That's not exactly how "Asian" works.
That's not exactly how "Asian" works.
Secondly, I'm in the Bay Area, if that was not evident.
Third, Manju Kulkarni quoted in the article as Manju Kulkarni, executive director of the Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council is also of Indian decent.
So, yes, I'm an Asian.
BTW, if you go to UK, people from Indian sub-continent are referred to as Asians..
Ironically, humans form only one race because our genes are in strong agreement with one another and work to reject any radical gene changes, which is likely because human population had a bottleneck in recent history [3]. We haven't had enough time to speciate; we haven't even had enough time to genetically specialize to a degree which would allow speciation to be a possibility.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sneetches_and_Other_Storie...
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/10/why-are-apes-more-ge...
[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13169-3
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory#Geneti...
So is Russia. The objection isn't that you're calling yourself Asian but that your definition is likely different from that in the article, so using that description to associate yourself with the article can come across as misleading/wrong.
It is appalling that the commenter above had to edit their own comment based on these responses.
Because people get browner the further southwest in Asia you go, a distinction is made.
Though its most fascinating that in America only recent immigrants would be referred to as European-American, if not their by their specific ethnicity, even though the majority of the country is European-descent; they're called "white" instead. "White" is a racial caste designation, European indicates a person descends from the people in a specific place on Earth; "white" is not a place on Earth.
And yet everyone who is not white gets referred to by where they're ancestors are from