>"chinaman", despite being 100% descriptive and not pejorative at all, is somehow racist>"paki", a clipping of "pakistani", again 100% descriptive and not pejorative, is somehow racist (but ones for firsties like "Ami" for "American" are fine)Does this happen in your country? These aren't even new words (which can be slurs). I don't understand why they're considered racist
Because people used them negatively, that’s the origin of most slurs
>>219785607A lib made a post complaining about how an old dude referred to Asians as Orientals. The microagression thing is incredibly gay
>>219785607Because it was developed by our allies in a friendly way and Americans don’t get offended by it. But I have seen some Americans online get offended at the term yank
>>219785607I think it's incredibly gay and unhealthy to be offended by such things, but when have you ever heard the phrase "chinaman" and not instantly thought of this nigga?
because it's not of white people thus it's racistyou must only address non-white people by the longest and most polite name possible if you even are allowed to talk to them
>>219785747that's mostly southerners mad they lost the war thoughbeit
>>219785842is finngolian racist?
>>219785875we're too white adjacent so no
>>219785607bruh
