This is a nonsensical phrase used by advertisers in China looking for persons who speak English as a native language to fill up various job vacancies across the country. The phrase is commonly used in English-as-a-second-language (ESL) teaching job ads, but even more nonsensically, it sometimes extends to non-English related job ads. On social media as well as on official job portals, this phrase has been used over and over so much that it now seems to make sense.
Here is the dictionary definition of the word native: (adjective) “born in a particular place – used to refer to the place where a person was born and raised. Belonging to a person since birth or childhood”.
Going by the above simple definition, you can see everybody is a native because everybody was born somewhere. Everybody is a native of some place. A native teacher would therefore mean a teacher born somewhere. Applying the last part of the definition would mean that the person is a teacher from birth. That is how absurd the phrase is. Other extensions of the phrase also commonly used are: “Native speakers wanted…” “Native writers wanted…” Native singers wanted…” “Native science teachers wanted…” etc. In fact the weirdest I saw recently was native swimmer wanted.
The phrase “native teachers” originated from the two phrases “native English speaking teachers” and “native English speakers.” The former is supposed to refer to an English teacher who speaks English as a native language and the latter to a person who speaks English as a native language and not necessarily an English teacher. So originally it was:
ð “Native English speaking teachers wanted” (Lacks complete meaning: What subjects will the teachers teach?)
ð Then it became “native English speakers wanted” (More lacking in meaning: Do you mind if the person is not a teacher?)
ð Then it became “native teachers wanted” (Completely absurd).
ð In fact the shortest version of it is in the making “natives wanted”
The evolution of this misleading phrase has been reinforced mostly by unscrupulous job placement agents who focus more on getting placement fees from employers as well as from job seekers sometimes than on taking time to convey a meaningful message to the job seekers. Put yourselves in the shoes of job seekers and feel the confusion when they get the answer “sorry we are only looking for native teachers.”
The person you are most probably looking for is a native English speaking English-as-a-second-language teacher. Take some time to understand the meaning of each word in the phrase. If you want to shorten the phrase, you can simply say Native English speaking ESL teachers wanted. Note: You won’t use exactly the same phrase if you want to hire a Math teacher for example. You will have to say Native English speaking Math teacher wanted. The controversy surrounding who is a native English speaker and who isn’t, is another topic I will write on in the days ahead.
I honestly don't know anyone who would first invite/allow someone into their home, only to eject them based on the colour of their skin.
Unless you are describing something that happened with a group of young drunk males, this is very unlikely to happen.
Or unless you are describing, as some of my friends have experienced, a racist comment from the parents/family of their girl-friend when they were brought to meet them.
A host is unlikely to eject an invited guest without some sort of extreme provocation. And if the ejection was unprovoked, then there should be no acceptance of such antiquated ideas.
And to meekly accept a racial slur will only perpetuate a racist mind-set.
Could it be that your gf's family made such a comment about your skin and you are meekly accepting it?
If so, this is not going to be an easy relationship to maintain in the face of family opposition as the girl is most likely going to defer to her family first on many issues.
Saying 'when in Rome' and meekly tolerating this is in essence condoning something that has no place in the 21st century.
And certainly not in a country that we are continually told is 'very friendly and hospitable.'
Such behaviour is not the sign of a good host.
I am saying about people's right to have preferences in their personal life, in their homes, within their families, family owned companies, such limited scopes. I am saying if somebody put me out of his home because I am dark colored I will bow to his wills, however if somebody put me out from a public institution because I am dark colored that f***er will learn his lesson forever for his life.
Sube, I gotta jump in, here.
You say you respect people's right to preferences and that's good, but when that preference defines people by, say, the color of their skin, their gender or their age, that is NOT OK!
Yes, I know it is your opinion and you are entitled to it but, think about it: tolerating racism is perpetuating it, at least by allowing it to go on.
As a female who is Caucasian, I am less subject to racism than, say, a person of African or Indian descent. However, just because the irrational thoughts toward people of races other than my own doesn't affect me, does that mean I should ignore it?
As a global citizen, I have a duty to help foster acceptance and tolerance, and so I ask you: wouldn't it be better to be accepted as human who, incidentally, is of a specific race?
Everybody is a native of some place. A native teacher would therefore mean a teacher born somewhere. Applying the last part of the definition would mean that the person is a teacher from birth.
pakistanjobs.pk/education-jobs-a29
but...schools are a public institute which is ultimately what this article is about.
few people would extend an invitation to someone to their home only to refuse entry later on to the same person later on.
Equally if a group of friends were invited somewhere only to have one refused entry based on their skin colour, i doubt the group would accept that.
Why would anyone go to another home if they were going to be treated in a racist way, and why would they accept being treated in a racist way?
It is acceptance of unequal treatment, be it racist or sexist, that perpetuates it.
People have rights to have their own preferences. Even though those preferences arise from their racism in deep down of the heart, we have to respect their personal preferences. I know what is racism is. As an Asian with dark color skin, I have experienced this a lot of time. However, I respect those people to treat me that way in their personal life. If somebody throw me out of their house because I am dark in complexion, I will bow to his/her right. Because it is his/her home. But if someone throw me out of a public institute or enterprise I will fight like hell until that f**ker learn his lesson in life.
so choosing a white person over a black person is not inherently racist no. But you have no idea WHY a Chinese lady chose a white person over a black person. It's this WHY, that is possibly(and most probably is) the racist part.
Comment