Eug
Senior Member
So... You're arguing the silent racists are bad, but the vocal ones are irrelevant. That makes no sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
is racism common in Toronto?
- Thread starter sangcho1989
- Start date
Tacoma
Active Member
With all due respect, to juxtapose gweilo and chinaman is absurd as the latter connotates oppression of the Chinese as in "no dogs or Chinaman allowed" signs that were once accepted in the American South.
On the contrary, the term gweilo arose in the 19th century and is associated with the demonization of Europeans during the occupation of China by foreign powers. The term "gwei" was also used against the Japanese when they occupied China.
So while both were used in a derogatory context, one was used to suppress and the other was used by the suppressed. Big difference, IMHO.
This is what I'm talking about. The term as a hateful reference was weak to begin with and today it's a slang term Caucasians refer to themselves, especially in HK.
Jeremy Gendstrasversk Sun
New Member
Toronto and racism make an oxymoron. I'll let you figure out why. 
drone
Active Member
No, my point is. It isn't a principal or government official who's going to be advertising their idiocy of being a racist. It's usually white guys with no brains. The ones you gotta worry about being racist is people in power who make decisions. Anybody whom is in power and is going to directly discriminate in anyway, is going to do it silently and, likely,effectively. People who are vocal about their racist views, don't go very far...remember David Duke in the states?
That's why I support TOTAL free speech..say what you want, so, we know who to avoid.
Last edited:
Eug
Senior Member
There are lots of different origins of racist remarks. However, they're still racist. Sorry, this "but-they-were-the-oppressed-way-back-so-it's-OK" type justification really has no place here in 2009.
Blacks sometimes call themselves niggers. Gays sometimes call themselves queer. Both have totally different connotation when said by a racist non-black or non-gay. Similarly, use of "gweilo" can be very benign, and maybe you're not aware of this, but some Chinese really do have contempt for the gweilo, and in that context it can be quite racist. An example would be something like "I would never let my daughter marry a gweilo. If she did, I'd disown her."
To put it another way, don't assume it's a term of endearment. Those who do assume that are just fooling themselves.
Last edited:
T
Tdot_one
Guest
^ I'm black and I could be called nigger twelve milion times. The word itself means jack shit to me on its own. Instead, the historical and, primarily (if not, only), CURRENT realities the term represents do. You don't need to be a damn nuclear physicist to access papers on the racialization of poverty amongst CANADIAN-born "visible minorities".
That applies even when controls are applied to:
Migration status.
Age.
Education.
Accent, dress code and personal hygiene? You get what I'm saying.
Regardless, a racialized disparity does appear and there seems to be world-class precedence (or tradition?) of racism when looking at the indigenous community. It isn't terribly surprising to see similar barriers occur even amongst a more educated, literate dark skinned migrant population, vs. say, near/illiterate European migrants in the past.
The fact that people seem to overemphasize on name calling (which is petty nonsense) just tells me that we have totally different experiences. In the past, many European migrants in the past, who entered such as the Irish, Jewish, etc were also discriminated against extremely harshly. I doubt most during that time will be pointing the petty slurs. Being untreated unequally despite having equal, if not better standings (as we see in this case), is why most were upset.
To most, the SITUATION ON THE FIELD, at that time matters. The term "donkey" exemplified that the Irish were marginalized people and "destined" on the path of failure. That group has been able to assimilate, unlike indigenous people, Blacks living in the East Coast, and even Asians, who still see very visible barriers in employment.
The disturbing fact is that "visible minorities" throughout time hasn't seen assimilation, even when being more educated than then norm (with Canadian qualifications). I mean, what more can you ***ing ask for? In fact, Canadian-born minorities, on a whole, are MORE educated than any other segment and yet we see this disparity appear as well.
Not saying there is no way out of it. I think one of the best methods for people of color is to opt out of useless art degrees. I've seen too many unemployed on that nonsense and it's probably going to continue for a while. The fact is, without communal depth in those shallow markets, it's difficult to access it.
Humans generally tend to cluster with those familiar, or in this case, an ideology developed ever since the first people in Canada were more-or-less exterminated. For that reason, it would make sense to enter engineering, the hard sciences (outside pre-med biology), at lower levels, carpentry, plumbing, and other areas where there is a shortage. That would mitigate racial and even gender selection, because employers wouldn't be able to afford to be picky.
However, that cold suggestion that I make would be extremely unfair for many tied to these poorly invested areas. It must also be a coincidence that these often tight and severely underpaid sectors are female-dominated and haven't been addressed, despite the fact that large-scale communism-esque funding and intervention went into developing suburbia which benefited a population who at that time were obviously (and still are) dominant.
Point being, you don't see pathways into the construction sector within Jane-Finch unlike "middle class" outer areas. The service sector is extremely regressive, underpaid and is not part of an organic route to sustainability. Historically (talking about valid generalizations here), higher-paying blue collar jobs is what created the middle class.
Unfortunately right now the reluctance to fund "unconventional" segments of society (as we see in the US) is pushing these nations into unsistainable path of credit. In the US, people of color and women have seen very limited investment in their work segments, or for former, living spaces included. I could say the same for women, but that could be saved for another thread if required. Having said that, I'm pretty disappointed.
I think I need to re-post this excerpt AGAIN:
This, by the way, repeats itself amongsts those of Aboriginal, Indian, Iranian, and Thai descent as well. The fact that Canadians often from smaller cities and towns are also being compared to visible minorities nearly-exclusively living in the higher cost and most dynamic cities suggests that problem is quite deep. Most scholars would agree.
That applies even when controls are applied to:
Migration status.
Age.
Education.
Accent, dress code and personal hygiene? You get what I'm saying.
Regardless, a racialized disparity does appear and there seems to be world-class precedence (or tradition?) of racism when looking at the indigenous community. It isn't terribly surprising to see similar barriers occur even amongst a more educated, literate dark skinned migrant population, vs. say, near/illiterate European migrants in the past.
The fact that people seem to overemphasize on name calling (which is petty nonsense) just tells me that we have totally different experiences. In the past, many European migrants in the past, who entered such as the Irish, Jewish, etc were also discriminated against extremely harshly. I doubt most during that time will be pointing the petty slurs. Being untreated unequally despite having equal, if not better standings (as we see in this case), is why most were upset.
To most, the SITUATION ON THE FIELD, at that time matters. The term "donkey" exemplified that the Irish were marginalized people and "destined" on the path of failure. That group has been able to assimilate, unlike indigenous people, Blacks living in the East Coast, and even Asians, who still see very visible barriers in employment.
The disturbing fact is that "visible minorities" throughout time hasn't seen assimilation, even when being more educated than then norm (with Canadian qualifications). I mean, what more can you ***ing ask for? In fact, Canadian-born minorities, on a whole, are MORE educated than any other segment and yet we see this disparity appear as well.
Not saying there is no way out of it. I think one of the best methods for people of color is to opt out of useless art degrees. I've seen too many unemployed on that nonsense and it's probably going to continue for a while. The fact is, without communal depth in those shallow markets, it's difficult to access it.
Humans generally tend to cluster with those familiar, or in this case, an ideology developed ever since the first people in Canada were more-or-less exterminated. For that reason, it would make sense to enter engineering, the hard sciences (outside pre-med biology), at lower levels, carpentry, plumbing, and other areas where there is a shortage. That would mitigate racial and even gender selection, because employers wouldn't be able to afford to be picky.
However, that cold suggestion that I make would be extremely unfair for many tied to these poorly invested areas. It must also be a coincidence that these often tight and severely underpaid sectors are female-dominated and haven't been addressed, despite the fact that large-scale communism-esque funding and intervention went into developing suburbia which benefited a population who at that time were obviously (and still are) dominant.
Point being, you don't see pathways into the construction sector within Jane-Finch unlike "middle class" outer areas. The service sector is extremely regressive, underpaid and is not part of an organic route to sustainability. Historically (talking about valid generalizations here), higher-paying blue collar jobs is what created the middle class.
Unfortunately right now the reluctance to fund "unconventional" segments of society (as we see in the US) is pushing these nations into unsistainable path of credit. In the US, people of color and women have seen very limited investment in their work segments, or for former, living spaces included. I could say the same for women, but that could be saved for another thread if required. Having said that, I'm pretty disappointed.
I think I need to re-post this excerpt AGAIN:
This, by the way, repeats itself amongsts those of Aboriginal, Indian, Iranian, and Thai descent as well. The fact that Canadians often from smaller cities and towns are also being compared to visible minorities nearly-exclusively living in the higher cost and most dynamic cities suggests that problem is quite deep. Most scholars would agree.
drone
Active Member
Then explain the success of chinese immigrants in Canada versus your assertion that visible minorities get the short end of the stick.
I'm no historian, but, they had they "head tax" as I belive it was called.
It is said that one chinese man died for every kilometer of railroad track laid across Canada..they were essentially slaves.
Until recently, they were surely out numbered by blacks in Canada.
Yet, I'm sure when I looked at the 2006 forensic reports, they had the lowest rate of incarceration. They likely have the highest rate of employment, university degrees etc.
I'm no historian, but, they had they "head tax" as I belive it was called.
It is said that one chinese man died for every kilometer of railroad track laid across Canada..they were essentially slaves.
Until recently, they were surely out numbered by blacks in Canada.
Yet, I'm sure when I looked at the 2006 forensic reports, they had the lowest rate of incarceration. They likely have the highest rate of employment, university degrees etc.
X2 Buyer
Active Member
I still do not agree with the use of the Cantonese speakers' norm to reflect the whole Chinese communities. Mainland China never used the term "gweilo" until "imported" from Hong Kong movies during late 1990s. We always called non-Chinese "the foreigners"..or white people, black people..Americans, Canadians etc. I could even say in Mainland China back in the two decades 80s and 90s, to marry a foreigner means some sort of pride to the family in many Chinese people's mind - basically because they represent the westernized civilization and a citizenship of freedom (we were not able to go abroad freely and the low standard of living). Nowadays it became less attractive because without marrying a foreigner you are able to get abroad by different ways, and the standard of living has been improved dramatically in China.
prosperegal
Senior Member
Strict, attentive parents? Most young people of Chinese descent I grew up (I'm 30, so this would have been in the 80s and 90s) with took piano, played some sort of sport (usually tennis or badminton) and probably went to some sort of tutoring program like Kumon (and this was like a decade before the rest of the Canadian population sent their kids). They didn't go overboard, but didn't limit their kids, either. Most had a well-rounded, polished upbringing.
drone
Active Member
my tone in posting this is not to antagonize,
so, is it possible to say that a visible minorities success is at least somewhat interdependant on familial supports/upbringing? As I'm sure if I looked at american stats. Most teen pregnancies are in the african american population, and I have nothing to prove this, but, I would be willing to guess that african american mothers are more often single. If I'm right, then the idea that visible minorities, especially african americans experience increased poverty, unemployment, etc.. may be, in part, to lack of natural support systems (family) and not due to discrimination?
The chinese have been here for less time than african americans, one would think that the longer a group has been established in a country, the more success it ostensibly should have over newer immigrants.
so, is it possible to say that a visible minorities success is at least somewhat interdependant on familial supports/upbringing? As I'm sure if I looked at american stats. Most teen pregnancies are in the african american population, and I have nothing to prove this, but, I would be willing to guess that african american mothers are more often single. If I'm right, then the idea that visible minorities, especially african americans experience increased poverty, unemployment, etc.. may be, in part, to lack of natural support systems (family) and not due to discrimination?
The chinese have been here for less time than african americans, one would think that the longer a group has been established in a country, the more success it ostensibly should have over newer immigrants.
golodhendil
Active Member
But of course, the use of the term "ghost" to describe foreigners originated in "mainland" (ie, rest of China) centuries before HK even existed as an entity.
Dugmor
Banned
I think I speak for all of us here when I say that it's not as common as we'd like it to be?
Tacoma
Active Member
I'll give you a real life example in Toronto. Back in the early/mid 70's, our home was vandalized by white teens calling us every derogatory racist name in the book while doing so. My parents called them gweilo a$$holes in response. Racist remarks flying both ways, but you're telling me both the situations are equal and my parents are "still racists"?
Sorry, but this "a racist remark is a racist remark" type justification and ignoring the past really has no place here in 2010.
This is hardly news. "I would never let my daughter marry a [racial reference here]. If she did, I'd disown her." is used by many races. But it's the speaker's intent and the entire phrase that's racist and not any word within it. Replacing gweilo with "white man" would make it no less a racist statement or the person no less racist.
So your example supports my point that gweilo as a deragotory term is very weak compared to other racially charged terms such as n!gger or ch!nk. As I said before, "gwei" has also been used by Chinese to refer to African Negros, Japanese and other racists, but its use is more to feel self-superior than to oppress or hurt those of other races, and today is used innertly as a slang for "white man."
Now if someone wants to use gweilo in a most racially insulting manner, s/he's free to do so. But expect indifference from your target on use of that term. To put it another way, don't assume it's a term of insult. Those who do assume that are just fooling themselves.
prosperegal
Senior Member
I've never heard of gwei being used for non-Chinese Asians. My grandparents refer to Japanese as yap-boon jai (Japanese boys) - and this is supposed to be insulting and South Asians are called "cha".
drone
Active Member
my in laws are chinese, and use gweilo to describe anybody whom isn't chinese. the say it means "stranger"