ok, the title says enough.
-
MissBoom — 11 years ago(May 03, 2014 08:21 AM)
In australia we call indian people Indian
chinese, japanese, etc are referred as asians.
if you want to be technically correct. you should call one group east asian and other south asians but indians and chinese are not in the same category. period. they have completely different facial features and skin tone. -
alexharperxxx — 11 years ago(May 10, 2014 03:34 AM)
EXACTLY, Miss Boom!
They have different physical features, skin color, etc etc.
if we're talking about ethnicity, I think in America we've been labeling people of South Asian ethnicity with East Asian and that just doesn't make much sense as ethnicity goes. I think they should revamp the ethnic labeling system! -
Manth_Sigdaw — 11 years ago(July 02, 2014 10:53 PM)
Things have gotten better. I remember back in the 80s, as a young kid I would hear the horribly dated term "oriental" still being used to refer to people from China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc, etcand sometimes even for Indians. I don't ever hear anyone say "oriental" anymore as it's generally considered as offensive as calling a black person a "negro" or "colored".
Technically India is part of the Asian continent, and in technical terms Indians are Asians, but the problem is that in more general terms most of the world does not think of Indians when the term "Asian" is brought up. It confuses most people who want an easy all around phrase to describe one group of people. Most people like calling those from China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam as "Asians", but there is not an equally easy catch all term for people from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and the Fiji islands.
Some ignorant people will call Indians and Pakistanis "Arabs" or "Middle Easterners", but that is very incorrect. As of now, it may just be easy to call South Asian people Indians or Pakistanis (or Bangladeshis or Fijians). -
archer1812 — 10 years ago(February 14, 2016 01:35 PM)
Indian people are not asian
That is the dumbest thing I've read all week.
Your mistake is thinking that "Asian" is a r2000ace. It isn't.
Anyway, in Britain when they refer to Asians they usually mean someone from the Subcontinent (Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis), while East Asians (Chinese, Korean, Japanese etc) are referred to as Orientals. -
archer1812 — 10 years ago(February 20, 2016 03:11 PM)
The fact is that Asia is a continent made up of multiple cultures, ethnicities, and skin colors that run the gamut. If you can't see that, and lump them all into one race, then clearly you are the moron. Not to mention some pantywaist little a.hole who can't control his temper. And who gives a crap about what forms in the US say about, it's completely irrelevant.
-
ReelReviews14 — 9 years ago(January 30, 2017 12:15 PM)
Your mistake is thinking that "Asian" is a race. It isn't.
"Asian" is classified as a race by the US government. Specifically, the category is "Asian or Pacific Islander".
I agree its silly to lump in people from India with orientals, just because India is geographically part of "Asia". The Indian subcontinent is separated by the Himalayan mountains and has nothing in common with nations like China, Korean, Vietnam, etc. Indians are not the same race as someone from China or Japan. -
Vacuus — 9 years ago(June 18, 2016 08:35 PM)
The term you should be using is Mongoloid.
Asia is a continent. It has all sorts of ethnicities and races.
East Asians are Mongoloid. Indians are a mixture of Veddoids, Caucasoids and (in northeastern India) also Mongoloids.