Re-working of definition
[NOTE: I have been trying to login on this entry, but it is not working. My username is Computer1200. Do I need a separate account for Wiktionary??]
I was the one who changed the definition, which was reverted by someone.
In my opinion, this definition is insufficient for multiple reasons, but one in particular: to say that the only ones who are marked with this "Asiaphile" moniker are "Caucasian men" is simply false. Next, when was the slang term only applied to "East Asian women?" When it is used in the derogatory way, it is meant to signify attraction to all Asian women, not just North East Asian. That is wrong.
To that end, it must be pointed out that said term is a slang term, and, as such, it is used in many different ways and has wildly different meaning depending on the speaker, listener, cultural context, among other factors. To simply define it, in relation to the more derogatory side, as, white men who want to have sex with East Asian women is unstudied and sophomoric, if not reckless and irresponsible. I contend that the best way to handle this — if it must be in Wiktionary — is to state clearly that the delineations of use generally fall along boundaries of controversy surrounding its use. We would do this with two different definitions, as already exists, but with a more expanded explanation.
Again, it is not a technical term, and cannot be found in academic work. Therefore, all we have to rely on is anecdote, and as such, it is imperative that we represent, to the greatest extent possible, all the possible uses.
Ultimately, the term can be highly inflammatory and racist as in some forms of use, it singles out racial groups. There is a higher standard of accuracy and care necessary for this kind of entry than other entries because of this.
I propose the following as a start for a new way to define this term in Wiktionary:
The term Asiaphile is controversial because it can, depending on the speaker and/or the listener, carry many different connotations and meanings. That said, however, the term, as defined, might be delineated in two ways as follows, one controversial, the other not:
1. A person interested in Eastern culture, society, geopolitics, or collective history. This definition does not assume, presuppose, or connote any fetish, derogatory sexual interest, or negative stereotyping of any group in Asian society, either past or present.
2. A controversial, derogatory slang term meaning non-Asian males who have interest in Asian females. The term applied in this manner, as slang, can mean a sexual interest in Asian females. Further, the term can also be used to imply non-Asian male focus on a stereotypical makeup of Asian females that is submissive and loyal that some Asian females find ignorant and offensive.
I am going to be checking in on this. It is very important to me that Wikipedia and Wiktionary get this right. As it stands, it is really not sufficient, accurate or useful. In the end, to define the controversial use of the word to only extend to white men and East asian women is simply false. 23:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC) [ My Wikipedia username: computer1200 ]
- Please note Help:Writing definitions; it may help to explain why your edit was reverted. Wikipedia treats subjects in depth. Wiktionary defines words. --EncycloPetey 00:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. But you do understand my protest about the choice of words within the definition, correct? I do not believe the words reflect the reality of how the term is used. Ultimately, it is a slang term. Does not Wiktionary have policies on slang? It seems to me that the term should be in Urban Dictionary where slang is welcome? Thank you. [ My Wikipedia username: computer1200 ]
- I do not dispute inclusion. I dispute the wording of the entry. I contend that saying it is ONLY "Caucasian" males is false, discriminatory, and inflammatory. Please disclose exactly what "published literature" you are referring to that states categorically that this is a phenomenon which pertains ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY to Caucasian males. Thank you. [computer1200]
- I mean that every published use of the word I've seen either says explicitly or implicity that Asiaphiles are Caucasian/European. Examples: Emily Ignacio's book Building Diaspora (2005), Cemil Aydin's The politics of anti-Westernism in Asia (2007), Sheridan Prasso's The Asian Mystique (2005). The word is indeed discriminatory and inflammatory, but so are many other words in the English language. Wiktionary explains how words actually are used by people, even if that use is narrow-minded, bigotted, racist, derogatory, etc. It is not the purpose of Wiktionary to redefine words, merely to define them. --EncycloPetey 06:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)