I am from the US. "Dots and feathers" is not a common way in the US. It feels pejorative as well.
If it's ambiguous, I say "Indian (from India)" or "Indian (subcontinent)" vs. "Indian (Native American)". Or I'll just say "from India" or "Native American", and avoid that ambiguity.
Plus, I think many in the US don't know about the bindi, so referring to "dot" in that context may not help as much as you, someone from India, may think.
>I am from the US. "Dots and feathers" is not a common way in the US.
I am from the US, I have heard people say things like "I picked up some Indian artwork this weekend, dots not feathers." I've also been asked "dots or feathers?" when I was talking about something Indian. I've also been asked in gestures, pointing to the forehead to represent a bindi then saying "or" and covering and uncovering the mouth while making a noise to do that mock Indian battle cry (see the scene in Peter Pan if you are unfamiliar with it)(1).
Its not super common (for obvious reasons) but I've heard to several times from several different people so its common enough in at least some parts of the United States. Being casually racist in informal conversation is still a "thing" in the United States.
That being said, its impolite racially charged language thus very inappropriate in most cases and should be avoided especially in formal communication.
(1) I am ashamed to admit that I did that while playing "cowboys and Indians" as a child before I knew better.
A Google Book search finds only a 2002 Weekly World News opinion piece by "Ed Anger" and a 2009 book "Stealing Ganymede: A Novel".
There are ~150 hits in DDG for "Indian" plus any of the four combination of order and choice of {"and", "or", or "not"}. There are 94 hits in Google for "dots or feathers" and 120 "dots and feathers". This includes "polka dots and feathers."
Almost every single one referring to people uses that phrase in a derogatory way.
None of the 6 phrases exist in Google's n-grams.
That makes it decidedly not common, at least in the written word.
> Being casually racist in informal conversation ...
Correct, I never, ever, ever said it was appropriate, it is decidedly not. If you look up a couple posts I highlighted the problems with using it on HN (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11985794). I don't expect that it would be in written word to often either. Point is its common enough that I've heard it several times over many years from several different people. Perhaps you don't talk to too many casually racist people or it is regional.
I still don't think it's common, though I agree it's not rare. I provided counter-evidence that my observations are not solely biased by the people I know nor the regions I've lived in. To flip your question around, perhaps you are in the one region of the US where people do that?
The other part of my response was because I didn't like the wriggle room in your paragraph describing how being 'casually racist in informal conversation is still a "thing" in the United States' and that such uses are 'very inappropriate in most cases and should be avoided especially in formal communication.'
HN is full of informal conversation. Is HN casual enough that it's one of the few places where this "thing" is appropriate? I don't think that's what you meant. I wanted to make a more firm statement which removes that possible interpretation.
I wouldn't claim that the phrase is PC, and it is indeed lazy in written form, but people need to get over being so easily offended on behalf of others.
Yes, it seems that phrase is more common than I originally assumed. That said, movies use derogatory terms, even Oscar winning movies.
People need to get over the word "PC". It's a nearly meaningless term because it comes with the pejorative assumption that the reasoning behind it is always excessive.
Do you have any word for "politically correct but not excessively so, so I think I'll change my language"? Or is every such suggestion inherently based on offense and therefore easily dismissed?
Because my statement above was to show pictures of Puebloans in Santa Fe from now and from 100 years ago, and argue that "feather" makes about as much sense as calling a 6th generation true son of Georgia a Yankee.
Are you going to go to the South and start calling everyone Yankees? Or would that not be politically correct?
If it's ambiguous, I say "Indian (from India)" or "Indian (subcontinent)" vs. "Indian (Native American)". Or I'll just say "from India" or "Native American", and avoid that ambiguity.
That said, even "Native American" is controversial. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controver... for full details.
Plus, I think many in the US don't know about the bindi, so referring to "dot" in that context may not help as much as you, someone from India, may think.
As to why it feels pejorative, here's are pictures of Native American vendors in Santa Fe. https://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/el_camino_real_de_tierra_adent... . One is recent, another from almost 100 years ago. Here's are some more: http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/native-american-vendors-progr... http://adorepics.com/santa-fe-indian-market/ .
Do you see feathers?
Other than decades-old stereotypes from mass media, why do you think "feather" is the appropriate term?