"Sean Holland" <seanholland@pants.telus.net> wrote in message
news:BD695592.112FB%seanholland@pants.telus.net...
> in article 2Ik0d.9604$ZC7.722@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com, Musashi at
> Miyamoto@Hosokawa.co.jp wrote on 9/10/04 9:34 AM:
>
> >
> > I see your point. But I was not thinking so much in terms of being
> > influenced by the
> > surrounding area, but in the case of a Japanese person who arrives in LA
for
> > example
> > and hears himself being refered to as an "asian". I think that if he or
she
> > were called
> > "Japanese" or "Oriental" it would make more sense. I think that many if
not
> > most
> > Japanese people in Japan when hearing アジア人　would think of people on
the
> > Asian continent.
>
> Hmm. So you're saying that the British are not Europeans?

Yes and No. If we are speaking strictly in a geographical sense, then
obviously British are
Europeans. But if we are talking about "how a people or nation perceives and
calls themselves"
then I have met plenty of British people who rather pride themselves in
being "British or English"
and consider themselves seperate from those on the "continent". Perhaps this
has somtehign to
do with being an island country, in which case it is understandable that a
similar type of mentality
would have developed in Japan.


> I am a Canadian of
> British and Irish ancestry (well, I was actually born in England), and
when
> the need arises to refer to myself and my "kind" as distinct from Asian
> Canadians, African Canadians and so on, I will refer to myself as
"European
> Canadian." I prefer that to "white."
> "Oriental" is a Euro-centric term. From where I stand, Japan, China and
> Korea are to the west. "Oriental" and "Far-eastern" seem not to make
sense.
> "Asian" makes perfect sense. Japan is obviously a part of Asia.

The problem with the term "asian" is that while the old term "oriental"
pretty much restricted
the person to be from the far-east, mostly, China. Korea, Japan, ect., the
the term "asian"
encompasses not only the northern far east but central amd southern asia as
well. In other words
it's a term that makes the definition even more ambiguous than "oriental".

> My woman is a sort of left-wing Japanese (won't sing Kimigayo, thinks the
> Hinomaru should be scrapped, get rid of the emperor, etc) and she insists
on
> being called Asian. She seems to think that Japanese who deny being Asian
> are right-wing bigots. I wouldn't go so far as to say that, largely
because
> it's none of my business. But still, to me, it seems obvious that Japanese
> are Asians. I don't think "Oriental" is a bigoted term, but it seems sort
of
> stupid to me.


I am not left-wing, however I too am　反天皇制　and I can't go 10 seconds
into listening to
君が代 without falling asleep. But I find it hard to believe that there are
Japanese people
(whose thinking hasn't been formed by the surrounding environment- as in
living in the US)
who actually prefers being called "Asian" rather than "Oriental".
Could you please ask your wife how she would differentiate the words 東洋人
　and
アジア人？？

> What it might come down to is that the English word "Asian" and the
Japanese
> word アジア人 are not equivalent at all. What English speakers mean by
Asia
> may be quite different from what some Japanese (not my wife) mean by アジ
ア.
>

This is very interesting, and if the above is true, may resolve much of the
problems that I
have with the current American usage of "asian" vs "oriental".

Musashi