Well, not to be the one to take this thread further off-topic (apologies), but why is it okay to call Caucasians "white", Africans "black", but not Asians "yellow"? What is the difference? Every race seemingly has a color associated with their skin tone (incl. red/brown).
Seems to me it's when we label a certain skin color as the reason for some sort of lesser value that is when you have an issue (racism). I don't see that is what happened here, though. If someone joked that a team wearing black uniforms, but had mostly all white players, was the "white" team I doubt people would care. It'd just be a mildly humorous joke that most people would just look past.
Just seems like weird set of rules for which race can be referred to by their skin tone and which one's can't.
the history race for asians in in america is complex and filled with racial stereotypes. being "yellow" is one of them. it was regularly used in a derogeratory way and was part of the larger discourses used by a dominate group to belittle and marginalize others. the point to that was to perpetuate a larger system of domination.
not all forms of racial stereotyping are the same from group to group. yet the damage done remains.
since asian are not really "yellow", labeling them this way had a purpose of separating and demeaning them for many years. it was part of a larger practice of discrimination.
watermelon is an innocent fruit. it is tasty. what could possibly be discriminatory about saying one group of people like to eat it a lot? the answer is clearly "plenty" since watermelon once (still is) used as as part of a larger process of demeaning another group.
are posters here that oblivious to the power of stereotypes and their harmful history? is this the new norm on this board?
the use of yellow above was a direct and intentional use of a term to label a group based upon race. yes. i object to such usage of language.