Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation

Stephen Barnard (
Sun, 18 Aug 1996 17:29:14 -0800 wrote:
> (Bryant) wrote:
> >In article <4v7iu5$>, Bryant <> wrote:
> >In article <4v6h9f$>,
> > <> wrote:
> >>Stephen Barnard <> wrote:
> >>
> >>>A few people have questioned my motives in starting this thread. Well, tough.
> >>
> >>Did you take any time at all to wonder WHY people questioned your
> >>motives? Judging from your post you could have cared less.
> >
> >Why *should* any of us care less? Questioning motives is an interesting
> >exercise after it's been shown that somebody's arguments are illogical,
> >but it's a poor argumentation tactic.
> I understood Steven to say that he made a post to the Indian NG
> and got some replies and some of those replies questioned *his*
> motives for what ever questions or statements he made. If he ment
> that these questions concerning his motives for starting what
> ever thread were coming from people in this thread then I
> misunderstood him.

I said that people have questioned my motives for starting *this*
thread. I thought that was clear enough, but apparently it wasn't.
Sorry for the confusion.

I've never used the term "Amerind". If it's offensive to Native
Americans then I won't use it. I sincerely hope that "Native American"
is acceptable to everyone. I've expressed, and I've heard from others,
some reservation about the "Native" part, which implies that others born
in America aren't native born. After some thought, I consider this to
be nitpicking and overly sensitive, so it doesn't bother me. The
capital N makes the meaning clear, at least in writing.

The term "Indian" is a little different. That is downright confusing,
unless the context is crystal clear. Personally, if I were a Native
American I don't think I'd want to be called "Indian", since it derives
from an error by the European explorers, but that's not for me to

Steve Barnard