I think it is important to remember the context of why things are deemed racist or offensive. Black face is widely accepted as offensive and I can easily see why as I understand the relation to black and white minstrels, which while being an American creation also extended to the UK. But Australia doesn't have that same cultural reference, therefore it is not generally considered quite as offensive. There was a case a few years ago where a kid dressed up for school as his favourite footballer, who happened to be black (from one of the pacific islands) and has a distinctive hairstyle. The papers decided that should be offensive because of blackface, but when interviewed about it, even the player in question wasn't really sure why he was meant to be offended.It's offensive in the US because of the treatment of Asians during late 1800's
Due to the amount of Asian slave labour the Americans used to build the western cities and railways the word became synonymous as being a derogatory term.
But other parts of the world including Britain and i guess parts of Europe don't consider it as being because the word Orient means east. So it's seen as a literal description of the part of the world they originate from.
Sorry to stray off topic.
Good post by OP
Another example would be the use of the word "wog". (Hopefully no one is offended by me typing it, I am just using it for illustration) In the UK, that would be just as offensive as the N word, and rightly so, however in australia, it refers to someone from around Greece, Italy, Balkans etc and is considered no more offensive than calling a British person a Pom or a New Zealander a kiwi.