from "Aussie Pete"

Taken from here: http://www.aussiepete.com/2008/05/ang-mo-in-singapore-and-lao-wai-or.html



13 May 2008
'Ang Mo' in Singapore and 'Lao Wai' or 'Gweilo' in China - Offensive to Westerners?

I promised I would write a blog on this one, so here it is. Although I will put forward my personal experiences, my intention is to try and remain impartial and with an open mind. I really invite comments from any others with personal experience or opinion on this topic.

Firstly, here is my take on the various terms. Although in my country of heritage, Australia, all three terms would be considered 'politically incorrect' and if used toward a foreigner whilst playing sport, would constitute a suspension from the game for a number of weeks and at the highest level of representative sports would ensure that the offending player would undertake mandatory counselling (under racial villification rules), as a foreigner living and working in Singapore and having spent much time in Shanghai, China, I am quite tolerant of the usage of these terms.

In my experience, I have been called all three of these names many times. If a friend or colleague refers to me in any of these ways, it is often with affection or without malice and therefore I take absolutely no offense. However, as with any 'name calling', any of these terms can be used in a derogetory manner - which I have also been exposed to. No country is without some level of racial divide or downright racism, but I have found these people to be the minority in this era of globalization. In this instance, I just feel sorry for the person offering the racial taunt, as it suggests an ignorance that may never be resolved, no matter how much education.

I also understand the cultural divide here - what is acceptable in one country, may not be in another. It is my choice to live and work in a foreign country, and must therefore learn to live with the differences and respect the cultures for what they are - I cannot personally try and change centuries of tradition and beliefs in another country, just because I was raised differently by my parents.

In summary, although I understand the 'passion' that both sides of this discussion adopt, I strongly believe that if we are to ask whether or not a term is offensive (as my topic suggests), the answer lies with the recipient. That is, no matter whether a term is used in a demeaning manner or if the intent is not to offend, this is of no consequence in the argument - if someone is offended by being called any particular name, then by definition, the term is offensive (to that person) and that person should be respected for their opinions and feelings. At the same time, if one is travelling to a foreign country, one must understand that cultures are different and should therefore be respectful themselves and more 'open minded' to various terms. It is however in my mind, never acceptable to 'talk down' to someone based upon difference of race, religion or any other factors - by working together we can make this world a better place.

Please feel free to comment candidly on this topic.


NB: I do not claim to be author of the following texts. All facts on terms below have been freely adopted under 'GNU free documentation licence' and by copyright cannot and have not been altered from the original state. The same free texts can be found on Wikipedia.




Some background facts on the usage of the term 'Ang Mo' in Singapore

Ang mo (simplified Chinese: 红毛; pinyin: hóng máo; POJ: âng-mo•) or sometimes Ang mo kow (red-haired monkeys), also spelled ang moh, is a racial epithet that originates from Hokkien (Min Nan) that is used to refer to white people in Malaysia and Singapore. Literally meaning 'red-haired', the term carries a strong stigma at present amongst a large proportion of the Caucasian minority. The term implies that the person referred to is a devil, a concept explicitly used in the Cantonese term gweilo ('foreign devil').

The term is widely regarded as a racist and derogatory by many Caucasians living in Singapore, but is widely used. It appears, for instance, in various Singaporean television programmes and films. The term was used in the film I Not Stupid, in which when several employees in the marketing department of their company resented a particular Caucasian individual because they perceived that preference had been shown to him because of his race.

Ang mo is believed to be the term originally used in the Singapore place-name Ang Mo Kio (now usually rendered thus: simplified Chinese: 宏茂桥; pinyin: hóng mào qiáo). The term may either refer to the rambutan, a fruit with a red skin covered with hairs; or to a bridge built by the British after which the nearby town was named.

Fort Santo Domingo in Tamshuei, Taiwan is known as the 'City of the Red-Haired' (Traditional Chinese: 紅毛城; pinyin: hóng máo chéng; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Âng-mn̂g-siâ; ) in Chinese. It was built by the Spanish in the 17th century.




Some background facts on the usage of the term 'Laowai'

Laowai (Chinese: 老外; pinyin: lǎowài) is one of several Chinese words for foreigner. Laowai literally translates as "old" (lao 老) "foreigner" (wai 外). It is an informal word that appears in both spoken and written Chinese. While some people consider laowai a casual and neutral word, others view it as a pejorative term.

Laowai is a commonly used Chinese word. It is the informal version for foreigner, waiguoren 外国人, which literally means "outside country person." There is some dispute about the correct Chinese characters used to write the word. While "老外" is the more common form, some argue that the character "佬", with the addition of the ren (person) radical (人字旁) is more correct. However, this form is grammatically awkward ("佬" is a slightly derogatory noun for an adult male), and infrequently used.

Lao 老, or "old", is frequently used to express long-term friendship, as in laopengyou, which means "old friend"; or respect, as in laoshi 老师, which means "old teacher." However, there are also words with clear negative connotations containing the character lao, such as lao dongxi 老东西 ("silly old fool"), laohan 老憨 ("simpleton") and lao gudong 老古董 ("old fogey, fuddy-duddy"). Lao is also used as an empty prefix in words for some animals, such as laohu 老虎 ("tiger") and laoshu 老鼠 ("rat, mouse"). (There is some disagreement about this "neutral" use of "lao" in front of these animal characters. In all of the cases mentioned and other cases (including 老鹰 laoying ("eagle") and 老狐狸 "laohuli" ("fox") the "lao" indiciates fear or discomfort. All these animals are considered unlucky or evil.)

Laowai is thus not a completely positive, or even neutral term, and its usage can imply "making fun of" foreigners. The recently published edition of the Chinese-language dictionary 现代汉语规范化词典 (Xiandai Hanyu Guifan Cidian) states that laowai carries a bantering connotation (谐谑; xiexue). Further indication of the negative connotations of laowai is the fact that it is sometimes used synonymously with waihang (外行; amateur, or lay person).

A pejorative term for foreigner, yangguizi 洋鬼子, which literally means foreign devil, was in frequent use early in the 20th century, but today is rarely used and is recognized by Chinese as inappropriate and racist.

Laowai, as well as waiguoren, are commonly used terms that in everyday spoken Chinese refer to Caucasian foreigners, but not Asian foreigners or foreigners of African origin. While a White Westerner may be referred to as a laowai, someone from Japan will be called ribenren 日本人, the Chinese word for Japanese. Someone who has dark skin color and appears to be African in origin will be called heiren 黑人, which means black person. Sometimes the term laohei 老黑 is used for people of African decent, a term which also has pejorative connotations. The most pejorative term is heiguizi 黑鬼子, which literally translates as black devil.

Laowai is one of the first Chinese words that foreigners learn when they come to China. It has now entered the lexicon of China's expat community, which numbers in the hundreds of thousands. It frequently appears in English language literature and advertisements in China as ‘‘laowai’‘ or ‘‘lao wai’‘. It is very common to see ‘‘laowai’‘ used in blogs and websites administered by foreigners living in China. A Google search will come up with 10,000s of entries for ‘‘laowai’‘, including an English language Web portal Laowai.com that caters to expats in Shanghai. There is even a Beijing based drum'n'bass band named "Lao-Why?" that is composed of foreign and Chinese members.

In recent years the word ‘‘laowai’‘ has begun to stir up controversy within the expatriate community in China. In this way ‘‘laowai’‘ is similar to how Americans view the Spanish word gringo and Westerners view the Japanese word gaijin or the Thai word farang. This is because many foreigners in China believe that ‘‘laowai’‘ is a derogatory term. This is due to the fact that some Chinese frequently shout out "Laowai"! to foreigners passing by, which may then be followed up with laughter and taunting.

The official Chinese press has expressed concern about the inappropriate use of ‘‘laowai’‘ and foreign sensitivities surrounding the word. Editorials, written by foreigners and Chinese, have appeared in English and Chinese language newspapers about the subject. In response, local governments have launched campaigns aimed at educating the Chinese public about the appropriate usage of ‘‘laowai’‘.



Some background facts on the usage of the term 'Gweilo'


Gweilo (鬼佬; Jyutping: gwai2 lou2; Cantonese pronounced [kwɐ̌ɪ lə̌ʊ]; sometimes also spelt Gwailo) is a Cantonese term for people of the caucasian race (generally men), and has a long racially deprecatory history of use. It literally means "dead corpse that has come back to life", ghost" or "ghost man", and arose to describe the pale complexion, the sometimes "red hair and green/blue eyes" (traditional Chinese: 紅鬚綠眼; Cantonese Yale: hung4 sou1 luk6 ngaan5) of caucasians. When the term is translated into English, it is often translated as foreign devil. The term arose in the 19th century and is associated with the demonization of Europeans during the occupation of China by foreign powers .

The translation, foreign devil is appropriate when seen from the standpoint of the history of deprecatory use of the term and the common use of the living dead (鬼) inhabiting various levels of hell in Chinese Buddhism.In this sense, the translation foreign devil also has strong merit. The Chinese meaning of gwei (鬼) can mean "ghost" or "devil" in Chinese, because although Chinese religions such as Buddhism do not include beliefs parallel to the the Christian ideas of "God" there are indeed hells where devils reside. Furthermore, some Chinese do believe in ghosts, spirits, and reincarnation. The reason for calling caucasians as "hateful living dead" was probably because during the 1800s, when the Chinese first saw the caucasians with a comparatively much paler complexion, they thought that the Europeans were actually dead corpses that had come back to life. It also could also have expressed hatred, as when the same term gwei (鬼) was historically applied to express hatred of the the Japanese military which massacred many Chinese.

Nowadays, this term demonstrates that Hong Kong residents often refer to caucasians and other races by their race. This is in sharp contrast to the remainder of the People Republic of China where foreigners are most commonly referred to as "foreign friends" (waiguo pengyou 外国朋友) of "good old foreigner" (lao wai 老外). The character "lao" (老) is the same character use in "good old friend" (老友). This sharp contrast reflects the ill will that Hong Kong residents have had towards caucasian occupiers during the past several hundred years. Particularly Hong Kong residents use "Gweilo" as a racist term which betrays a racist and isolationism mentality among many towards caucasians.

One must keep in mind however that gwei (鬼) in gweilo (鬼佬) is indeed used to express the highest degree of hate and deprecation. A case in point is when many Chinese families watched as their mothers were killed and daughter taken into forced prostitution by the Japanese during World War II. At that time the term they chose to express their greatest hatred towards the Japanese was (鬼), the same gwei that is used for gweilo. "Guizi Bing" (鬼子兵) does not refer to a cute Casper-type ghost, but is closer in connotation to devil or Satan. Considering this, "foreign devil" does have merit as a translation to capture the full nuance of the term.

The pejorative sense is further intensified when the term is prefaced by the Chinese word sei (死, jyutping: sei2, meaning: death, damnation) as in sei gweilo (死鬼佬), literally meaning "dead ghost man", using the translation "dead" for "sei" (死) because it is only correct to be used as an adjective. However, the word "sei gweilo" is not really a term, but an adjective added to the term in order to describe the person or people referred to by the term as bad. When the word "sei" (死) is used as such to describe a living person, it means "bad". "Sei" (死) is commonly added to other terms in order to describe the person or people being referred to as "bad", such as "sei lo" (死佬), meaning literally "dead man" or "bad guy" and "sei chai lo" (死差佬), literally "dead policeman" or "bad policeman". Chinese people also can call each other "Sei gwei" (死鬼), literally meaning "dead ghost", but refers to a bad man also. Even without the word sei (死) the character (鬼) itself can express intense loathing as when it was attached to the Japanese military in the term "Guizi Bing" (鬼子兵) during their massacre of what some have estimated to be upwards to 30 millian Chinese during World War II.

Gweilo is the most generic term, but variations include:
- To refer specifically to European women: gweipor (鬼婆; jyutping: gwai2 po4, literally: "ghost woman") which is also often spelt "gwai-poh"
- To refer specifically to European boys: gweijai (鬼仔; jyutping: gwai2 zai2, literally: "ghost boy")
- To refer specifically to European girls: gweimui (鬼妹; jyutping: gwai2 mui1, literally: "ghost younger-sister")

Due to its widespread use, the term gwei, which means devil, demon, or ghost, has taken on the general meaning of "foreigner" or "westerner" and usually refers to the European races since Indians, Filipinos, Indonesians, African and other races have their own separate racial terms that are used for them instead of gweilo. Few people for example would refer to their Philippine maid as a gweilo. The following variant of the term is considered racist because they are specific to a group of people based on their racial characteristic:

To refer to a white foreigner: bakgwei (白鬼; jyutping: baak6 gwai2, literally: "white ghost")
To refer to a black foreigner: hakgwei (黑鬼; jyutping: haak1 gwai2, literally: "black ghost")
In 1999, CFMT-TV in Toronto had a cooking show named Gwai Lo Cooking. It featured a Cantonese-speaking European chef as the host, who was also the show's producer and the person who named the show. In response to some complaints, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council ruled that
... While historically, "gwai lo" may have been used by Chinese people as a racist remark concerning foreigners, particularly European Westerners, the persons consulted by the Council indicate that it has since lost much of its racist overtone. The Council finds that the expression has also lost most of its religious meaning, so that "foreign devil" no longer carries the theological significance it once did. Based on its research, the Council understands that the expression has gone from being considered offensive to, at worst, merely "impolite".

According to CFMT-TV, "Gwei Lo" was used as "a self-deprecating term of endearment". Others, however, particularly foreigners living in Hong Kong, find the term demeaning and/or racist. However, it is also used by some non-Chinese (sometimes jocularly) to address themselves.

While "gwailo" is commonly used by some Cantonese speakers in informal speech, the more polite alternative sai yan (西人; jyutping: sai1 jan4, literally: "western person") is now used.
The term is often considered racist by non-Cantonese people. Many Cantonese speakers, however, frequently use the term to refer to white people and westerners in general and they consider the term non-racist, a controversial notion. The term was commonly prefaced by sei (死; jyutping: sei2, meaning: death, damned) as in sei gweilo, meaning "damned ghost man", and used pejoratively with sei as the pejorative suffix.

Chinese Racism in Sport

Found a wonderful article on how China is perpetuating racist policies in sport.  Even Zimbabwe, with all of it's racist problems still allows a white woman to represent them in swimming, but, according to this report, if you are living in Hong Kong and want to compete at the Olympic level: only Chinese need apply.

When read in conjunction with the previous report on people who speak out on racism being labelled as promoting "splitism" by the Chinese Communist party, you can begin to see just how far China has to travel in relation to other countries in terms of confronting racism, both in society and, as this and the previous article demonstrate, at a governmental level.

One wonders when the world will take actions similar to those taken against South Africa.

Hong Kong’s Olympic Racism

17 October 2007
Original can be found here
Only Chinese need apply for the territory’s Olympic team

Until recently, qualification to represent Hong Kong at the Olympics was determined by length of residence, in keeping with the territory’s dependent status and the multi-ethnic origins of a significant part of its population. But now the Hong Kong government, perhaps abetted by Beijing, is changing the rules in a move that borders on outright racism.

Although qualification by length of residence remains the case with other dependent territories, such as Bermuda, it is being made a condition of joining a Hong Kong Olympic team that individuals have a Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passport, which requires that the person be of Chinese nationality. This is contrary to practice across the whole Olympic movement.

1. The Olympic movement bases nationality qualification not on passports but on “sports nationality.” Thus a British passport holder who has lived in Australia for several years would be eligible to represent Australia. In the same way a Canadian permanent resident of Hong Kong should be able to represent the territory.

2. The implementation of a Chinese nationality qualification for Hong Kong (and also Macao) in effect gives China three representations while depriving non-Chinese national residents any chance to compete for the territory. It also enables mainlanders to qualify very quickly to represent Hong Kong rather than China.

3. China’s definition of a Chinese national includes an ethnic element. Thus a Malaysian Chinese resident in Hong Kong for a short time may readily be accepted as a national while a person of Indian descent will have great difficulty even if resident for many years and willing to abandon Indian national status.


Hong Kong has only once won a gold medal – wind-surfer Lee Lai-shan in 1996 so its presence is largely irrelevant in the wider scheme of things. But it is not irrelevant to persons such as equestrian hopeful Jennifer Lee Ming-hua, who was born in the US and has a US passport but has lived in Hong Kong for 14 years and has a locally born husband and children. To compete she would have to become a Chinese national and acquire an SAR passport.


The International Olympic Committee is allowing Chinese chauvinism to trump its own rules and ideals. It is time either to make Hong Kong change its qualifications or take it out of the IOC, together with Timothy Fok, the territory’s representative on the IOC, who got there not through sporting achievements but as the son and heir of billionaire property developer and Beijing friend, the late Henry Fok.

Digging up Facts of Singapore

One of the more annoying double standards that i have encountered in Asia is that of the Singaporean mindset towards migration. Now, i need to clearly articulate that i mean chinese Singaporean. You see, many chiense Singaporeans are rightly very critical of Australia's former 'white australia' migration policy. It was a racist piece of garbage that belongs on the scrap heap of history. By and large, Australia has moved on from the days of only allowing 'whites' who could speak english to their shores.

But fast forward to the 21st century and we have in Singapore a blatantly pro-chinese migration policy still in place. Indeed, it was set up in the led up to Hong Kong returning to Chinese rule.

Basically the policy is this:

Hong Kong citizens can migrate to Singapore. They are given assistance. No education requirements. At the time the then Prime-Minister of Singapore refereed to the need to keep Singapore predominately chinese to ensure it's economic success (read in between the lines what you will.

The proof of this policy is still out there at the following places here here and here

To be balanced although the migration policy has been publicly linked to keeping the proportion of Singapore's population that is Chinese above a certain percentage, nothing explicitaly states you MUST be chinese, it is very clear that the policy is aimed at recruiting Chinese hong-kong citizens and as this is the only ethnic group that is being targeted in such a way it then lends itself to the question: if the white Australia policy was so racist and so evil, how is this any different or better? The answer to that (IMHO) is none.

Sure, defenders of it will say that Singapore has a non-discriminatory migration policy. They will also say as long as you have the skills you can migrate to Singapore. True to an extent, but if a non-asian country were to introduce such a scheme to keep a certain ethnic mix stable, to proactively recruit a specific ethnic group (which is already the majority) it would rightly be labeled as discriminatory and racist. Why then do many chinese singaporeans feel the need to defend such a policy whilst rightly condemning former very similar schemese hatched by neighboring countries? The double standard is alive and well.

Death to racism.

Wherever it is found.

The First Five

The first five articles posted on this blog cover a variety of issues. Singapore comes into special attention with a variety of articles focusing on the challenges faced by non-chinese minorities in the Lion City.

Although Singapore has done much to stop racial violence the academic study in particular shows that even the younger generation of Singaporeans show some racist traits, although thankfully they are not a majority. The two articles also questions the assertion made by many Singaporeans i have encountered that Singapore is a land of equal opportunity. Of particular concern is the lack of anti-discrimination statute law in Singapore.

Hong Kong also is in the spotlight today with an excellent article looking at the racist attitudes towards non-asians, especially those with brown skin colour. Attitudes towards darker skin color are also examined in the Korean context and an excellent article on Asian Racism in general from the International Herald Tribune is also posted.

One key features of asian racism is that it is often thinly disguised under 'nationalistic feeling' or 'patriotism'. Another common feature when dealing with asian racists is that complaints by minorities simply dismissed or disbelieved.

A common tactic of asian racists is to attack your home country or culture and point out it's flaws and on this basis suggest that you have no 'right' to offer observations or criticisms of their culture or own racist policies. I hope these articles can begin to provide an insight into the complex world of asian racism and begin to equip enlightened and tolerant people to question, consider and attack the issues when suitable occasions to do so arise.

Hong Kongs Racism

Hong Kong’s Racial Bias

SR Bhose

26 February 2007

Where is the "world" in Hong Kong’s claim to be Asia’s World City? This World City is growing more parochial The vivid posters around Hong Kong’s Central District proclaim Hong Kong to be Asia’s World City. But at best this self-accorded accolade looks increasingly threadbare and at worst hides a worrying level of discrimination against “brown” Asians from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia. Over the past five years, the number of ethnic non-Chinese has fallen from 5.1 percent to 5.0 percent of the population. That may not seem much of a decline but it has occurred at a time when the economy has mostly been in recovery from the financial malaise that gripped it from 1997 through 2003 and an influx of foreigners might have been expected. However, more instructive than the numbers is the composition of the city’s foreign population. An increased percentage are domestic helpers who have no right to permanent residence, rather than the business and professional classes who are the key to the city’s international status. Even among domestic helpers there has been a big shift. The numbers of often better-educated Filipinos are falling, while those of Indonesians have risen sharply, mostly because many are prepared to work for less than the minimum wage prescribed by the government – a law that is seldom enforced by officials who often show contempt for their brown servants. The number of persons deemed to be “white” – it is not clear what the definition is – has fallen from 0.7 percent to 0.5 percent, clearly indicating a decline in the numbers of Europeans, North Americans, and Australasians, other than those of Chinese descent. Those would almost all be from the professional and business classes. Fewer whites would not be a problem if they were being replaced by other high-skilled foreigners to help keep Hong Kong connected to the non-Chinese world. But that is not the case. Numbers of other Asians have at best been static. Nor is the government encouraging them. The ethnic bias of its formal immigration program is stunning. In addition to the fixed number of mainlanders allowed to settle, and the small number of non-Chinese who acquire permanent residence by virtue of staying here for seven years, there are two categories of people the government is supposed to lure with offers of permanent residence: big investors and those with special skills and talents. The latter are now admitted under what is known as the Quality Migrant Admission Scheme. Announced a year ago, it permits admission of up to 1,000 people a year. Hong Kong, it was supposed, was opening up to skilled people from anywhere, competing with the likes of Singapore, Australia, etc for brains and special skills regardless of ethnicity or nationality. They would be admitted without needing to have a job in advance. But in reality the scheme is puny and the beneficiaries are almost all from the mainland. In the first selection exercise, conducted in November, there were 83 approvals out of 122 applications. Of these 76 percent were from mainland China and only 2 percent from elsewhere in Asia. Details of ethnicity were not available. In the second allotment, announced this month, 81 percent of the 66 successful applicants were from the mainland. They are overwhelmingly male, between 30 and 39 years of age. The next allotments will not be made till mid-2007. In other words, the numbers are sure to fall far short of the original expectation and the number of non-Chinese will be so small as to have minimal significance. The same trend is apparent with the scheme to attract investors. Under the capital investment program, those who invest upwards of HK$6.5 million in financial assets or real estate can obtain residence without having to set up an actual business. As of end-2006, 978 approvals had been given representing HK$6.9 billion in investment. Of these 553 were mainlanders and 144 residents of Taiwan or Macao; actual foreigners accounted for less than 30 percent. Data on ethnicity is not available but judging from the hassles those who are neither white nor Chinese – and particularly Indians -- receive at the hands of Immigration and Customs officers, Hong Kong seems reluctant to see more brown, let alone black, people residing here other than as menial servants. Quite apart from the issue of attracting non-Chinese who can benefit “Asia’s world city” Hong Kong has yet to face up to the discrimination faced by its brown minorities who were born or have acquired permanent residence in the territory. While many Indians are members of the business and professional classes, most from the Nepali and Pakistani communities, offspring of soldiers and police who served under the British, are a poorly educated, poorly paid underclass. Those of sub-continental origin total about 0.7 percent of the population or some 50,000 people. While proposals for a law outlawing racial discrimination in employment have been discussed, the government has been dragging its feet reluctant to challenge the ethnic bias which was deeply embedded in Hong Kong by the British. While Hong Kong remains an open economy and it is relatively easy for foreigners to get work permits or set up businesses, there is scant evidence that the government is doing anything to ensure that its international status is sustained through a liberal immigration policy and respect for other Asians.