Is "Gaijin" a Racist Slur?
- Thread starter Flanker
- Start date
- 26 Feb 2003
- 2,337
- 86
If you're uttering a racial slur doesn't that mean you're doing so in order to denigrate deliberately whereas a word with racial connotations may not carry the same venom when voiced spontaneously?
ex. A: Walking down that street I see a couple of punk bosozoku wannabes eyeballing me. As I walk past I hear one say to his friend, "nantoka nantoka gaijin..." in a throaty voice. (could be interpreted in this usage as a slur)
ex. B: I overhear one of the mothers of a student of mine referring to something she heard or saw me say or do in class and in her retelling to her friend, she uses the word "gaijin" often. Clearly from her tone of voice and the body language (appearing quite jovial) one can assume the word carries no barb. (interpreted as a connotated word minus the weight)
Anyways, that's just my take on it. I guess it's all relative and depends on the context used and the interpretations of those who hear it. Not sure if that makes any sense but the question you posed is an interesting one.
ex. A: Walking down that street I see a couple of punk bosozoku wannabes eyeballing me. As I walk past I hear one say to his friend, "nantoka nantoka gaijin..." in a throaty voice. (could be interpreted in this usage as a slur)
ex. B: I overhear one of the mothers of a student of mine referring to something she heard or saw me say or do in class and in her retelling to her friend, she uses the word "gaijin" often. Clearly from her tone of voice and the body language (appearing quite jovial) one can assume the word carries no barb. (interpreted as a connotated word minus the weight)
Anyways, that's just my take on it. I guess it's all relative and depends on the context used and the interpretations of those who hear it. Not sure if that makes any sense but the question you posed is an interesting one.
Last edited:
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
Iron Chef, in your example B I do not think that there is even a racist connotation (just a clear barrier between Japanese and non-Japanese). But I have heard many times the word gaijin used to make fun of, criticise, or look down on all non Japanese, although it was also in a rather jovialor neutral mood, not in words filled with hatred. For example, when a Japanese say "Japanese language is too difficult for gaijin to learn", they may say it on a very matter-of-factly tone, but in their mind the term "gaijin" will have racist connotations (gaijin = intellectually inferior). So is that a racist slur in this case ?
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
Label jars, not people.
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
How can you not label people ? Everybody does it. You label them by job, etnicity, nationality, language, religion, social class, attractivity, and many more things. If you don't you just see the world in monochrome.
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
(bold mine)
This is the more correct understanding here. For words or expressions to have 'racial connotations' need not mean anything more than more specific identification.
Goldigirl's most likely intention with the use of 'label' appears to not have been taken correctly, Maciamo, your come back may well have been to rash. What she has communicated--if my power of grasping the heart has served me right--is an idea that should be listened to by all !!!
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
Thank-you Mars Man...
we are all humans first.
we are all humans first.
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
But what are we next ? If you were a company manager (e.g. in HR), you would not recruit someone because they are humans. You have to look a bit deeper than that. Likewise, you do not choose a life partner, or even your friends, based on the fact that we are all humans, or all equal, because we aren't equal. If human kind became limited to billions of clones of the same person all speaking a single language, having the same beliefs, fears, hobbies, etc., the world would be boring. I hope that this is not you ideal for human kind. Quite frankly you comments scare me ! Please recognise the infinite diversity among humans ! None of us are equal, not even identical twins.
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
I have to say that your comments are more frightening! We are not equal, funny I've heard that said in the past to horrible ends, As humans we are all equal...on that regard.
Anyway the point here was if the use of gaijin was a racist slur. Having never been to Japan and never being call gaijin I can only say that if it makes a person feel bad when it is used, then yes it is racist. I'll be better informed in a month...I'll be in Japan for 2 weeks so maybe then I can have a more educated opinion.
Anyway the point here was if the use of gaijin was a racist slur. Having never been to Japan and never being call gaijin I can only say that if it makes a person feel bad when it is used, then yes it is racist. I'll be better informed in a month...I'll be in Japan for 2 weeks so maybe then I can have a more educated opinion.
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
Goldiegirl and CC1, I do not understand your definition of equality. You seem to limit its meaning to the legal or moral sense. What about the rest ?
In this context, Merriam Webster dictionary defines "equal" as follow : a. of the same measure, quantity, amount, or number as another; b. like in quality, nature, or status.
The Oxford Dictionary has : being the same in quantity, size, degree, value, or status.
Humans are certainly NOT equal when it comes to abilities, intelligence, perception, health, physical strength, attractiveness, wealth, etc.
If you can realise that, I am talking to a brick wall.
In this context, Merriam Webster dictionary defines "equal" as follow : a. of the same measure, quantity, amount, or number as another; b. like in quality, nature, or status.
The Oxford Dictionary has : being the same in quantity, size, degree, value, or status.
Humans are certainly NOT equal when it comes to abilities, intelligence, perception, health, physical strength, attractiveness, wealth, etc.
If you can realise that, I am talking to a brick wall.
DoctorP
先輩
- 3 Jun 2004
- 2,193
- 93
Humans have equal opportunity to learn and improve...some make use of that opportunity, others do not. Take homeless people for example. Some are content to sit around and pity themselves for their situation, others refuse and attempt to better themselves and their position. The two people are equal, but they choose to react to their situation differently.
Physical strength? One may be weaker than another, but that doesn't prevent them from training and becoming stronger. The weakness is not in their body, but in their mind! Intellectuals tend not to see a need to work the body, but would rather work the mind. Athletic minded people see things the other way...then there are people in the middle who see the benefit of both lifestyles. They are all equal, but the way they choose to live/attack life is different.
That is one way I see it. Some people attack life, with a vengence...others choose to just live it and take what is given to them!
(note: Your attempt at an insult fails once you use incorrect wordage...it just makes you look stupid!)
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
I am reminded of a book called Animal Farm....we are all equal but some are more equal than others. It's good book to read.
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
"Why can't Japanese treat all foreigners just as human beings instead of labelling them as "gaijin" and acting different from their usual behaviour between themselves ? ---quote from Maciamo (another thread)
Also you said how can you not label people everybody does it....sounds like you walk both sides of this fence.
Also you said how can you not label people everybody does it....sounds like you walk both sides of this fence.
Ma Cherie
Your Goddess is here
- 24 Mar 2004
- 1,342
- 52
Isn't it human nature to label people before seeing them as human beings first? Yes, everyone does label people, we may not realize it but we do. We do it everyday in our lives and probably don't even know it.
Goldiegirl
先輩
- 10 Aug 2006
- 1,694
- 69
You are right Ma Cherie...we all at some level label people, it's just a problem when we can't see past the label we have given them.
Ma Cherie
Your Goddess is here
- 24 Mar 2004
- 1,342
- 52
Oh I know, it's basically dehumanization.
- 28 Jul 2005
- 5,238
- 172
And good day again...it seems the planet (and yes, this object in space has still maintained its 'planet' identity) has spun around again...
Off topic? Perhaps yes, and no. It could be taken as a more indepth look at concepts lying inside those which come up under the very theme of this thread, and to that extent, is, actually, on topic--but just so 'micro' in nature that 'theme' cannot be seen in it. On the other hand, this specific volley of ideas appears to have been kicked off by the question Maciamo had raised in post #252 which could be taken (I mean there may be at least two ways of taking it) to not be so related to the overall theme. . .
I feel that I can understand the point Maciamo is making about not being 'equal', and would argue that it simply has not been expounded on quite well enough. From what can be gathered, after looking over so many research results and such, the basic genetically and randomly collected genes and chromosomes and so on that build the basic 'hardware' of mental and physical being of each and every individual are not the same--just as fingerprints are not. To that degree, and in that way, even after nature and nurture have had their effects, no two humans are 'equal'.
The matter to clearly conceptualize here, is the description behind the term 'equal'. In discussion which comes in under the areas that such definition (as used above) gives us, although, it is also equally important to grasp that we would not be talking about the state of being 'human'--say as opposed (for now) to being a lesser brain-state being--as it is applied to matters such as human rights, individual rights, and freedom of the individual regardless of ethnic background, sexual state (and that includes all aspects of it; to the larger degree) and normalicy state. (These all would be tempered by group bonding to some degree--be that good or bad being held aside for argument's sake at the moment.)
I have said it before, and will always say it, but the human element, as Goldigirl and Ma chan and others have been getting at, is what should always come first !! In that playing field, we are all equal !! Because of my sexual state, I am no greater in importance (and scientifically perhaps the lesser acually, according to evolutionary biology) than one which differs. Because of my genetical make-up, or geographical location of birth, nurturing, or personal history I am no more priviledged than one differing from that.
Again, the term 'gaijin' as used even in the example Maciamo provided, most likely identified only--thus should not be said to have racial connotations in the sense of that being a slur. This is so due to context, tone of voice, personage, and perhaps a few other things. In my experience here in Japan, that is the superlative of the several possible understandings.
Off topic? Perhaps yes, and no. It could be taken as a more indepth look at concepts lying inside those which come up under the very theme of this thread, and to that extent, is, actually, on topic--but just so 'micro' in nature that 'theme' cannot be seen in it. On the other hand, this specific volley of ideas appears to have been kicked off by the question Maciamo had raised in post #252 which could be taken (I mean there may be at least two ways of taking it) to not be so related to the overall theme. . .
I feel that I can understand the point Maciamo is making about not being 'equal', and would argue that it simply has not been expounded on quite well enough. From what can be gathered, after looking over so many research results and such, the basic genetically and randomly collected genes and chromosomes and so on that build the basic 'hardware' of mental and physical being of each and every individual are not the same--just as fingerprints are not. To that degree, and in that way, even after nature and nurture have had their effects, no two humans are 'equal'.
The matter to clearly conceptualize here, is the description behind the term 'equal'. In discussion which comes in under the areas that such definition (as used above) gives us, although, it is also equally important to grasp that we would not be talking about the state of being 'human'--say as opposed (for now) to being a lesser brain-state being--as it is applied to matters such as human rights, individual rights, and freedom of the individual regardless of ethnic background, sexual state (and that includes all aspects of it; to the larger degree) and normalicy state. (These all would be tempered by group bonding to some degree--be that good or bad being held aside for argument's sake at the moment.)
I have said it before, and will always say it, but the human element, as Goldigirl and Ma chan and others have been getting at, is what should always come first !! In that playing field, we are all equal !! Because of my sexual state, I am no greater in importance (and scientifically perhaps the lesser acually, according to evolutionary biology) than one which differs. Because of my genetical make-up, or geographical location of birth, nurturing, or personal history I am no more priviledged than one differing from that.
Again, the term 'gaijin' as used even in the example Maciamo provided, most likely identified only--thus should not be said to have racial connotations in the sense of that being a slur. This is so due to context, tone of voice, personage, and perhaps a few other things. In my experience here in Japan, that is the superlative of the several possible understandings.
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
Do you really believe that a starving Sudanese or Somalian has the same opportunity to learn and improve as a Westerner born in a wealthy and intellectual family ? I can't believe what I am reading.
Even within the same country, depending on one's social background, environment, wealth and innate intelligence or personality, people do NOT have the same opportunities to learn and improve. For instance, just to take the "Innate intelligence" part, it is a proven fact that people with a higher IQ's learn faster and crave more knowledge than people with lower IQ's.An ethnic Japanese will never become as muscular as a Black, for genetic reasons. There is no genetic equality between humans, except for identical twins.
- 17 Jul 2002
- 5,907
- 385
I was justly saying that they should have more accurate labeling. Instead of having only one term for all non Japanese, I wish that they distinguished people more based on nationality, ethnicity or many other factors. I hate people who see things in black and white, without nuances. The worst oversimplification is to say that we are all humans, equal in every respect, and nothing distinguish us. It only takes 2 neurons to have such a shallow view of humanity.
