racistscarf.jpg

Accusations have been made.

Lindy West was born an unremarkable female baby in Seattle, Washington. The former Stranger writer covered movies, movie stars, exclamation points, lady stuff, large frightening fish, and much, much more....

150 replies on “Is My Scarf Fnarf Racist?”

  1. OK, Lindy. Lindy? The police have the helicopter. It’s flying over there now. Can you look out the window? Wave the scarf so they can find you.

  2. @46: there is no such large-scale move. “A Chinese” is the correct way to refer to a person who resides in China, just as “a Moroccan” or “a Norwegian” or “a Pakistani” or even “a Liverpudlian” are correct. This move you’re talking about isn’t happening.

    The word here is “demonym”. Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonym.

    “A Japanese” may sound odd to people who don’t refer to single Japanese very often. But if I said “120 million Japanese can’t be wrong”, you wouldn’t bat an eye.

  3. Fnarf, are you in your 90s? Saying “a Japanese” or “a Black” or “a…. anything” sounds racist. Just FYI, you won’t sound like such a douche if you simply add “person” to the end of it.

  4. who cares… all you need is more weather control and satellite operations command.. you’ll rule the world as long as you remember to run like hell.

  5. oh yeah, @53 i totally agree with you that calling anyone ‘a something’ is completely crazy batshit racist and i’d be appalled if it ever happened to me.

    …

    Sincerely,

    An American
    (get off my fucking lawn)

  8. one quick little google search shows instance of NPR using the term “a japanese” without any sort of problem:

    2007 October 16, Madeleine Brand, “Japan Struggles to Meet Its CO2 Emissions Limits”, Day to Day, National Public Radio

    “One Japanese couple goes a bit further than most in conserving energy.

    Motoyuki Shibata isn’t a typical Japanese.

    He and his wife, Hitomi, don’t own a car. They have a solar panel on the roof. They collect rainwater in an old whiskey barrel to water the plants, and they don’t use dish soap.”

  9. I’m afraid Fnarf is correct here, guys. “A Japanese” is not racist unless it’s used to describe a person’s race, which he was not doing; it’s just not heard too often.

  10. @53, you are completely and utterly full of shit.

    I can’t imagine how you people come up with this stuff. “A black” offends — does “An African-American”?

    I have already quoted an article from the Reuters wire service FROM TODAY that used the construction “baseball-mad Japanese”. Is Reuters racist? From Wikipedia: “the people of Japan are called Japanese, which is also the name of their language”. The JAPANESE call themselves “the Japanese” when they’re speaking English.

    Is “a Colombian” racist? “A Senegalese?” “A Bhutanese”? “A Nepali”? “A Monagasque? How about “a Seattleite”?

    You remind me of the people — real people, I’ve met some of them — who think it’s offensive to call a Jewish person “a Jew”. THAT IS THE WORD.

    If you think “a Japanese” is offensive, you really need to go fuck yourself.

  12. I think it’s fair to say that those who think “a Japanese” is racist, are actually racist themselves, since they’re conflating nationality (which is a concrete thing) with ethnicity.

  13. Lindy I have to get off the phone. I can’t sit here all day. Can you see them or not? GO OUTSIDE AND LOOK FOR THE POLICE CAR!

    The scarf is evidence. You have to give it to them. Don’t try to elude them Lindy, I know how you Stranger people like to do it. When are you going to learn?

    OK? OK??? I’m hanging up now. Let this be a lesson to you.

  14. Most of the masks resemble arch-villains from pre-WWII comix like Dick Tracy. One of them looks like a genie who once menaced Bugs Bunny.

  16. @Fnarf: I am totally in your corner. It’s like culs-de sac vs. cul-de-sac’s. The proper way sounds weird because a lot of people say the plural wrong. I think a lot of people add the “person” on the end, which is OK but not necessary. Like adding ‘very’ to something. I know that I use terrible grammar/spelling all the time, and fuck, if something sounds weird I’ll look it up. 9 times out of 10 the weird sounding sentence is proper and I am just saying it wrong.

    There are also 10 million errors in the above paragraph. Is that racist?

  17. @65, there are several dozen undeniable truths in my posts between the obscenities. Your inability to spot them suggests that those obscenities are for you. The shorter version of your post is “I can’t read”.

  20. Longer Fnarf:

    “Maybe you’d have better luck folding your fucking cranes if you’d pull your head out of your ass. (Wikipedia factoid). You are completely and utterly full of shit. (Wikipedia factoid). I can’t imagine how you people come up with this stuff. (Wikipedia factoid). You really need to go fuck yourself.”

  23. Ah, you’re right, I swear too much. For fuck’s sake, it’s the truth. My argument is sound, though.

    You folks are keen to see racism everywhere, but your ignorance of other cultures means you simply don’t know what you’re looking at. The scarf is almost certainly Japanese itself, and intended for a Japanese audience, since the characters portrayed on it would be familiar to them, but not to most Americans.

  25. The scarf’s not racist. Saying “a Japanese” isn’t necessarily racist either. But I disagree that your argument regarding usage is sound. I just wish I could find the damn sources to back myself up. I know you shan’t be convinced, but where nationality can also be used to describe ethnic identity, I agree with the viewpoint quoted here:

    http://poynteronline.org/dg.lts/id.67/ai…

    Of course, I’m just a racist.

  27. No, leek, you’re wrong. “A Japanese” is not racist when talking about nationality. It’s a style issue, to be sure, and most will opt to play it safe in order to avoid this tedious conversation, but when the context clearly indicates nationality, this usage is fine. In fact, this usage is even more clear, in my opinion, since “a Japanese person” could indicate either ethnicity or nationality, where “a Japanese” only suggests the latter.

  28. OMG! It’s sooo fuckin racist! This scarf, I mean! And everyone who ever even references race is, like, RACIST as all get-out!!

    SLOG is hyper-racist, because, look at the background, people! Is it not oh-so-lily-white? That is RACIST!

    RACIST!!

    lol… This was the most entertaining comments thread I read all day… It makes me want to write a play… Actually, you could just stage this thread as is.. it’d be all avant-garde and shit… and, you know, RACIST!!! lol

  32. I am half Japanese and grew up in Japan, and I immediately recognized the red mask on here as a tengu, which is a popular folk character. As for the other masks, I really don’t know if they are as culturally appropriate or just generic drawings of masks…but either way, it isn’t racist. People shouldn’t be so paranoid about racism. That kind of attitude drives people to be ultra-sensitive around any mention or even implication of a minority, which is the kind of censorship that limits the visibility of minorities in public culture.

    On that same note, using Japanese as a noun isn’t racist, either. It just feels weird because other people think it feels weird, and collectively people assume that must mean it’s racist. But just because something isn’t said doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be said. Saying “a Japanese person” may relieve your conscience, but really, nobody needs to be reminded that Japanese are people.

    People who dance around perfectly acceptable terms in order to be politically correct inadvertently insult minorities by finding something shameful in something being what it is. The implication of deeming “a Japanese” (or any other proper racial/national term) racist is that there is something unfavorable about being Japanese. I’m pretty sure nobody arguing that you shouldn’t use Japanese as a noun meant to imply that, but ultimately that’s what you accomplish by policing language too much.

  35. @81 Being taken down? By looking like the only grownup in the room? Clearly there’s more than one way to read this comments thread. LOL

  36. Naive wimpy white Emo Seattleite progressives who always wring their hands about “racism” are the stupidest people on Earth.

  37. This is a common discussion in ESL and English-teaching circles:

    Whether or not an article is used with the names of nationalities depends on the way the name is used.
    When the name of a nationality functions as a noun, the principles governing the use of articles with countable nouns apply.

    There is a Brazilian in the store.
    He is the Russian I met recently.
    In referring to an entire group of people, no article is required if the name has a plural form; the may be used to single out one group from another.

    Norwegians are fond of winter sports.
    Do the Americans eat as much ice cream as the Italians?
    The is ordinarily used if the name does not have a plural form.

    The British are known for their civilized ritual of high tea.
    The French have made their mark in the fashion world.
    When the name of a nationality functions as an adjective complement, no article is used.

    The Mitsubishis are Japanese.
    Hans is German.

    http://uwf.edu/writelab/handouts/article…

    While “a Japanese” is not grammatically incorrect, it is also not common contemporary American English usage, where one would more likely hear “he is Japanese” as opposed to “he is a Japanese”. There most definitely is a trend away from usage of articles before nationality (i.e. “she is Canadian” vs. “she is a Canadian”), though again the use of the article is not incorrect. Even searching Google for the phrase “a Japanese” pulls results that overwhelmingly show “Japanese” in this case as a proper adjective, and very few results showing “a Japanese” being used to denote a person of the Japanese nationality or ethnicity.

    Many ESL learners receive a simplified “hard and fast” rule to use articles before nouns denoting nationality, which is why among Japanese and Chinese English-speakers it may be common to hear “I am a Japanese” or “he is a Chinese”, even though in contemporary American English that may sound dated or incorrect to some. This is particularly true for learners whose native language does not have articles. Having taught ESL and also speaking several languages, I’ve found that correct use of articles can be one of the most challenging parts of English grammar for non-native speakers.

  38. Leek, I’m trying, but failing, to see ANY connection at all between “a black” and “a Japanese”. The first word describes a race, the second a nationality. “Japanese” isn’t really a race; the Japanese are Asian. And no one in their right mind would ever argue that “an Asian”, to describe a person who is ethnically Asian and resides in Asia, is offensive. NO ONE.

    Your link is completely irrelevant. I agree with what Mr. Mills is saying. It’s nothing to do with what I’m saying.

    Please do not accuse me of saying “a yellow” (cognate of your “a black”), because I didn’t. I also didn’t say “a Nip” or “a Jap” or any of the offensive WWII-era terms that you appear to be reacting to instead of what I actually said, which is THE CORRECT USAGE.

    Note also that an ACTUAL JAPANESE has now popped up in here to correct you.

    I’m still waiting for the explanation of how “a Japanese” is different usage than “an Italian”. If you will concede that “an Italian” is not an offensive or outmoded way to refer to a resident of Italy, then you MUST concede the same about “a Japanese”.

    Japan is the name of the country. Japanese is the name of the people who live there. Why is this hard for you to grasp? I would suggest instead that what has happened in YOUR mind is an association between the word “Japanese” and the racist stigma of an epithet. Not mine.

  40. Filoblog, your examples don’t match my usage. I used “a Japanese” because I was referring to a hypothetical ONE person. “The Mitsubishis are Japanese” is a different case entirely; for one thing, they are plural, so the article goes away; for another, it’s essentially an adjectival usage, like “The Mitsubishis are rich”.

    The reason you don’t find the usage in Google much is because it’s a relatively unusual way to need to refer to a person — it’s much more common in news articles and what-not to refer to a Japanese car or a Japanese novelist or a Japanese businessman. But in my usage the only particular characteristic of a Japanese I was referring to is knowledge of basic archetypes of Japanese theater, i.e., virtually all Japanese, and it would be stupid to explicate that. “A Japanese” is exactly correct. “A Japanese person” is unnecessary.

    In your other examples, the usage is also different. Yes, you could say “she is Canadian” — that’s adjectival, like “she is tall”. But if you were to say “I met a Canadian person while we were in Buenos Aires”, that would sound awkward — you’d say “I met a Canadian” (and you certainly wouldn’t say “I met Canadian”).

    It’s not common to refer to individuals by their nationality alone, which is why you don’t see “a Japanese” often. There’s something about the -ese endings that sounds odd — “a Senegalese”, “a Chinese”, “a Viennese”. That doesn’t make them wrong.

    And it certainly does not make them racist.

  41. Fnarf: I don’t really think anyone here is interested in hearing more of my take, so I’ll keep it brief. I think that in this country, there’s a history of using SOME nationalities (which I’m quite aware are actually descriptors of a country’s people) to describe people’s presumed racial identities. In the past, this led to a person being described in the news, etc. as “a Chinese.” My sole argument is that it has become less common to use that terminology, possibly because it puts less emphasis on their personhood, more emphasis on what has historically been used as a racial identifier.

    I’m done. Ain’t convincing anyone, clearly, and don’t really care to keep setting myself up for more whitey-based insults.

  42. @90, not sure why you’re arguing with me. Nowhere in my comment does it say that “a Japanese” is incorrect or racist:

    While “a Japanese” is not grammatically incorrect, it is also not common contemporary American English usage…

    You wrote that

    It’s not common to refer to individuals by their nationality alone, which is why you don’t see “a Japanese” often. There’s something about the -ese endings that sounds odd — “a Senegalese”, “a Chinese”, “a Viennese”. That doesn’t make them wrong.

    I am basically making the same point. It is not technically incorrect and there is no inherent inference of racism. It is also not a common contemporary American English usage. In contemporary English, nouns that determine nationality that end in -ese, -ish, -ch are generally not preceded by the article a/an when referring to a person, for example, Chinese, Danish, French, Nepalese, Polish, Dutch. In the case of Polish or French, for a noun one would use “Pole” or “Frenchman/Frenchwoman” (or even “Polish person” or “French person”), whereas the -ese words function as both noun and proper adjective. “A Nepalese” is not incorrect or racist, but it’s not something commonly heard among Native English speakers. In plural form, however, when referring to a group as a whole, “the French”, “the Poles”, “the Nepalese” etc. are standard. This discussion, by the way, is happening in many online language/linguistic forums.

    There is a school of thought that says referring to a person solely by their nationality or ethnicity, especially preceded by an article, i.e. “a Japanese” or “a Russian” could infer racism, as the speaker defines that person by their nationality or ethnicity, rather than their humanity (i.e. being a person first and foremost). (If you want a good flame war, check some out some of those forums). There are arguments that one would not refer to a person just as “a blond” or any other characteristic, so why ethnicity?

    When describing three people you met last night at a party, is the most relevant thing about them that they are Jews, Blacks, or Koreans? It depends on the context, but stating that “I met a Jew at a party last night” has a off-putting sound to my ear. That does not mean that I would assume racism on the part of the speaker, but without some context, it sounds like the speaker is defining that person only by their religion or ethnicity, in which case I might wonder what the relevance is, but that’s a whole big can of worms that I probably shouldn’t open here. My 86-year old (bigoted) grandmother speaks this way, and it’s her way of defining others as 1) separate from her and 2) less than her.

    Again, it all depends on tone and context. I would guess that to some people reading “a Japanese” might sound racist. If it was coming from my grandmother, it most definitely would be. However in my comment I was not implying that was the case in your posts on this thread, or that it inherently carries that quality.

  47. Don’t fret, leek; I think most commentators here agree with you (just not me). Thanks for your thoughtful contributions, though. Nice chat.

Comments are closed.