From: sakimura@sscl.uwo.ca
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: Who started all this gaijin myth?! (was Re: Genitals in Japan)
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:48:55 GMT
Organization: Social Science Computing Laboratory

In article <MS-C.722505867.1103527590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>, Mark Crispin <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
> Michiaki Masuda writes:
>> So, how do you want us to call "gaijin"? We cannot call them "Nippon-jin",
>>can we?
> 
> Answer: how about ``hito'', ``o-kyaku-san'', etc.?
> 
> WHY is it so damn important to have to specifically say that the person is not
> of Japanese race?  Yes, I mean ``Japanese race'' -- I have *never* heard
> ``gaijin'' used to describe anyone who looks Japanese.
> 
Oh, I was referred to, once. (^_^).
That's of course, an exception.

> There have been any number of excuses such as ``How, when you have several
> different customers, would you identify in particular the customer who is a
> foreigner if you can't say `gaijin'?''  It is important to realize that this
> is nothing but an excuse.  How do you identify a particular customer if they
> are all Japanese, or if they are all foreigners?
> 
Suppose that one "hakujin" was in the shop, and rest were Japanese.
Then, it is most efficient to refer the person as "hakujin" because
it is most unambiguous.

If there are several "Gaijin"s in the shop, then the natural strategy
would be to divide the customers into 2 subsets, "Gaijin" and "Nihonjin"
and then, subdivide each subset until the person can be singled out.

If there are only Japanese in the shop, then, we could use sex 
as the first criteria of the differentiation. Then, we may go 
down by location, clothing, length of hair, etc. Am I a sexist
if I do that?

Differentiation is not discrimination. It is quite natural to 
use the most apparent feature of that person in the group of 
people to differentiate him or her. While it is possible to 
differentiate him by less obvious ways, it is not efficient 
nor natural.

> You can argue all you want that there is no racist intent behind the word
> ``gaijin''.  That argument is not valid:
>  1) you should have enough common sense to know that people do not enjoy being
>     singled out by race.
>
People do not enjoy being singled out by race in an intimidating 
context. I would not mind to be referred to as "Him, that Chinese gentleman
who is sitting beside the window." I do rather look like a Chinese than
a French.

>  2) you should have enough courtesy to stop doing it after you have been told
>     that some people find it offensive.
>
This is not solving the problem. This is evading from the problem. 
It often works in the way that it temporarily conceal the problem.
The real problem is not gone. What we have to do is,

1) Solve the misunderstanding around such contraction words like "Gaijin"
2) Try to convince the racist to change their mentality.
 
> White Americans learned in the 1960's that identifying black Americans by
> their race was offensive to blacks.  We don't say ``that negro'' or ``that
> black'' any more.  We say ``that person''.  Japanese people need to learn the
> same type of courtesy.
> 
Was the real problem solved by that?

I strongly feel that such cosmetic adjustment is nothing but 
postponing the time to really solve it.

What Japanese people (I hate this kind of generalization, BTW) 
need to learn is the reality, not the courtesy, but the fact that 
there is no need to fear or detest or admire "Gaijin" in general,
that such incomplete generalization is totally invalid. It has to
be carried through to the level of human being or kept to the 
individual level. 

Even then, such differentiation like "Gaijin", "Nihonjin", "blonde",
"Tall," "young," etc. may remain. It is perfectly right to remain. 
Neutralizing everything and to behave as if there is nothing to
differentiate one from another, and imposing one "standard" way
of viewing thing is dangerous. Do you remember what was done in Africa
during the colonial time?

Let's face it. Diversity is A FACT. And such diversity is the wealth 
of the world. What we have to care is to make sure that 
none of the subset is more equal than the others.

--
Natsu Sakimura