would you consider "foreigner" an offensive term?

[questionzzz]

I gave a presentation to a university class yesterday, using the term foreigner,eg "foreigners and healthcare" (it wasn't about healthcare). For context, I am visible ethnic minority, grew up in the UK, moved to Canada in my early thirties. I explained in my presentation that I deliberately avoid using the term immigrant, because my presentation did not focus just on immigrants, but also talked about refugees, international students, their spouses, temporary foreign workers and so on. In short, foreigners. At the end of the presentation, one of the students (also visible ethnic minority) said she found the term foreigner offensive because it contributes to "othering" immigrants. I agree- I see the point- but the fact is, immigrants- and foreigners, are "othered", I said my lived reality is that I'm a foreigner- and foreigner is a non-academic,commonly-used phrase which everybody immediately understands. She said what about slogans saying "foreigner go home" on walls. Also many recent immigrants see themselves as "Canadian" and would resent being called foreign. Again, I agree! But should these racist slogans prevent us from using a pretty accurate term? Also, no matter how "canadian" recent immigrants feel, the fact is (as my presentation showed), they are not treated in the same ways and have different outcomes. Others said maybe I should consider using the term "foreign-born". I said in my home country, the administrative term is "alien". Maybe I should use "wanderer? or "stranger"?" Anyway, the discussion was good, and ended on bit of laugh, but it did get me thinking.
AIBU not to find "foreigner" offensive?

The word itself is not offensive, only if it is used in an offensive way. She is being a snowflake

I wouldn’t give it another thought

It's a tricky one - I used to have similar a conundum and eventually my default was always to use the relevant legal term. It is difficult to argue with someone using the legal definition. However it does sound as if you managed to diffuse the situation well.

It's a bit of a blunt instrument and it does have some negative connotations, although its proper meaning isn't offensive. Especially when related to healthcare - at least certainly it would back in th uk, what with health tourism headlines in the dm and so on. So perhaps your title needed a bit of a sub-heading, to give it a bit more context?

Sounds like a worthwhile discussion though and it's hardly a world-ending thing, so I wouldn't worry about it.

I think the term ‘foreigner’ is offence yes. There must be a more PC term for the group of people you want to describe that doesn’t have the same daily mail, BNP type connotations.

Thanks for the responses-
I'm not worried about it per se, at least not enough to change the title of my presentation (which I'll probably be giving a few more times!)

I know a lot of people do default to administrative categories "immigrant and refugees" being the most common, but as I said, these categories really obscure whole other groups of people. Also, I am actually, when i think about it, really critical towards these categories, because they cause some much confusion and obfuscation, and contribute to fracturing society rather than creating bonds. So why I should perpetrate their use?

And I didn't use it offensively all.

@Thatswot I don't think Daily Mail and BNP has the same resonance in Canada that they do in the UK.

Also what do dou suggest (not being goady, genuinely interested in alternatives)

I don't think it's offensive. I don't think you can avoid all the language that racists use otherwise you'll eventually be reduced to refering to foreigners in the negative, non-nationals or some such which only speaks to what they are not.

Would migrant cover all types of foreigner?

For a formal presentation, I'd either put national on the end, so foreign national, or another term.

If you're speaking in public, you've got to consider what other people find offensive, unless you are Donald Trump or Prince Phillip.

foreigner
noun
1.
a person born in or coming from a country other than one's own.

You used it as per the dictionary definition. Yes, there are some twats misinformed, xenophobic, racist idiots who will use it in a derogatory way, but clearly not in this case. In the phrase 'foreigners go home' it's not the word itself, its the sentiment and implications of the phrase (you're not welcome here if you're foreign). It does sound like you handled the situation well though.

I find it blunt and offensive, although in the context you describe, spoken by you as an ethnic minority, probably much less so.
It also has no clear legal meaning. So you mean non-nationals, non-domiciles or non- residents? Maybe it would be better to be more precise.

The term foreigner can be used in a different context. I am white british and moved to a small village in Norfolk, I was called a foreigner there! It wasn't meant as an insult, just as someone who's family hadn't lived there for generations.

Ooh! I have been there. We used foreign nationals as that apparently maintains that it is the country of origin that is foreign to us... not the individuals.

I am so very glad not to have to be so mealy mouthed, watching very single word for possible offensiveness

"Would migrant cover all types of foreigner"

Migrant wouldn't nesecarrily include every category.

I suppose it's been used in an offensive way for quite a while though. 'Johnny Foreigner' when did that originate? Though maybe it's good to reclaim it in a non- offensive way.

@Harebellmeadow In one of my slides, I had a list of all the categories I meant by the term "foreigner"- international students, temporary foreign workers etc.
@Charley- I've thought about migrants, but i don't think it covers those temporary categories of movement (eg work and study). Something about migrant/immigrant implies permanency, which may not necessarily be the case.

I agree describing people by what they're not (eg non-canadians) is even more offensive.

Foreign national may be ok- although it really wouldn't describe someone such as myself. (not a foreign national anymore)

Refugees are immigrants, as are international students. Are you trying to differentiate between economic immigrants and those seeking asylum for humanitarian reasons?

In what context did you give the presentation, I'm assuming you're a student as opposed to a lecturer?

I would just have asked her what word she would use.

Especially since you used the correct word for the context.

As a naturalised immigrant, I am both a foreigner and British. I do not find 'foreigner' offensive at all.

Of course context matters. But "Germans go home!", "Foreigners go home!" and "Immigrants go home!" are all equally offensive, so should we not refer to Germans and immigrants, either?

I might copy and paste the dictionary definition on the title slide in fancy fonts to make it clear.

I'm not a snowflake (far too old for that!) but I do think the use of the word foreigner is offensive these days. 20-30 years ago it was fine but in the 21st century, not so much. Foreign national is much less provocative.

I think this one is a no brainier. If the term you used was in quotation marks - ie “foreigner” - then the approach might be ok.

Otherwise the term in common usage for about 2 decades is ‘foreign national’ - no quotes needed

In Canada people frequently use newcomer

Which you will have heard, if you were in Canada

For example, banks advertise services for newcomers to help them get established financially in a new country

Newcomer covers anyone not born in the country or to Canadian nationals

So weird that as common and widely used as this word is, and for so long (I can remember it being used in the 90s) you went with foreigner

Hmm

Foreign nationals is accurate and not offensive.

I am a brit and live in Germany, and up until 5years ago the Germans saw no harm in using the term “Ausländer” meaning foreigner, as a blanket term for non Germans. Even though it was often used offensively in connection with the words “get out”. I think there has been a lot of debate and the word is less often used, replaced with “non-nationals” and “those with a migratory background”, the latter of which is also considered offensive by many because it is linked to the concept of pure-bloodedness irrespective of nationality. But these terms are used broadly and not for refugees or recent immigrants.