.</p>
<p>As for the fact that Asia is used to refer to such a large and diverse number of cultures, I don’t see much problem with that. When people need to specify the country, they are usually able… for instance, there are differences that people understand between chinese, japanese, korean, mongolian, thai, and indian food. Geographically, it’s all just “over there”… it’s of no practical import.</p>
<p>I think “Asian” is a term usually used to refer to someone’s race. I don’t find it a particularly offensive term, but then again, I’m not Asian. I don’t know how I would feel if everybody called me “European”. Well, on the other hand, people call me “white”, lumping all of us together. I guess I don’t really care. Is it different for Asians?</p>
<p>Funny story…</p>
<p>I’m in my history class having a conversation with my friend. He asks,
“So what race are you?”</p>
<p>Being a descendant from parents who were from the Phillipines, I reply,
“Filipino.” </p>
<p>Then my other “close” friend, looking puzzled, jumps in the conversation by asking,
“But aren’t you Asian?”</p>
<p>…goooooood job.</p>
<p>To answer Auburnmathtutor question on whether Asians take issue with certain connotations of the term “Asian”: Yes. Alot of literature and debate has been given to the issue, not so much arguing its initial conceptual geographical meaning but rather how the meaning of the word has persisted as a kind of “lumping” term. In addition, on the outside it isnt a “big deal” because it’s so “far away” which is to supposed to serve as an excuse for accepting the simplistic term.</p>
<p>nbachris2788 mentioned the “define against” theory (actual term?), and how it may solidify a white consciousnesses. Whether it is intentional or not (it depends on the time period and age group you’re looking at, I say), I have heard a number of my colleagues mention that even in terms of their own white culture they search for some type of other (ie such and such distant family member came from Ireland, Germany, etc). I liked how this question fit into the discussion because it suggests that in order for us to hash out who constitutes as Asian, and what constitutes as Asia, we have to first define what White European/American is.</p>
<p>What do you think about that?</p>
<p>Or we could, you know, BE INDIVIDUALS and not define ourselves by where our ancestors got on a boat.</p>
<p>rotimouth:</p>
<p>What?</p>
<p>Huh, I am Indian but I have never been referred to as an “Asian”. In North America, ‘Asian’ usually refers to people from Far East. But in Britain ‘Asian’ refers to people from South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka) and ‘Oriental’ refers to people from the Far East. Using the term ‘Oriental’ to refer to people from the Far East makes more sense to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Define “European” and “African” for me.</p>
<p>I was reading, a few weeks ago, on Wikipedia (…I know, not the best resource to use) that said that, besides the physical racial differences we tend to think of, there’s distinct differences within the skull’s size, shape, slope, width, etc. with each race and physical differences (relating to the skeleton) among each race. And that people with these skeletal features, despite their “outward” (lack of better term) appearance, would fit into a racial category/(ies) based on this. </p>
<p>I can’t locate the exact link, I’m sifting through my history now. It was actually pretty interesting. But there’s the, likely, chance that I’m the only one this is news to. </p>
<p>I’m guessing this probably wasn’t what you were referring to. But I found it interesting.</p>
<p>I think it’s clear that there are some differences between races, perhaps more than some people like to admit. The most obvious difference is skin color, but that’s not to say that difference races don’t share other unique traits.</p>
<p>That being said, I think that races are sometimes lumped together in unjustified ways and I do not condone “racism” as most people probably think of it - as the unfair treatment of people based on race. However, understanding and accepting racial differences makes more sense to me than pretending they don’t exist. If that makes me a racist, I guess I’m alright with that. I think there are appropriate and inappropriate ways of taking racial differences into account, and I don’t think about it in terms of superiority or inferiority. I think that if there are differences, it would make sense to know what they are and use that knowledge to everyone’s advantage.</p>
<p>I like to think of it in terms of Everquest or WoW. 
Obviously people aren’t that different, but everyone is slanted towards being good at something, even if it’s only a cultural thing (and not a biological thing.)</p>
<p>^^ lol great summary!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That may be true, but then there are also similar differences within an established race that we simply refuse to recognize because it doesn’t fit in with our neatly ordered concept of whites, blacks, yellows, etc. Do East and West Africans count as different races? What about North and South Asians? North and South Europeans? Why not? They all differ in terms of body structure and skin colour.</p>
<p>Most of us blindly accept the world’s definition of race as given, then afterwards try to find justifications for such categorizations. It should be the other way around.</p>
<p>most of the indians look like hispanics</p>
<p>"I think it’s clear that there are some differences between races, perhaps more than some people like to admit. The most obvious difference is skin color, but that’s not to say that difference races don’t share other unique traits.'</p>
<p>Thats why you live in alabama :). But seriously differences in race—what race? Also it isn’t clear, I dont believe in what human’s see, I am more interested in hard and well researched facts. Finding differences in race has usually being a pseudoscience and based on the biased nature the people carrying the study. Bring an unbiased study which is actually done on merit and i would accept the results as longs as everything is kept equal ceteris paribus. I wouldn’t mind doing the research myself—considering the fact that i am not biased :)</p>
<p>“Thats why you live in alabama”
- lol.</p>
<p>“But seriously differences in race—what race? Also it isn’t clear, I dont believe in what human’s see, I am more interested in hard and well researched facts.”
- That’s what I’m saying. I think most people avoid racial issues like it’s the plague because it has the potential to **** a lot of people off. Personally, I don’t think that people’s irrational fear of asking certain questions should be a reason to stop doing science, for instance, embryonic stem cell research.</p>
<p>“Finding differences in race has usually being a pseudoscience and based on the biased nature the people carrying the study.”
- The last time people did anything with racial differences, a lot of psychology and biology was pseudoscience. As far as I know, people haven’t done anything with it recently… because it seems dangerous.</p>
<p>“Bring an unbiased study which is actually done on merit and i would accept the results as longs as everything is kept equal ceteris paribus. I wouldn’t mind doing the research myself—considering the fact that i am not biased”
- That’s what I’m saying. If unbiased people would carry out the research, not only would it be potentially helpful to everybody involved, but it would lay to rest all the questions over the pseudoscience that people confuse with truth.</p>
<p>(And it’s a little redundant to say “everything is kept equal ceteris paribus”. You’d only need to say “everything is kept equal” or “ceteris paribus”… they mean practically the same thing.)</p>