Olivers wrote:
>
> Jenn Ridley extrapolated from data available...
>
> > "Charles Gifford" > wrote:
> >>"Arri London" > wrote in message
> >>> I haven't met anyone here who resents being called 'Anglo' yet. It's
> >>> understood to mean 'white' nowadays, so what's to resent if one is
> >>> white?
> >>
> >>Hi! Let me introduce myself. I'm Charlie and I certainly would resent
> >>being called Anglo. If it is understood by some people to mean white,
> >>that is a sad commentary on their education.
> >
> > You just don't get it, do you?
> >
> > He's talking about a specific *regional* use of a word, and you're
> > getting all bent out of shape by it.
> >
> > In the area where Anglo is used in this fashion, it's an acceptable
> > use of the word.
> >
> > It doesn't matter if it's acceptable to you, since you don't live
> > there.
>
> ....as compared to being called gringo, Anglo is certainly the preferred
> form. Back in the "old days" (and still) in Mexico, ethnic/skin color/etc.
> prejudices led to the widespread use of such terms as gachupine, criollo,
> mestizo, and indio, all descriptive of racial admixture or lack of it.
>
> TMO

There's still some of that round here. And I imagine if I understood
more Vietnamese, I'd hear another version still.