It's a word I never use simply because of its complete lack of relevance. It describes one thing about a person that also applies to every other person like them. One thing whihc says nothng at all, to me, relevant or valid about the person in front of me. If I call that person a smart-arse, a hard worker, a comedian, a creep, a charmer, a wanker, a genius or an unmitigated idiot, I am actually saying something -pleasant or otherwise - about the individual.

To use terms of generic abuse -and there are many, coon, wog, gook, frog, eye-tye, dago and so forth - is to display nothing but ignorance and arrogance. The assumption that a single characteristic defines an entire group is asinine. It says more about the user than about the target.