I refer to the letter 'Hong Kong as racist as West' (South China Morning Post, April 10).
As far as I read, the main reason the Hong Kong-born man was compensated was because the police entered without a warrant and then left the apartment open to crime when the man was brought to the station.
But I agree the term gweilo is politically incorrect if you explain it character by character in Cantonese. It was first used in the 1840s, when both British and Chinese in Hong Kong were equally racist.
These days Britain and many English speaking cultures attempt to transform themselves into more enlightened, evangelistic societies through legislation.
However, the rest of the world did not change with them. That is why the caning of Michael Fay, a punishment initially brought by the British into the Singaporean judicial system, was seen in the West as barbaric.
While the territory does not have similar legislation against racism, Gordon Farquar should be glad the Hong Kong Chinese are open enough to tell you the names they have for a foreigner.
