Talk:Laowai

Pejorative?

I am a Chinese and I highly doubt the word "Laowai" is pejorative. The use of "Lao ?" (old ?) is very common in Chinese. Besides laowai, there are Laoyin (old indian), Laomei (old American), and Laozhong (old Chinese), where the last one is frequently used in overseas Chinese community to refer to themselves. So how can that be "pejorative"? Sweeper77 (talk)

You doubt it, because you have never experience this racism and never will, end of story, instead you should grow some compassion and trust people on the receiving end. (Andrew) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.250.199 (talk) 10:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

The reason why people feel that Laowai is pejorative is because they don't understand the language. Lao is a neutral term, so is wai, which merely means 'foreign'. If you don't understand Chinese you can of course think that all references to you be derogative. There is a thin line between being oversensitive and really being discriminated against. 121.6.3.63 (talk) 06:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand the language and I find it deeply offensive. There are many reasons for this: 1. You fail to distinguish between different nationalities and keep yourself ignorant in the process. 2. Since you don't really use the term for all foreigners in China, only white ones, you are actually racially stereotyping people, which is something that should have been left behind with slavery. 3. It's a bad habit that you just can't kick - if you move to a Western country (and you probably have) you'll still use the term to refer to people who have lived in that country for generations. It implies you have more right to be in the country than they do! 4. It's offensive because, if you know that even if only some Westerners don't like it, you should stop using the word out of respect. Many Westerners do make efforts to do away with old, discriminatory language, you could do the same. 5. It's offensive because you accuse anyone who doesn't like it of not really understanding Chinese. Don't worry, you don't need to bring Westerner's linguistic abilities into the equation. Westerners DO have ample language skills. Assertions to the contrary are off-topic and add further insult to your already poorly justifiable use of racist speech. Many of us don't like the Chinese word, and we don't like the English either. We don't like being considered "foreigners", especially when we're not in China. (James) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesrlforsyth (talk • contribs) 11:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

It is a term used for identification. In the west, because of sensitivities towards so-called pejorative terms, many things are very difficult to do; for example, if I were to be selling coffees, as nicely and neutrally as I may, I wouldn't be able to say, "May the tall gentleman with black skin please come to the counter", as many would interpret that to be racist, even though there was no intention of harm in the first place. I have to shuffle through about 20 "gentlemen" before I reach my customer. Hence, I have to waste an additional 200 kilojoules of energy running around after this guy, repeatedly saying "excuse me, Sir". In China, we don't have such attitudes - we identify people based on their appearance, and we use words to describe them to assist in such identification, with no ill intent. It's just like man/woman, child/elderly, brown/blonde hair. It's something that can easily assist in identifying someone, why is it considered so "racist" to refer to people in this way? If political correctness was to expand futher, would we end up with a society where we would be prohibited from distinguishing between men and women, because it is sexist? So I would have to say "Would the individual who ordered a latte please..." to a woman, in a crowd of about 30 people?

I am currently living in Australia. My parents, all my friends, practically every Chinese I know refer to the local white population here as 老外 and 洋人. We're not saying that they are foreign to Australia, it's simply a means of identifying someone based on how they appear. They appear different to Chinese, and 老外 is just a name designated towards that group of people, based on history and whatnot. We never meant for it to be offensive; we just want to get an idea across in the most easy and efficient manner possible. Now, even if you have certain attitudes towards describing an individual, be it with malicious intent or not, you cannot expect someone else to share that same opinion. If I were to ask my family, I would be certain that they would refuse to "change this habit", as it makes life more difficult. "Looking for someone in a queue of ten people? Don't say "Indian guy", it's offensive!" Chinese people don't think that way. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 06:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I find it incredibly ignorant and offensive when used outside of China. Your argument about trying to describe people is weak. How about identifying someone by what they're wearing, their height, hair colour, or just pointing and saying "that guy over right there"? I don't think that's very hard at all. So you all your customers are white Australians, how exactly is saying "would the laowai please come and get your latte" going to make for an easier description? I know in China it's different. There's no way I can expect some farmers from Anhui to understand these Western sensitivities. However, I do expect Chinese people coming to Western countries to understand them, much the same as I don't go to China and start shooting off about sensitive topics there (not saying Western people don't do this, but of course I don't agree with it). The bottom line is if you use a certain term to refer to a group of people, and said group of people doesn't like that term, you shouldn't use that term anymore. Simple respect. Anawrahta (talk) 18:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

What is considered taboo depends on the person. I've been to a Catholic school, and you have no idea how many times the creepy old ladies have told me off because "pointing is rude", and given me a 2 hour lecture on it. One person's opinion is not necessarily universal. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Reply to James' 5 points:

1. If I had a dollar for every time someone has said "ALL ASIAN ROOK ALIKE", I would be able to purchase Microsoft Corporation. It's the same everywhere. Do you honestly believe that a Chinese has the ability to tell between a Frenchman and a Spaniard?
2. Yes, it is a term for white people. We call Black people 黑人, Japanese people 日本人, but white people 老外. Keep in mind of the historical context, and that there were no Africans in China during the Opium Wars, nor Filipinos running the concessions in Shanghai.
3. Refer to my explanation above.
4. Westerners avoid words that describe races because in their culture, they believe identification of races to be wrong. Plus, many of these words, such as nigger, kike, spic and gook were meant to be offensive. 老外 does not have the same "offensive weight". Otherwise, we would be using phrases such as 死洋鬼 and 西方野蛮.
5. Refer to my explanation above.

Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 07:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Reply to 李博杰's 5 points:

1. Yes actually I believe every Chinese person who has the ability to communicate has the ability to determine the difference between a Frenchman and a Spaniard. All they have to do is politely ask the person in question.
2. I don't hear 黑人 used much anymore, usually I hear 非洲人. That's a whole different can of worms that not being black, I cannot comment on. Calling a Japanese person Japanese is much more specific and totally different than just lumping a whole group of people together and calling them something. Let me explain it to you further. Japanese implies a culture, a history, an ethnicity, and is generally a far more descriptive term than Laowai, which simply and ignorantly groups all Western ethnicities, nationalities and cultures under one umbrella.
3. -
4. Excuse me, but who elected you to speak on behalf of people from the West, their culture, and what they believe in? There's a HUGE difference between identification of races, and racial epithets. Perhaps you should read up on this before you make anymore uninformed comments.
5. -

In the Australian (and probably other) legal system, we have the idea of "standing", it means one needs to actually be concerned or affected by a potential wrong in society to be able to bring it to court. What I find amazing is that so many Chinese vehemently stand up for their right to refer to Westerners as 老外, as though it is an essential part of their culture. Since when has something "outside" a culture been an integral part of the said culture? The whole idea is false by definition. On this same idea of "standing", I would definitely say that anyone who is the "referent" has standing, i.e. has the right to say whether s/he approves of the said term. 李博杰, on his user page has some interesting ways of describing himself on the right hand side. He has 该用户的母语是中文 (This user is a native speaker of Chinese), he's also got "This user is a native speaker of English." OK, he also says "这个用户是位海外华侨。 This user is an overseas Chinese." and "这个用户以作中国人而自豪。 This user is proud to be Chinese." So, confers upon himself the luxury of having his nationality *named*, i.e. Chinese. Does he grant the same to Westerners in Australia? No, don't worry about naming their heritage, 老外 "old outsider" will do. Never mind that Westerners have a longer history than the Chinese in Australia, all his friends call them 老外, so he'll do exactly the same. Then it says "这用户坚决地反对台独，藏独，和疆独。 This user strongly opposes Taiwan, Tibet, or East Turkestan independence." OK, not surprising, he (and "[his] parents, [his] friends, [and] practically every Chinese [he] know[s]") has no regard for the feelings or preferences of others and will run over them with a tank the proportions of which any Beijinger like himself would be familiar (1989). If it were Starbucks where he happened to be serving coffee, they'd ask him his name first so that they could identify him the way he himself chose. As a rough guide: If you know someone's name, use their name; if you don't know their name use a pronoun (s/he); if you don't know which specific person you're talking about, say "someone"; if you happen to work for the department of immigration, and you really have no other better way to describe a person, use "applicant" or some other such relevant term. If 李博杰 continues to use ignorant language to describe people there's not much we can do. But I do have many Chinese friends, and none of them ever call me "foreigner"/老外/外国人 because they know the friendship would be over. 李博杰 would probably laugh and say that all my Chinese friends are calling me those terms behind my back. Well, that would be his estimation of Chinese culture, not mine. James Forsyth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.158.184.72 (talk) 05:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

"people from the West", If you are referring to me from Australia, that is an insult - from what point on the World am I west from? Certainly not China - ok, I am West from New Zealand. I am not a Westerner and in Australia I am not a foreigner. Call Australian's Australian. ZhuLien:ZhuLien 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Quote: "This user strongly opposes Taiwan, Tibet, or East Turkestan independence" - your Ad hominem is derailing the discussion, and is completely irrelevant to the topic. If you wish to engage in an educated discussion regarding the article topic, then please do so. Otherwise, I have no time for you, and you comments which are borderline WP:ATTACK.

1989 was 22 years ago, and Abu Ghraib was six years ago. Not only is your point irrelevant, but it is also overused everyday in the western media, as if it happened yesterday (and yes, I do watch Australian TV and it is mentioned every time a Australia-China economic trade deal is announced), to the point of ad nauseum. If you have a problem with people calling you laowai, there are many ways you can deal with it. Hold it in, or start a protest march, I don't care. If you would like to discuss this article, then I will by all means join in with you. But if all you intend on doing is talking about who I am as per my userpage, and irrelevant things like 1989, then all I have to say for you is adiós, señor. Oh my, the Northern Territory intervention was 3 years ago - see? I can write irrelevant nonsense to try to back my arguments too. But does it make me a more credible person? I sure hope not. And don't get me started on the social implications and politics behind 1989, and the one-sided-POV that most of you people actually have about it. How much do you actually know about the students? Most likely you've never heard of Sitong Electronics. Most likely you've never heard about the televised cuss sessions with Li Peng. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

1. You are mainly referring to formal sittings. 老外 is scarcely used in formal sittings - when was the last time you have heard 老外 during the National People's Congress, or on CCTV? It is informal speech we are talking about, and as with all cultures, there are tidbits here and there within common speech that some may find objectable. Here in Australia, University students aren't the nicest little bunnies. I have Anglo-Saxon friends, and we would occasionally go drink at a pub/bar/club, and regardless of whether I hung out with girls studying nursing, boys studing engineering, or just lazy university sloths, these students would refer to people in manners such as "look at that Abbo cunt!" and "move out of the way, you slant-eyed fuck!" in a very casual, matter-of-fact manner, without even the slightest feeling of taboo-ness. (as per WP:NOTCENSORED, my edits are not to be refactored by anyone.) Regardless of whether these were A+ grade students, or failing students; regardless of their socioeconomic background; regardless of how intoxicated they are; regardless of the sitting (this can even be at a McDonald's, or on a bus), the word cunt, along with an ethnic adjective, is a standard, yet informal, way of referring to someone amongst youths. In most cases, people don't take it seriously. I don't, unless someone had pure intent on harming me; I could say to a friend "hey you filthy (ethnic name) dickhead", and expect to recieve a friendly reply along the lines of "not bad, you gook faggot". Saying that Chinese people are ignorant and are bigots because they use terms such as 老外 is pot calling the kettle black, as all people have their informalities in speech. Here in Australia it's the youths, and perhaps grown people living in non-urban New South Wales and Queensland. In China, everyone uses 老外, but that doesn't make them any more ignorant than Australians. (inb4 "you're making this up". If you disagree, then you're not Australian.)
2. I saw somewhere above that an alternative would be to refer to hair colour or height. How practical would this actually be? Ethnicity is much more specific. And I repeat again, whatever values you may have in the West are utterly irrelevant in China. You can't force someone to change, as they have their own right of freedom. And I never said that I would refer to Australians as 老外 in Australia: since this is Australia, I would be prohibited in doing so, but if i ever were to do so, I would use "white", "Caucasian", "Anglo-Saxon" or "Australian", which are neutral, non-disparging terms. I think one of the editors has misunderstood my words.
3. When Chinese people come to a foreign country, the people around them are still considered foreign to them. When Chinese people then have children in these countries, the second and third-generation children are still brought up to believe that these people are foreign to them (not to the country, but to them), as per the sentiments of the parents. This really isn't that surprising to me at all, but then again, I'm not in the same shoes as you. Also, Chinese people are very cautious about assimilation (to the point where non-assimilated Chinese look down upon assimilated Chinese. That is, those that cannot speak Chinese, eat fish and chips, and behave like blue-collar Australians.) That is the entire reason why people such as Pauline Hanson intend on expelling us from the country.
4. I cannot speak on behalf of the West, but I can speak of what I have experienced, what I have been exposed to, and what I have been accustomed to. You are in the same position: you cannot speak on behalf of Chinese people and say that we have no regard for your dignity, when we believe that we are using a fairly neutral term to describe a group of people.
5. Keep in mind that Chinese people are more worried about maintaining their calories than other people's feelings when we're selling coffees. We weren't brought up to be Dr. Phil. Most people born after 1970 are selfish, because of the one child policy. Expecting single-children to be nice like those who aren't is wanting a bit too much. It's reality, deal with it.

My two cents, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 14:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

1. I'm sorry for the incivility of some Australians, however your anecdotal life experience does not translate into the general way things are, especially for rest of the world outside of Australia. You're right, I'm not Australian and if that's the way conversation is held there then I'm glad I'm not. That kind of language would not be tolerable in many places regardless if the setting is formal or not. So I never use racist obscene language and yet, me not wanting to be referred to as a foreigner within my own country is pot meet kettle? In China, NOT everyone uses 老外, many people are aware that it is not polite speech, and many people use 外国人 or even make sure to ask the person their nationality and then refer to them as that. Then again, it's not my concern what some uneducated migrant workers shout out to people of different skin colour in the mainland.
2. I never said I had a particular problem with people using the term 老外 on the mainland. Where the problem lies is people using it outside of China to refer to those native to the country their in. You wrote further above "I am currently living in Australia. My parents, all my friends, practically every Chinese I know refer to the local white population here as 老外 and 洋人" but you claim to never use it yourself. Is that so?
3. Again you go on with these generalizations. Speaking on behalf of all overseas Chinese now is it?
4. It's great you've grown up with some interesting experience being a different ethnicity from the majority, understanding a different culture etc. but to take your experience and then apply it to everyone and everything as if that's just the way things are, it doesn't work.
5. Most kids born since 1970? Because of the one-child policy? You paint with a huge brush there, especially considering the one-child policy didn't take effect till 1979. Care to demonstrate some sociological research that demonstrates most Chinese born after 1970 are selfish? While I don't dare say there aren't any, I would be very careful to say most. Are you speaking here from experience again? Anawrahta (talk) 12:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

For number 5, yes, it is based on my own experiences, but it seems that my view seems to be universal even amongst mainlanders themselves. A quick look through some of the posts at ChinaSMACK will provide a few examples of mainland attitudes towards mainlanders. It is quite a melancholic thing to believe, but I cannot see how things could possibly be otherwise. I also believe that there were a few PBS documentaries made a few years ago about China's growingly selfish and capitalistic youth. Generally though, it tends to be the post-80s and post-90s, although it does not exclusively have to be within those two groups. Most netizens refer to Post-90s as 90后脑残 (post-90's brain disabled) due to their self-centred, non-respectful behaviour. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

李博杰: On your mention of Abu Ghraib: You're trying to point to the collective sins of the West here, which is your continued error... I'm an Australia, so I'm not even from the same country as those who operate that facility. But it's all the same to you, right? We're all just foreigners in your eyes. Since you are "Asian", I could talk about the atrocities of the Japanese during WWII and it would be just as relevant as your mention of Abu Graib.

I note you haven't addressed Anawrahta's question about the difference in your own behaviour ("And I never said that I would refer to Australians as 老外 in Australia") and your loved ones ("My parents, all my friends, practically every Chinese I know refer to the local white population here as 老外 and 洋人"). I'm curious as to your response to Anawrahta's observation.

I read your description of the behaviour of some Australians. Being from Melbourne I can honestly say that if anyone spoke like that in public it wouldn't be viewed upon favourably by the vast majority of people. I note that Australia is the country you were born in, you and your family must have found it quite accommodating on the whole. On the treatment of Westerners in China I will quote another blogger who's experience is very much like my own in China (I had a guy want to fight me because I didn't like him yelling 老外 at me from across the street.) This blog is already connected with this page in the links. The blogger concerned is answering the question about whether the term is derogatory (and here I have a minor disagreement with Anawrahta in that "foreigner" terms are also stupid *within* China, as well as outside)

Quote:

    Stephanie 23.06.06

   Connotations of words are informed by their use. When the word “nigger” was first used, white people didn’t mean anything by it either. But as time went on, the USE of the word “nigger” shaped the connotation. So it is with laowai. When I walk down the street and in 15 minutes get 5 people yelling laowai at me and then sniggering about it with their friends, how does it make me feel? The people who call me “laowai” never want to make conversation. They are always passers-by, lookers-on, and they almost always have a crowd of friends with them to impress. They could yell “banana” the same way at me and eventually “banana” would become a derogatory or insulting word. Rarely has anyone said “laowai” to my face. They say it after you have walked past them. People who are our friends never call us laowai. Parents have corrected their children in front of us when their children call us laowai. White people used to think “nigger” was an okay word to use – they had to be taught not to use it. So with Chinese. My Chinese friends will insist that it is not a bad word. After I explain to them my personal experiences with the word, they tend to agree with me. When I hear the word “laowai” I hear “nigger” Never have I felt that way about any other Chinese word.
   54
   Stephanie 23.06.06

   One more comment – black people in the U.S. can call each other “nigger” and themselves “nigger” but you will never ever see them tolerate this from a white person. Why? Useage and context contribute more to the meaning of a word than its dictionary definition. Therefore the argument that “Well, foreigners in China call themselves ‘laowai’ so therefore it is not a derogatory word is misguided. By the way, has anyone come up with a corresponding insult that we laowais can respond with? I’ve tried laoshu before but Chinese people probably take this as a compliment. Oops! Did I just say something derogatory? Well, after years of being degraded and treated like an animal on the street, the anger kind builds up. Somedays it’s all I can do to keep from kicking someone in the balls.

Unquote

Now, like I have said, I've experienced similar abuse in public in China.... I suspect much more often than your anecdotes about treatment of Aboriginals and Asians in Australia. I happen to be a firm believer in the rights of Aboriginal people in this country. If anyone has the right to call me a foreigner, it's THEM, certainly not you!!!

All your talk about ad hominem and ad nauseum etc. You offend me first with your defence of the term foreigner. It's interesting that you mentioned Aboriginals. Let's have some respect for the indigenous people of Tibet and East Turkestan (Taiwan also has it's own Aboriginals, but that's different on one level to independence). Your political comments on your own page betray your own attitudes to them.

I mentioned above that I have a minor difference with Anawrahta regarding the use of 老外 within China. For me to have a difference with another person is just a part of everyday life, we all have diffences. However, you claim that ALL your friends and ALL your relatives and ALL the Chinese people you know use 老外. I think you cherish your own herd mentality. You have benefited greatly from the multiculturalism of Australia, it's time you treated Westerners with the same courtesy as has been extended to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Jamesrlforsyth (talk • contribs)

Regarding Abu Ghraib, I was giving an example of a poor argument, to match with the ad hominem you have given me. Regarding "Chinese people sniggering and using the word", the actions of a few shouldn't represent that of the whole. There is by no means a consensus among all Chinese that it should be used that way.

Also, from "Let's have some respect for the indigenous people of... East Turkestan" you are implying that Uyghurs are indigenous to East Turkestan. Now you're pretending to be an expert at something that you are not. The Uyghurs came from the Mongol steppes, and when they were driven out by the Khitans, settled in what is now Xinjiang. Keep in mind that 500 years before that happened, the area was occupied by the Tang Dynasty, and 200 years before that, it was occupied by what now ascend from modern Khirgiz and Kazakhs. The Uyghurs by no means are "indigenous" to the area. They came afterwards. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 07:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

You don't really seem particularly interested in answering the arguments anyone actually puts to you. You find convenient holes. You assumed right about me not being a sinologist, though it's dangerous to say online "you're pretending to be an expert in something that you're not".... I was really just answering your self-righteous suggestions about the treatment of Aboriginals of Australia. Since when have you ever cared about other people's rights? Westerners in Australia and other Western countries can justifiably be called "foreigners" in your eyes. Further, I was talking about all those disputed territories of China. My point is, stop talking as if you care about Aboriginal Austalians when you think the Han people (& mainland China) can just tread all over everybody else. So I confirm, I'm not a sinologist, but I don't need to know 10,000 years of Chinese history to know that it sucks to move to other people's countries and call them foreigners when you get there (and don't come with any crap about White Australians being colonisers - the Chinese call whites laowai in Europe too).

To clarify: Are you saying that the Han Chinese were in East Turkestan ever since the Tang dynasty? Or are you against Uyghur independence because the Han Chinese were there "once"?

You say "We think it's a neutral term." I'm here to tell you otherwise. 黑人， 印度人，西方人 all allow the recipients some identity. But to say 老外 means that the person is a "foreigner" which means less right to be in a place than you do. Not that I'd ever refer to you as one, but in truth you are really more of a foreigner in Australia than I am. If all Westerners can be lumped in the same basket as "foreign", regardless of where they are (the logical absurdity! can't you see it?) then it would be perfectly OK to confuse the Chinese with the Japanese. Now, I wouldn't want to insult the Japanese.

Although I will say that if it is the case that the Tang dynasty which you refer to vacated the area a hell of a long time ago, then anyone who has been around for more than a hundred years or so must have some legitimate claim to the land. Unlike you people, you get off the plane and continue calling people foreigners because your brain still hasn't left China, and neither have your political affiliations and biasses.

You said "There is by no means a consensus among all Chinese that it should be used that way." You are saying that I am guilty of ad hominem and that you are after a sensible discussion. Sometimes you need to concede a point in order to actually have one.... Why didn't you concede that there is no consensus among Australians when it comes to rudeness? You expect us to believe the same about the Chinese (despite the quite unanimous treatment I've personally received in China.) I remember a group of young students setting up a display of some kind, sensible, university student looking types, they had flyers written in Chinese, and they offered me one. I gave a characteristically Chinese wave of the hand to say I didn't want one, and they all burst into shrieks of laughter (no discernible reason except my race - oh, very funny, this guy won't be able to read our flyer anyway). Nobody there protesting about my treatment, and I've only given you one of many examples of my treatment over there. I'd love you to be treaded in Australia the way I've been treated in China - just for one day. Any longer I wouldn't wish on you. You used words in your previous post that I haven't heard on the streets of Melbourne for a long long time. Also, if you want to have a sensible, on-topic, discussion, then you should answer the very valid points made by myself and Anawrahta, rather than just throwing your latinisms around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.202.24 (talk) 08:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of disputed territories... Here's a scenario for you. With continued migration China could possibly claim Australia in a few hundred years... what would be the best way to do it? Convince everybody that Westerners are "foreigners", then gradually everyone will come to accept the idea. Then in a few hundred years, say that Westerners have been "foreigners" ever since 2010, and hey presto! Australia is yours!

Lao is neutral. Granted. Wai is not neutral. It's offensive. How can a migrant come to my country and call me an outsider? [Again, I say 'my' with no claim above the Aboriginals, but remembering my previous point about use of 'laowai' in England and Continental Europe]. It stinks. And anyone who defends such behaviour stinks too (and so do their "...parents, ... friends, [and] practically every Chinese [they] know"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.39.247.185 (talk) 01:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

	Here's another good reason not to say "foreigner":

<quote> Strevens (1980/82, p. 71) provides an example of a speech from a Singapore’s Representative to the United Nations: “when one is abroad, in a bus or a train or aeroplane and when one overhears someone speaking, one can immediately say this is someone from Malaysia or Singapore. And I should hope that when I’m speaking abroad my countrymen will have no problem recognizing that I am a Singaporean.” This example illustrates the reason why many people prefer keeping their accent; they want to be recognized as having their own nationality.* </quote>

Note, he didn't say he wanted to be recognised as a foreigner, but as a Singaporean.

I have some ridiculous Chinese language learning materials (for listening) which features the story of some Westerners visiting China. The Westerners in this listening material (which was made by Chinese people) introduce themselves as "我是外国人" (I am a foreigner). (a) As if it isn't obvious in the first place (b) Who would ever introduce themselves as that? I've never heard a Chinese person introduce him/herself to me as a foreigner, they seem quite proud to be able to say they are from China. I don't blame them, but I expect the same treatment.

• From STREVENS, Peter. Teaching English as an International Language: from Practise to Principle. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1980/82 (cited by Liana Bairros de SOUZA in COMMUNICATION ACCOMMODATION THEORY (CAT) AND THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.156.122.181 (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting that, as it currently stands, the etymology and usage section has 5 paragraphs - of which four (paras 1,2,4 & 5) all contain the word "derogatory" or "pejorative". Is this meant to be the subject matter of the section? Or do the Chinese use derogatory words disproportionately often? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesrlforsyth (talk • contribs) 00:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I have lived in China for almost 18 months and regardless of what the Chinese think and their reasons for using this term, it is derogatory. Let me explain: 1. Any time a foreigner is reminded that he is a foreigner, he feels unwelcome. Just think if people referred to you as Asian in the West and you could hear them say this as you walk by? Do you think foreigners do not understand Chinese? Personally, I find it insulting to hear anyone say LaoWai when I walk by - especially when I know they know I can hear it. Are they so dumb that they don't realize I know what it means? What if the Westerners said Chink every time they saw you so that you could hear them? 2. Labels and categorization of people causes division. 3. Any verbal word that is offensive should be avoided, not just LaoWai.

James, I think you are mistaken about the expression not being derogative. It is. 114.225.81.231 (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi unsigned114.225.81.231, I think you have misinterpreted me. I agree with you 100%. To reiterate: I can't stand the terms foreigner/老外/外国人. I agree with you that they are racist terms, and particularly vile when used by Chinese migrants in Western countries. (Most) Chinese people constantly claim that it's not derogatory/贬义词. That's because they've grown to accept such stupid terms and fail to realise that it is inherently offensive to move to a place where the locals have lived for generations and start calling them foreigners, regardless of the language. The only reason why so many Westerners agree with such terminology is (a) they don't understand (b) they lack vision as to what the future outcome of such language use can potentially do to them.

In fact, recently I posted the following somewhere else:

Don't get sucked into the idea that "white guys" equals "foreigners". I noticed in your post you have used the terms interchangeably. Chinese people certainly might think that way, but you're certainly doing yourself a disservice addressing yourself and other Westerners in this way.

Did you know that Chinese people use the term "foreigner" (both in English and Chinese (老外/外国人)) so habitually that they can't stop using the term even after they have migrated to a Western country? Surely you don't regard it as acceptable to be referred to as a foreigner in the country in which you were born?

The other problem with being called a "foreigner" is that it's a term that you will never be able to shake, which is wrong. For example, if you ever decided to move to China, you'll be referred to as a foreigner from the first day, and after 20 years - no difference. USA and all other Western countries are deemed to be multicultural by default, so it is considered wrong to call people "foreigners" there... often it's Westerners themselves who will cry "racist" when they hear you use the term referring to non-whites.

Another problem with the term "foreigner" is... why are you using it online? There are no "countries" on the internet. Contrary to Chinese opinion, China is not the centre of the world. "Foreigner" has no useful referential value here.

One final problem with the term "foreigner" is that it is used unfairly in places like China. For example, Japanese people in China are usually referred to as "Japanese", Africans as "African", etc. But it doesn't matter to them where the Westerner comes from, they are marked with a term which denotes outgroup status - "foreigner".

To me the term is a real insult. I hope I've explained myself clearly and that in future you can be proud of your heritage and either refer to yourself as an American, or, if you want to be more general, a "Westerner". If you wish to continue to use the word "foreigner" in this way, I opt out of your definition, because I do have a home.... I have a place where I am a local, where the term "foreigner" simply doesn't apply, it's a misnomer.

regards,

James Forsyth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesrlforsyth (talk • contribs) 02:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Let me agree with my fellow US/European China-expats and former expats - laowai most definitely is used in a pejorative, dismissive, and rude sense. You need only walk down the street in any Chinese city to hear examples of it being used as such (though it seems to be getting rarer in the really big cities). Believing this to be the case is not evidence of ignorance of the Chinese language - I speak, read, and write Chinese fairly well, which of course meant that when people said things like "look at that 'Hello'! What a big nose that laowai has", loudly, in my hearing, whilst pointing at me, I could understand both the meaning and the context of what they were saying - and they were not using laowai in a friendly or affectionate sense, but instead as a disrespectful racial identifier. It was very obvious that it did not mean "foreigner", not only because the people in China who used the term to address me had no way of knowing where I was actually born, but because it was never used to refer to expats of Asian descent. And yes, if you were born in China but live in, say, the UK, and still refer to the native people there as laowai, then you are basically being racist. FOARP (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Word choice

I didn't change the term to "collected" to vindicate European powers. "Extorted" is a charged word that specifically means to coerce unjustly. "Collected" is a neutral term. It is not the wikipedian's place to make moral judgements about historical events, even if that event is the Holocaust, near-unanimously regarded as a terrible atrocity. It might be more appropriate to include a passage about how the Opium Wars are viewed by historians as having been unjust, but this would need citation. The reason I took out the word "extorted" is because it is no different than saying "stupid Europeans" or "very mean British". Whether accurate or not, it's not scholarly.--Zeplin007 20:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I wrote the original article, and I don't have any problem with the edits. Just keep in mind that there are times in history where neutral terms are inappropriate. You wouldn't call the holocaust an "unfortunate event", and it wouldn't be wrong to use a word like "brutal" to refer to slavery. In this article Zeplin007 changed the word "extorted" to "collected" for a reference to First Opium War and Second Opium War, when Europeans governments supported European drug smugglers who illegally sold opium to the Chinese, who were attempting to ban the drug. Wide spread opium use during the Qing dynasty is considered by nearly all historians of Chinese history to have been a major factor factor in the decline of Chinese power and the root of suffering for thousands of Chinese addicts. When the Chinese attempted to stop these smugglers Britain and France went to war with China, destroyed their armies and coastal cities, forced the Chinese to sign away the sovereignty over Hong Kong, Shanghai and several other coastal towns, and then made the Chinese pay millions of dollars to pay for the drugs that the Chinese government had originally confiscated. If that's not extortion, then I don't know what is, but a harsher term then "collected" should be used. But I'll let someone else make that edit. David Straub 12:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Although I've tried to refrain from editing this article, I really cannot let this go on any longer. I'm going to work in Shanghai for a while and was trying to do some objective research before I went. Wikipedia (minus talk pages) is not the place to interject one's own opinions regarding the supposed racial force behind a word or compare degrees or types of racism among words. I've added some minor edits to the main article page to eliminate such instances. I hope it is understood that this is not mean to undermine what may or may not be true according to people with a lot more Chinese experience than me. It is merely an issue of style. No one wants to endure a wikipedian lamenting about how offensive a word is. Readers want objective, fact-based, neutral reporting. As the article previously stood, several statements exhibited impossible comparisons and generally "begged the question".--Zeplin007 00:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

There are currently two points in this article where it is said that "lao" in laowai connotes respect, which is inaccurate (but is a common misunderstanding). Laowai is a colloquial word for foreigner, as opposed to a more formal word such as waiguoren. For more discussion, see the following two pages (the first is written by myself). -- Todd May 4, 2005.

• http://www.waze.net/china/laowai.php
• http://sanpaworn.vissaventure.com/?id=123

Having lived in China for close to 5 years, I can verify that "laowai" does not connote respect. It is not inherently friendly (or unfriendly) either. When respect is truly intended, other words are used. --Sinosplice 01:17, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

How about (cautiously) using the example of "Australian" vs "Aussie" to illustrate that laowai is an informal term (it would not be used on formal occasions), but is more or less neutral? -- Todd 03:47, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Okay, who updated the article? "Respect" has become "friendly", and I agree with Sinosplice that this is not really the best definition either...can we just say "neutral" and leave it at that? Also, I think "lao zhong" is probably only used in overseas chinese communities. And another thing I've noticed, the "Laowais and the Media" section is about foreigners and the media, it is not related to the word "laowai" itself. -- Todd@waze 10:53, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree with this: The "lao" in "Laowai" literally means "old" and in this context is usually intended to denote familiarity and a degree of casual friendliness. Foreigners seem to have a big hangup with "lao" not really meaning anything, but here it's really the case. For other words, "lao" does indeed mean "old," or connote respect, but not here. The Chinese language has a tendency to form words with two syllables over words with one to avoid ambiguity. Hence words like laoshu (mouse), zhuozi (table), shitou (stone). In these cases, "lao," "zi," and "tou" have no meaning. This is a well-documented linguistic feature of the Chinese language. People should really stop trying to inject their own feelings into the language; it's really very simple. Laowai is a casual, netrual word meaning "foreigner." --Sinosplice 03:18, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

If laowei is neutral than so is 'nigga', 'chink', and 'gook'.

Word "lao"in "laowai" doesn't mean old.It is not a nutral word. old in chinese"老", but the "lao" in "laowai" is "佬" it means "Disrespectful name for foreigners". You can find this word in chinese dictionary.

 people write "老"but not "佬" because it's easier to write.So now they just use character "老" but it means "佬" it doesnt mean "old".

Who have been in china or Taiwan long enough can understand　what “do not like foreigners” it is part of Chinese culture. Taiwan is the same because they are all chinese ． P.S. please forgive me for my bad english July 2005

-- This is absolutely a ridiculous interpretation. "老" in this context is like "old buddy" in English, which add casual and friendly tone to the word. We call ourselves "老中" here so we are self-insulting? Sweeper77 (talk)

I can't believe all this talk about 老 all the time. Forget that. What *is* insulting is when Chinese people come to the country I was born in and don't know of any other word to descibe me other than 老外, despite the fact that I am *definitely* not a foreigner in that country. So, instead of debating the merits and demerits of the 老, think about how faulty 老外，外国人 and "foreigner" are, if Chinese people can't think of any alternative even when they are outside China. This is what makes these terms offensive. And furthermore, why is it only applied to Westerners? And also, why can't Chinese people do the same as in Western countries who on the whole name people from other countries by the name of the actual country, rather than just saying "foreigner"? I shouldn't generalise. Some Chinese people have dispensed with such stupid ignorance, but many haven't. However, the most ignorant and primitive, mutated minds are those Westerners who stand up for being called "foreigner". Have some pride in yourself and insist on being named in accordance with your actual country, just like the Chinese would prefer. A guideline: We should address people in the same way that they actually introduce themselves. If I say I'm from one particular country, address me as such, don't go changing it to foreigner! What do you do when you meet people at parties and they say "Hi, I'm John". Do you then call him "Some guy" or "stranger"? Of course not! It would be madness!!!!!Jamesrlforsyth (talk) 08:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Nine years later, and we're still going on with this discussion? To be honest, I can't even remember what I said 4 years ago, or that I even took part in this discussion. At this point, everyone's just speaking at each other, there's no "discussion", and each side is just beating their own dead horses. Come on, after all these years, shouldn't we finish this nonconstructive discussion once and for all? You know as well as I do that regardless how long this talk drags on, it's definitely going nowhere. --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:30, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm four years late to this discussion but just wanted to point out that your key assumption is invalid: you assumed that 老外 means "foreigner" as the English word means. It does not. Foreigner assumes the perspective of the land or state and prescribes the differentiation of two groups -- approximately, in and out. 老外 assumes the speaker's own cultural associations and prescribes the differentiation of two groups -- approximately, similar and distinct. One cannot use the word foreigner without assuming a relatively well-defined state existing with a rather clear range. One cannot use 老外 without assuming the speaker's own perspective and lookout with a rather clear sense of similarity. Now, by the fact that historically Mandarin speakers are all from the Chinese background, it has come to be so that 老外 refers to non-Chinese people (yes, preferentially referring to Western people -- see the similarity criterion, instead of the in/out criterion; but no, at least I can use 老外 to refer to foreign-born Chinese people, when they aren't culturally and customarily particularly Chinese in any way, shape or form).

I can perfectly imagine a Brit complaining ("complain" only because Brits complain a lot so it's easy to imagine it taking place) to me that some particular Spaniard 老外's aren't acting conforming to what is similar to this Brit's own customs ("these 老外's have such long siestas" etc.). It makes sense in the way that the hypothetical Brit is assessing people from their (the Brit's) own perspective and lookout, and views the said people as following a what is seen as very different set of customs. (If you know Mandarin then) Yes, I would find it funny, but it's only because the scope of 老外 varies from speaker to speaker (the scope of "foreigner" does not vary by the speaker, but by the territory and state discussed; the definition of "foreigner" might change by the speaker, as it does for 老外, but two speakers assuming the same principle definition would not disagree on who is foreign to what. e.g. most speakers will agree that a Norwegian citizen and businessperson is a foreigner for Canada, and those disagree only disagree for what constitutes "foreignness (to a territory/state)", viz. the definition, and not for who the speakers themselves are. This is not true for 老外. The set of people who are 老外 is different for e.g. a coastal Mainland Chinese and a Singaporean.) and to me this Brit counts as a 老外, even though it doesn't for the Brit (an analogy is "Northerner/Southerner" or "Easterner/Westerner" for those whose country has such internal divisions; someone from the far south would find it funny that someone from a bit farther north, a "Northerner" to A, is calling someone C from what's even farther north "Northerners"; i.e. treating a different group as distinct to self by using what comes across as what also refers to the self, even though that is never the intention).

For a positive example, I can equally imagine an American complimenting how fantastic the French 老外 are for their marvelous SNCF compared to what the American views as a sorry state that is American public infrastructure. In fact, it wouldn't be nonsensical at all for me for the American to refer to some Canadians as 老外 (e.g. "these 老外's are incredibly polite and they do say 'sorry's so much"). Again, (if you know Mandarin then) yes, I would find this situation funny, but this funniness comes exclusively from the linguistic mismatch of the scope of reference of the word between the two speakers of us.

By the way, when such topics come up, people I know in fact mostly specifically talk about how Americans are being Americans and Brits are being Brits, i.e. how 美国人 are being 美国人 and 英国人 are being 英国人. We absolutely name the countries when that's what we intend to mean (e.g. it's Americans that on average have mega-watt smiles and a special fondness of cars, not all Westerners; it's Brits who on average drink tonnes of tea, not all Westerners).

A case in point: by the prerequisite of the concept of "similarity", it is required that the speaker have some sense of the other culture and customs being assessed. For the present me, I cannot being myself to call an actual alien 老外 even though they are perfectly foreigners to any place on Earth, because currently I have literally no idea what their cultures and customs are like, even though I rationally know that those have got to be very different from mine.

tl;dr: 老外≠foreigner. 老外 is relative to the speaker, not relative to any country. Rethliopuks (talk) 12:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

The fact that laowai is used to collectively describe caucasians yet Asians of foreign nationality, many of them from nations that have visited far greater horrors on China than any European-based society, get to keep their dignity is incriminating at best. Laowai is a racist, hateful slur, like another poster said, it's tantamount to nigger, kike, bean, gook etc etc...the world is full of these monikers. However, use them here in the US, in public, and you'll likely manage a trip to the ER. justifying "laowai" by referring to alleged unfair treatment of China in the 19th century is more of the old, racist "white people are always to blame" rhetoric, and a smoke screen to guise China's genuine, widespread problems with ignorance and backwardness, problems Chinese society would be best advised to deal with soon. The source of such usage isn't injustice, it's the old demon of hate found everywhere. face it and stop playing games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.69.192 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 4 June 2006

-- I can tell you when I find myself with the unfortunate need to insult a white person in Chinese I would definitely use something much stronger than "laowei". The word just doesn't sound insulting to me. As a speaker of Mandarin, abeit non-native, I don't find it strong enough to convey insult. But if you think "laowei" is as bad "nigger" or "kike"... well then you should congratulate me for having the expressions to inflict a level of insult unimaginable to all 他媽的死洋鬼子. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.103.144.120 (talk • contribs) 11:24, 10 June 2008

I haven't been there for a few months now, but thank you for including information on public education in the media regarding this vulgar word, that's part of the way to go.

Move to Wiktionary

I transwiki'd this article to Wiktionary and replaced the current version with a soft-redirect. SchmuckyTheCat reverted that edit with the comment rv this is not a dict def

I've read and now re-read the article. The contents of this article are a detailed discussion of the meanings, origins and usage of a word. It includes synonyms and related words. Those are components of a dictionary definition. It is not the content that I would expect to see in a truly great, unabridged encyclopedia. It is, however, the content that I would expect to see in a truly great, unabridged dictionary. I believe that the content belongs in Wiktionary, not in Wikipedia because Wikipedia is not a dictionary has been established policy since long before I joined the project.

I see no possibility that this article can be expanded past a dictionary definition and into an encyclopedia article. I would be happy to be proven wrong, though. If you can show me what in this article is more than a discussion of the meanings, origins and/or usage of the word or if you can expand the article past that state, I will withdraw my objections. Rossami (talk) 01:13, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree that there's room for improvement on the article, but the word has a social context that calls for more than a dictionary definition. It is somewhat comparable to gaijin, only less known at the moment. Lawrence Lavigne 00:54, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[1] 66.235.28.63 02:12, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Three months ago, I expressed the opinion that this article was a mere dictionary definition and transwiki'd the article to Wiktionary. Several people disagreed and argued that the article could be expanded into an encyclopedic topic. In that time, however, no expansion has occurred. The only edits have been some minor wikification of existing content. Also in that time, a formal proposal was made to reverse the rule that Wikipedia is not a dictionary but the proposal failed. Since the article remains a mere dictionary definition and since its content is already at Wiktionary, I am going to again make this into a redirect to the dictionary definition. Please do not revert it until you are ready to expand the article into a full and encyclopedic discussion of the social context. Thanks. Rossami (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Hwong ya?

I have worked from people who I believe were from Fujien part of China in a number of cities, and they always use the term 'Hwong ya', but I cannot find any discussion of this term on any of the linked articles. The only explanation I was ever given is that it was the word in their dialect for 'Waiguoren'. Is it very rude? (I asked this same question at Talk: Ang Mo about a month ago and never got a reply) 71.253.146.218 16:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it all depends on how it is used. I live in Shanghai and when they say "naguonin" in the Shanghaiese dialect it is freuquently quite rude manner, but it is not a pejorative. I have a feeling "Hwong ya" is not a pejorative, but can be used rudely, just like the word foreigner in any language can. In Taiwan they actually use the local term "big nose" to refer to foreigners!!! --David Straub 06:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikitionary links

Is it absolutely necessary to have two links to the related Wikitionary definition at the top of this article?--Daveswagon 04:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course not, but it's Wiktionary. — LlywelynII 05:46, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

In-line citations

Remember to use them. I've found homes for most of the chaff that had settled to the bottom of the page, but I couldn't get this one to load from China: * [http://www.archchinese.com/arch_animation.html?find=lao3%20wai4 How to say and write 'Foreigner' in Chinese] If you can get it to work or find it at archive.org, kindly find some useful information and format it as a standard reference. — LlywelynII 17:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

translated by google translation

Couldn't you just use a dictionary as a source? Moreover, discussing different connotations of the word "old" is useless. It has positive and negative connotations just like in English. --87.123.198.90 (talk) 12:00, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

it *IS* offensive in many situations, but not in itself

It is ok to call me a laowai or waiguoren when I am in China, because there I am a foreigner, but... it is offensive to call me laowai or waiguoren when I am in Australia - because I am NOT a foreigner here.

It means foreigner, use it when appropriate instead of insulting people due to ignorance. --ZhuLien:ZhuLien 09:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)