By golly things move fast; you go away for a day or two and you're well behind the conversation!

Asia can include everything from Russia to Japan
"Asian" in England these days tends to be understood as meaning South Asian - India, Pakistan, Bangla Desh and Ceylon. Perhaps Afghanistan and Malaya.

Although it's now seen only in historical references (like the Mediterranean coast of Africa being known as "Africa Minor") "Asia Minor" used to be understood as a term referring to what we now call "the Middle East". The latter, along with "the Far East" betray a Eurocentric perspective that has penetrated the English speaking world, even though both are 'geographically out of whack" for the American continent. They're both misleading geographically for Australians but we're used to being relegated to the provinces in such matters.

In terms of using ethnicity to put people down, though, Australian Immigration documentation describe all groups, from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean (unless they're carrying Israeli passports) all the way to the western shores of the Bering Sea. The "Indian subcontinent" (in Oz) includes Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, while Burma (now Myanmar), Malaysia through to Vietnam and the Philippines, as well as everything south of that arc but north of PNG would be referred to as "Southeast Asia" in Oz.

Another reference in the discussions has me pondering, again because of how I think of language as an influence over our perceptions.

of African descent and similar expressions seem routine but, to me, it seems to imply a movement that is downward in more than the genetic sense. I prefer to use "ancestry" (but then I've also never really seen the sense in the phrase "falling pregnant", for similar reasons) as , to me, it avoids the negative connotations that can be associated with 'downwards'

Someone earlier in the thread made the comment to the effect that, if a person had only one ancestor who was "Black", then "polite society" regarded that person as "Black". I think the poster designated the rise of this notion as occurring in the 18th century. To me, such notions are harkening back to a primitively agricultural (and untenable) notion of "blood" and ethnicity that still seems to have appeal to the simple minded, some of whom are legislators.

But I must go. for now.

Cheers, Rowan